Building the Team

I should think that Obama's idea of reinforcing his team is an unmistakable signal to whom it may concern. Obama is here to vehicle an image of a young and dynamic candidate who has all the chances to change the icon that has long been attributed to the USA, I mean the country of the WASP.

Your comment is without merit because no one gets the experience of being president without being president. That's not a job that anyone can claim to have prior experience for except an incumbent, and there are none in this race. In the absence of an incumbent, you have to look at a whole host of qualifications to determine who is the most qualified. If that causes you to conclude that it is McCain or Clinton, that's fine. But it's not because they have "experience" being president. It's because you believe their experience as long time senators prove that they will be good presidents. So Obama's points are well taken. Don't just look at the jobs they have held, look at the judgement they have excercised in those jobs. I'm sure there are plenty of people who have become the CEO of companies with no prior experience as a CEO. Perhaps not of big corporations, but maybe they were CEO or director in a small organization. Which is why Obama's experience in the state legislature of Illinois is just as relevant as Hillary's experience as a first lady.

With regards to Senator Obama???s candidacy: If you owned a company, would you hire someone with absolutely no Executive experience to run it? Would you trust your company to be run by someone with no experience?
Even if you are just an employee - would your company dare hire a candidate for a mid or senior level position with no appropriate experience?
Most sensible people and companies would scrutinize someone for a job in their company at an even higher level than these candidates are being scrutinized! So why the hell would we, the American people, allow someone with no experience to run the largest Federal government, the largest military force, with NO EXPERIENCE?!

JP Rattie

GIVE UP TERRAVISTA:( I see you spreading miss-information on this site every day. How is it possible that you post on this site every day and are floored to hear the same miss information that you spend all day posting. Get a real hobby!

Help me understand this commander in chief argument! How is John McCain qualified to be CIC based on his military service??? I can't see how any one who did not have actual command experience in a theater of operation DURING A WAR would be "qualified" to be CIC! By that measure Eisenhower and US Grant were the only presidents qualified.

Let's get real. The real measure of a president's qualification is whether they put the experts in place, listen to those that ARE experts, don't try to distort the intelligence that the pros are paid to work up and don't rush to war without a plan in place that allows the paid soldiers the possibility of a victory.

So help me understand what command John McCain held that makes him an experienced CIC on day one???

This from the man who helped give us Jimmy Carter! Please.

The fat lady hasn't sung yet. Then and only then will it be over. I would lose respect for Hillary if she dropped out now. There is still hope AND she still have a chance. Obama has been getting a free ride. One more thing if people really like his xerox speeches, they'll love the xerox results. Hillary won Massachusettes for a reason even though the deck was stacked with the support of the Governor, John Kerry, and the Kennedy's (Caroline and Teddy) for Obama.

I'm not sure how you're judging patriotism but if you call taking your country to war on a lie, not having a strategy to win the peace, occupaying a country of millions with 30,000 troops - what do you think we have universal super soldiers they can do anything with nothing. (and most of the time they do) borrowing and spending 1 billion (with a "b") dollars per day on war with no end - not even bothering to understand the region and it's players before you go in and failure to execute once you're there being patriotric then you need to check your priorities. No one who's ever seen war wants to continue with one. So, we're going to be in Irag for 100 hundred years? and I guess will be in Afghanistan for at least 50 of those years also. Are you kidding me. We don't have the money or the manpower to trudge along like we've been doing. We need a gov't that can get something done anything diplomatically. The people over there are not fighting the same war we offer. We call them terrorist - they call them brother. They will fight each other, but they're fighting a war that's thousands of years old, they are trying to recapture glory that is thousands of years old. This is not our fight - we need to fight terrorism but we need a different strategy with a whole lot better execution. You can have the best plan if it's executed poorly it will be a disaster and a failure. So what does a poor plan with very bad execution get you? Patriotism is doing what is best for your entire country first and making sure you think it through and say no when it will frivolously cause Americans to die without any viable results. So, Irag holds elections whose to say they'll elect someone will can work with. It makes us look very bad when we insist on democratically held elections with observers and then get up set and fail to recognize the elected officials because "we" say their terrorist. So, what will do if that happens - a plan anyone? What will we have gained. If they elect people who hate our guts.

If you want more wars vote and no helath care at home vote for Clinton or McCain. If you want a leader vote for Obama. If you want a miracle vote for Huckabee. The choice is still in the hands of the American voter.

the one thing the republican party has always had over the democratic party is their ability to run a vigorous primary campaign but not so vigorous they destroy the elected nominee. The Republican party exerts tremendous pressure on candidates when they have decided who will be the nominee and they force them out for the good of the party, which gives them an early lead on preparation, strategy, fundraising and advertising. Democrats fight so hard that by the time the elected nominee is choosen they barely have time to breath and they have been so destroyed by the others than that crawl into the general elections and watch the republicans use everyone of the attacks that they're fellow democrats use again them and if that isn't bad enough the democratic presidential nominee doesn't seem to have enough time to prepare, strategize or be proactive in their advertising compaign against the Republican presidential candidate and for whatever reason I haven't been able to fathom neither does the Democratic Party - so while the Democratic candidates are running what is the Party doing that they can't run scenarios and prepare, strategize and develop advertising campaign against the Republican presidential nominee - a little help would be in order. There is 4 people in this race 2 for the Democrats and 2 for the Republicans and we no in a short, it will be one for the Republicans so the Democrats should be well prepared, have a solid strategy and should be able to start developing advertising campaigns that are ready to go. They never do it and it's cost them many elections. Now we have Nader, I love him, I think he's honest and straight forward but shows up to the party late, when he doesn't have a chance of doing anything but siphoning votes off of whoever will be the elected nominee. I don't think he'll spoil it, but when every vote counts - it could be closer than hen's teeth if he gets a good number of votes. Competition is good, but I would rather seen him a lot earlier, when they could have debated some of this issues he's talking about and we could have gotten the answers before it got down to 2 people. Now the Republicans will use every word in the general election to beat us over the head with it. So, I hope whoever wins it - they get that list from Tucker so they can start preparing to answer those questions and respond to those statements - because I can assure you the Republicans have the list and their digging and re-writing and rearranging the information even as we speak.

Doesn't he need to win the nomination first?

Barack Hussien Obama talks a lot about change but change what? The moslems also want change. Why doesn't he show any patriotism? Because he is not patriotic contrary to what he says. The above article is a joke because the Republicans can do the same thing. In a post 9/11 world having someone like Obama in office will weaken our national security and further endanger our nation. Having someone like Mcain will make terrorist and others who want to destroy america think twice before they act. If you socialist liberals want to live in Obama's fairy tail world then you can all go to Cuba where you and Barak can all live happily every after.