Tacitly. Both the PI and one of our local alternative newspapers have endorsed Barack Obama. (You can find the PI endorsement here; I generally don't link to the Stranger because it is not suitable for sprogs, but you should be able to find it easily enough.)
The PI gave Obama four long paragraphs; the Stranger gave him an entire page. Neither paper mentioned anything he has accomplished as a national political figure; neither mentioned a single thing he has done as a senator. He's a sweet talkin' guy, and that's enough for both newspapers. (I wonder if you could get a job writing editorials at either newspaper — if you had never written anything significant. Probably not.)
By now, I think we can conclude that Obama's supporters don't mention his accomplishments — because he doesn't have any, at least not as a national political figure. But he does talk pretty and he does make wonderful promises — and that's enough for those editorialists. But it shouldn't be enough for serious citizens.
Cross posted at Jim Miller on Politics.
(Here's one of my earlier posts on this subject.
Local readers will be amused to learn that the editorial writers at the Stranger do not pay income taxes. Or at least so I infer from their claim that Republicans always hurt (they use a nastier verb) people who live on their wages. No doubt they also disapprove of President Bush's efforts to help public school students with the No Child Left Behind Act. Or perhaps they don't have children, though I seem to recall one of the people there adopting a kid.)
Posted by Jim Miller at February 04, 2008 11:23 AM | Email ThisA long, long, way from the party JFK led, "ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country".
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on February 4, 2008 11:50 AMI swear, if JFK was a live today, I think he would be unbelievably embarrassed of today's democrats.
Posted by: Cydney on February 4, 2008 11:57 AMI'll be a president who ends the tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas and put a middle class tax cut into the pockets of working Americans.
Doesn't he know that taxing businesses is a big part of what sends jobs overseas? No of course he doesn't.
Posted by: RBW on February 4, 2008 12:03 PMObama isn't the only empty suit thrown up by the Dems and given a free pass and lavished praise upon by the fishwraps like the P-I (pravda-Intelligentsia), LA Times, Old York Times and the rest of the Dinosaur media. He's merely the new flavor of the month by race obsessed Liberals who mask their racism with clumsy overtures akin to :
"See?, i'm not a racist, I have black friends" (well, okay, i had a locker in H.S. Next to some black guy....still counts doesn't it?)
No need for substance folks, just step right up and buy our new ointment that is a surefire way to cure every ailment you have. His Name? Barack Obama....
Thanks, but no thanks. I prefer not to have B.O.
Posted by: Rick D. on February 4, 2008 12:23 PMUmmm they agree with you? Those rags agreeing with you doesn't make you more credible. Just the opposite.
Posted by: pbj on February 4, 2008 12:34 PMLook at the exit polls this year. A hypermajority of Americans admit that their primary issue is not policy. A majority openly admit to that! That's pretty astounding to me, but not really surprising. Obama is not running as a policy wonk. I suppose one could chastise him for that. But America has shown that they don't want a policy wonk in this election. They want "change" or they want "experience." They're both pretty meaningless terms. Americans are clamoring for personality, and making no bones about it. Issues are divisive, and both parties seem to be looking for unity and healing.
Jim, truthfully, if the majority of Americans based their votes on the substantial issues you provide, most voters won't be considered "serious citizens." But then again, if the candidates said that, those "unserious citizens" would boot them out of office. And now we return to why I can't hate on Senator Obama too much for his campaign M.O.
Entirely unrelated: Since when was President Bush an accomplished national political leader, anyway? I've never heard much of a response to this line of argument. He was the de facto Lt. Governor of Texas. Some might argue that this argues the case against Senator Obama, though. This is not a rhetorical knock; it is a serious question.
Posted by: Benjamin Johnstone-Anderson on February 4, 2008 12:49 PMBut listing a bunch of accomplishments, like running your daddy's oil company or running a failed football team, doesn't necessarily mean you will get a good executive... and I think the last 8 years are proof of that.
Posted by: Splinter on February 4, 2008 01:08 PMI'd say that's just a bit more qualified than a state senator who won a US Senate seat simply by going up against arguably the worse campaign ever run.
Again, this isn't about Bush. And it's not about the cult of personality: Tell us what Obama's done during his time in public office. Why is he qualified to be POTUS? What has he done?
As you say, it's not a rhetorical knock; it's a serious question.
Posted by: jimg on February 4, 2008 01:15 PMYes, I know he was elected Governor of Texas. Texas has an incredibly week Governor. The Lt. Governor actually has more useful powers and responsibilities - hence my calling him a "de facto Lt. Governor." :)
I was also not speaking to his 2004 re-election. Of course, at that point, he had more presidential experience than anyone who hasn't been president. I'm not sure that there was any point in the GOP running any kind of race there, really (although leaving Ryan on the ballot probably would have left them better off than Keyes).
You've read too many inferences. My argument was not that Obama is qualified (or isn't), but that by any honest standard that Obama is unqualified, now-President Bush would have been in 2000. Yet, evidently, he was still elected, and did well enough that the supermajority of Republicans still approve of his job performance.
Posted by: Benjamin Johnstone-Anderson on February 4, 2008 01:38 PMBy the way, if you're interested in the mechanics behind Texas's odd gubernatorial set-up, here's some information:
Posted by: Benjamin Johnstone-Anderson on February 4, 2008 01:41 PMActually the availability of cheap educated labor usually drives companies overseas. Why pay a single US worker $15/hr when you can pay eight people in China to work the same job at $1.88/hr.
Why do you think H1B's are so popular? Why pay an American worker 50k/yr, when you can bring two very experienced people from India for the same price. Yeah, paperworks a bitch but you save the company a ton of money in the end.
I'm going out of my way to be clear here, but evidently I'm failing. I'll re-post my disclaimer again:
My argument was not that Obama is qualified (or isn't)
I have defended ideas and candidates I disagree with before. I am saying that "Obama isn't qualified" is a weak argument to present to a national electorate that has rejected this argument as recently as 2000. I am not offering "he isn't not qualified, by most people's standards" as a reason to vote for him. I didn't ever state that, infer it, or do anything but state that it isn't my intent.
Does that clarify things?
Posted by: Benjamin Johnstone-Anderson on February 4, 2008 01:50 PMWhich presidential candidate has run their daddy's oil company and a football franchise? If you're talking about "Dubya" he did neither. Thanks for playing though. Back on topic.
Posted by: Don Ward on February 4, 2008 01:56 PMWell a lot of people here don't seem to like McCain's national accomplishments (Campaign Finance, blocking tax cuts, Gulf War I & II). Romney pretty much passed the liberal buck ($.02 gas tax hike, universal health care, civil unions, flip-flopper). Huckabee, proably don't even want to go there (clemency, tax increases, etc). Then of course we look at Billary (Scandals, health-care "reform", Bill C., flip-flopper).
Maybe we should give a serious look at someone who gives us a fresh start since a lot of people here a lot of disgust with the current crop of national figures with much more notable accomplishments.
I guess we can always bring back golden-boy Fred Thompson who really didn't accomplish all that much either (outside of Hollywood that is).
If you go to his http://obama.senate.gov/issues/ page, you will see several issues that Barack is (or has been) involved in. Some highlights include:
- Co-sponsored Working Family Child Assitance Act with Senators Snow and Lincoln
- Worked with Sen. Colburn to draft and ultimately pass Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act
- Sponsored the Transparency and Integrity in Earmarks Act.
- Leader in the fight to prevent the abuse of no-bid contracts, including introducing amendments to the Homeland Security and Defense spending bills to reinforce the requirements for competitive procedures in contracting and to limit the use of unnecessary exceptions by government officials.
- Voted against the most recent effort to raise the national debt limit
- Joined with Senator Lugar to introduce the American Fuels Act to increase domestic production, distribution, and end uses of biofuels
- Joined Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa in reintroducing the Biofuels Security Act, which calls for 60 billion gallons of renewable biofuels in the nation’s vehicle fuel supply by the year 2030.
- Authored legislation with Senator Cochran, the Alternative Diesel Standard, to require 2 billion gallons of alternative diesels - - including agriculture feedstocks such as biodiesel - - as part of the 40 billion gallon national diesel pool.
- As the author of the Fuel Economy Reform Act, Senator Obama has worked to gain bipartisan support for an innovative approach to raising automobile fuel efficiency standards (also known as “CAFE” standards) and break two decades of inaction and deadlock on reforming fuel economy laws
- Senator Obama introduced the “Health Care for Hybrids Act” to provide health care assistance to domestic automakers in exchange for their investing 50% of the savings into technology to produce more fuel-efficient vehicles
- Senator Obama, along with Senator Harkin, authored the National Low Carbon Fuel Standard Act (S. 1324), which requires a 10% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions in the national transportation fuel pool by 2020, a reduction of about 180 million metric tons of emissions in 2020 – the equivalent of taking over 30 million cars off the road
- Senator Obama has introduced the Oil SENSE Act to eliminate unnecessary tax breaks to the oil industry
- Senator Obama sponsored legislation, the FILL UP Act, requiring oil companies that made at least $1 billion in profits in the first quarter of 2006 to invest at least 1% of the their total reported first quarter 2006 profits into installing E-85 pumps
- After visiting weapons stockpiles in Russia, Ukraine and Azerbaijan, Senators Lugar and Obama introduced the Cooperative Proliferation Detection, Interdiction Assistance, and Conventional Threat Reduction Act of 2006 in the 109th Congress, which would expand the cooperative threat reduction concept to conventional weapons. The Lugar-Obama bill was included in the Department of State Authorities Act of 2006 and was signed into law by President Bush in January 2007.
- Senator Obama cosponsored the Combat Meth Act, which provides more money for fighting methamphetamine (meth), tightens controls on the sale of meth ingredients, and provides assistance to the children of meth abusers.
- Senator Obama cosponsored Dru's Law which creates a nationwide sex offender database and requires greater monitoring of sex offenders upon their release from prison. The bill passed the Senate in July of 2005. This legislation was incorporated into a larger bill, the Adam Walsh Child Protection Act, which Senator Obama supported and which has been signed into law.
- Senator Obama is a cosponsor of the KIDS Act, which requires convicted sex offenders to provide their Internet identifiers, such as e-mail addresses and instant message addresses, for inclusion into the national sex offender registry.
- Senator Obama cosponsored the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act which passed the Senate on October 4, 2005 and was subsequently signed into law.
- After the horrific murder of an Illinois federal judge's mother and husband, Senator Obama and Senator Durbin worked together to beef up security at our federal courthouses. The Illinois senators secured $12 million to improve security for federal judges. Senator Obama also joined Senator Durbin in requesting a Government Accountability Office investigation into additional steps that can be taken to protect judges.
- Senator Obama introduced the Lead-Free Toys Act to require the Consumer Product Safety Commission to ban any children's product containing lead.
- Senator Obama is also an original cosponsor of the Home Lead Safety Tax Credit Act, which would provide tax credits to property owners who eliminate or contain paint hazards in homes where low-income young children or women of child-bearing age live.
- Senator Obama, working with Senator Lautenberg, introduced tough legislation to drastically improve security at our nation's chemical plants. The Chemical Security and Safety Act would establish a clear set of federal regulations that all plants must follow.
- In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, improving our nation's emergency planning and response capacity has become a priority for Senator Obama. He introduced legislation to ensure that the mistakes witnessed before and after Katrina are not repeated in the future. Language based on Senator Obama’s bill creating a National Family Locator System was included in the Fiscal Year 2007 Homeland Security Appropriations Bill.
- Senator Obama cosponsored the extension of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act. The Act provides important protections to real estate in potentially vulnerable cities such as Chicago.
- Senator Obama introduced the Spent Nuclear Fuel Tracking and Accountability Act in 2005, which would establish specific and uniform guidelines for tracking, controlling, and accounting for individual spent fuel rods or segments at nuclear power plants, including procedures for conducting physical inventories. These provisions were included in the Nuclear Security Act of 2005, which passed the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee in June of 2005.
- Senator Obama drafted an amendment to provide $37.5 million over the next five years to protect the country's drinking water from a terrorist attack. The amendment also instructs the Environmental Protection Agency and the Centers for Disease Control to develop the tools needed by drinking water systems to detect and respond to the introduction of biological, chemical, and radiological contaminants by terrorists. His amendment was included in the Safe Drinking Water Act, which passed the EPW Committee in July of 2005.
Obama is member of the following committees:
- Senate Foreign Relations Committee
- Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs
- Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
- Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
Lately, he has been intimately involved with the administration regarding the crisis in his father's homeland of Kenya.
Note: All of this is Senate related in addition to the numerous signicant legislation he worked on while in the Illinois legislature, including being the key person to negotiate an agreement between all sides with regards to the Police taping the full interview (not just confessions) of people charge with capital crimes. This preserved the taped confession that police and DA's desired and at the same time met the needs of openness that the criminal defense attorneys desired that contributed to the death role problem Illinios had and cause the Republican govenor to suspend executions in the state.
To say that Obama has no record is disengenious. It is only because readers here (an the press) have failed to look. The information is there. Obama may not be a headline grabber when it comes to his legislation efforts, but he has been very effective behind the scenes getting actual work done. It may be perfectly well to argue his political positions, which are laid out on his campaign website and through numerous speeches he has made, but to claim that there is no beef is only done out of clear laziness and reliance on the MSM to tell you the story. The MSM is only interested in selling headlines and causing a battle.
Benjamin Johnstone-Anderson: If you are interested in what Bush accomplished before he became president, let me suggest that you read this comparison, which I wrote during the 2000 election campaign. (It was originally circulated as email, which is why the formatting looks odd.)
tc: A list of bills or amendments sponsored by a congressman or senator is, by itself, unimpressive. It takes almost zero effort to co-sponsor a bill. Unlike John Edwards, Obama does appear to have done some work in the Senate. But he has zero executive experience, none in the military, none in the private sector, and none as an elected official.
And then there is the small problem of his truthfulness. Those who have checked his book, "Dreams of My Father", have found it, shall we say, imaginative. Again and again, when a newspaper checks what he has said about his past, they find that others remember matters rather differently.
I suspect that's one reason why he is dodging the press, that, and the fact that he just doesn't know much about national policy, especially foreign policy. When he says he learned about foreign policy by drinking tea with his Kenyan grandmother in her hut (which he has not upgraded), we can either laugh or cry, depending on how cynical we are.
Don't forget, that bill doesn't even include spending for the War post-PUSA swearing in ceremony. Next President comes into office with a giant mess created by the this President.
Here we are in the middle of an economic downturn, we have excessive spending, decreased revenue, and two major wars going on. Not exactly a job I'd want to be spending millions of dollars to walk into.
You have really hit the target about whoever gets elected. I'm not sure I would want to inherit this mess. A 3.1 TRILLION budget???? It just gets more insane. Maybe Ron Paul is the only one with a clue. I'm thinking of caucusing for him.
Posted by: Rocketdog on February 4, 2008 03:17 PMHow many of these bills were signed into law?
How many did he merely add his name to? If introducing or co-sponsoring bills qualified someone to be President, perhaps as many as 90 US Senators exceed Obama's qualifications.
He has little to no private sector experience, has never employed anyone (based on his Wiki read) has no business experience, no military experience, no budget experience and no legislative accomplishments to speak of.
Plus, he's been a US Senator for all of 25 months.
In the private sector, I simply cannot conceive on anyone with such a dearth of experience running a Boeing, or a GM, or Lockhead... and now many would advocate that he run the largest, single-most important organization on the face of the Earth?
Hardly.
Posted by: Hinton on February 4, 2008 03:33 PMThank you for that link. I was a little young in 2000 and can't do anything to agree or disagree with your presented facts, which is why I was being genuine with the "not rhetorical" part. The article you present does a good job of arguing for Bush's competence, which I think is a more important point than experience (for the most part).
I'll leave it to others to digest/evaluate your arguments there, but my point remains that Joe Public is not as concerned with the things Obama is being hit with as some might wish. (I know you weren't disagreeing with that point, Jim, but I just want to come back to my focal point to avoid being unclear again.)
Posted by: Benjamin Johnstone-Anderson on February 4, 2008 03:39 PMWhat did she do during 1992-2000 which she lists on her resume as White House experience?
If Bill Clinton "respects" her so much, why didn't he appoint her to a Cabinet position, or Attorney General like John Kennedy appointed his brother?
Same with Obama. Who is this guy? I feel like I'm being asked to put up $20,000 on a really sweet insider special IPO stock deal in a new airline, and then finding out three weeks later there is no company and no one takes the phone calls.
It's boiler room politics.
1) Merely 3 years in the Senate, half of that spent campaigning
2) Drug abuser
3) No real legislative accomplishments to speak of
4) No real Executive experience
5) Hardly any experience in a real, private sector job
6) No Foreign Policy experience
7) No Military experience
8) Most extreme leftist voting record when peering behind the curtain of "hope" and "change"
etc.. This guy would be easy to dispatch against Romney. Now, if we can just get rid of the ass-clown Double-Talk Express...
Posted by: Jefferson Paine on February 4, 2008 03:51 PMWorker pay is only a part of the cost of doing business and if a U.S. worker is more productive than one from overseas, that can mitigate some of the pay difference. Tax and regulation must be factored in too and taxing corporations more certainly isn't going to bring jobs back home.
Posted by: RBW on February 4, 2008 03:57 PMMilitary Experience: Hillary has had none. GW in all due respects, had none. Cheney had none. Romney has none. So, unless you are comparing to John McCain, Barack has as (effectively) as much Military experience as the current President and VP, his main opponent on the Democratic, and one of his two main opponents on the Republican side. Barack graduated High School in '79. There was no need for military service at that time. I suppose if you take Hillary's view that Barack was running for President since Kindergarten, then yes he should have gotten this block checked. Even if he had gone in for one term at that time, or after he graduated from college, he wouldn't have seen any major action. He would have been out by the time of the first Gulf War.
Budget Experience: Running Non-Profits. Involved in Illinios legislature in crafting budget. Involved in Senate with regards to budget (see committees he is on).
Legislative Experience: Significant for the few years he has been in Senate (when compared to his Senate counterparts). Significant in Illinois legislature, if you would bother to actually check the facts. Does he have Ed. Kennedy's long resume, no? Does he approach McCain's resume? Not given the length of time McCain has been in the Senate. Barack comes close to Hillary's legislative experience in the Senate in half the timeframe, and has a lot more if you add the years in the Illinois legislature. Romney has no legislative experience, only gubernatorial.
You asked for accomplishments. If you really didn't want them, or will buy them when presented, then don't bother asking. The truth is a pesky fact when it confronts the lies Hillary has been putting out that there is no meat there. Barack is a lot more experienced than Hillary, plus hasn't made blunder decisions like she did with the original Health Care proposal, or the many problems with her careeer at the Rose Law Firm.
He obviously has to manage his campaign budget and work to keep the money coming in. Huckabee is having a hard time doing that and he Governed a state of 2.6 million people. Guiliani ran a city of 8.2 million, spent millions on his campaign, and still couldn't manage to get more that 5 delegates.
Real World experience is pulling people into your campaign, pulling in money from the field, successfully distributing it to a multitude of states in an orderly yet controlled fashion. Doing this you pay for campaign events, venues to host them, staff to man them, setup/takedown crew, food/drink for staff and attendees. I would think running a highly successful 50 state campaign is certainly a item that requires real world budgeting, experience, and know-how.
I also would like to point out that the chosen one according to the views expressed on SP has no Military experience (nor do his 5 military age sons, who are obviously to busy helping dad to actually enlist). His business experience is great but the Federal Govt. certainly does not act like a traditional business, nor does it try to be one. Do tell me a business where one can propose a budget that puts itself $410 Billion in the red?
Nor does running a campaign budget. Nor does being someone on the floor of a legislature voting for or against a bill. Again, if these things actually made any difference, hundreds, if not thousands of people would have more experience in the field then Obama, and you guys banging your heels together and doing that "no place like home" thing doesn't change that.
The man shares so many things with Kerry, but part of the most frightening are that neither of them have accomplished a damned thing in the US Senate.
Equating his history with those who want ever so badly to make their delusion of his ability, experience and vision is a meaningless exercise. It smacks of that same weirdness inculcating the typical Paul supporter.
You cheap-shotting Romney's 5 kids, who's service is totally irrelevant, unless he's planning on putting them in charge of Defense (Are you people really that despicable that you have to pick on the man's CHILDREN?)
Of course you are. No double standard there, eh?
Obama's an empty suit, and nothing you've provided here changes that. Given the depths you'll stoop to in shilling for this disaster, we really have nothing more to discuss.
Posted by: Hinton on February 4, 2008 05:19 PMOh boo hoo, cry me a river why don't you. His kids are most certainly old enough to serve, they're old enough to vote, they campaign with him on the trail, as far as I can tell they are part of his campaign, thereby making them fair game. I'm not cheap-shooting anyone here, I'm sure you'd have no problem insulting Chelsea Clinton.
McCain is a war hero (silver star no less), has plenty of experience with budgets, has served on the Senate Armed Services Committee, and has actually managed to work with people across the aisle to get his bills passed. McCain was also was against Pork spending long before it became cool. Seems you should vote for him as he has all the proper qualifications one would look for in a potential President, not to mention he's backed by a prior GOP nominee (Bob Dole). The he gets closer to the nomination, the more he becomes the GOPs favorite punching bag (more so than Billary). You want to talk low, thats pretty despicable (talk about abandoning Reagan's 11th Commandment).
The man shares so many things with Kerry, but part of the most frightening are that neither of them have accomplished a damned thing in the US Senate.
I'd say Romney has more in common with Kerry. In fact they're both from the same state, they both love tax increases, they both flip-flop, and they're both boring as hell to listen to talk.
Again, if these things actually made any difference, hundreds, if not thousands of people would have more experience in the field then Obama
Maybe they do, but are they running for President?
Obama's an empty suit, and nothing you've provided here changes that.
You have your belief and I have mine. So be it.
In their ignorance, I guess all that matters to some is the slick lines and pretty face.....Adults know better and realize these surface attributes are little more than window dressing and a fresh paint job on a dilapidated house.
Posted by: Rick D. on February 4, 2008 07:52 PMAdults know better and realize these surface attributes are little more than window dressing and a fresh paint job on a dilapidated house.
Yeah, gee which party with the President who increased the size of the federal Govt. and driven the country farther in debt than any other Administration in histroy. Lets start electing real fiscal concervatives.
Vote McCain, save the party from liberal flip-floppers.
Let's see. The Border flop, McCain/Fiengold, Globla Warming.
That's not flip flop right?
Do you think this won't drive our debt even further.
As always, for those who want to int=roduce other subjects, there is the public area.
Posted by: Jim Miller on February 5, 2008 08:49 AMAs always, those who want to discuss different subjects can do so in the public area.
Posted by: Jim Miller on February 5, 2008 08:51 AM