Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lil Dancer
McCain is no intellectual. I read he graduated 5th from the bottom of his class at the Naval Academy at Annapolis. Obama, in contrast, graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School, an impressive feat, and was president of the Harvard Law Review. True, the President would have the benefit of astute advisors; I personally would be more comfortable with someone I felt was intellectually gifted.
|
None of the three candidates are "dumb" by any stretch of the imagination.
As far as Sen. McCain's USNA standing, the context is not relative to the rigors of the institution. All of the service academies are known as being overall the most difficult institutions to complete, as they test considerably more than grey-matter capacity. My hat is tipped to all who have the fortitude to complete a service academy program, and one review of the curricula - to include required service activities during non-academic periods - can attest to their severity and content.
Call me old-fashioned, but character, integrity, ethics and concern for country-over-self mean more to me than someone's collegiate transcript. I'd like to know that when the going gets tough, there will be someone tough enough in the job whose concern is more about what's good for the country instead of what's good for his/her public image or party.
Sen. Obama definitely has the most impressive academic credentials, but I know a lot of smart people without the sense to get out of the rain. His past history does not show any concern-for-country, as evidenced by his missing over a third of all Senate votes during his one-and-only term (only half-completed) in the Senate. That to me indicates a me-first and everyone-else-second attitude, and I'm not that comfortable having someone as President that selfish.
Sen. Clinton is a very sharp and gutsy individual who has made it clear from the time she first crossed the 1600 PA Ave threshhold that her goal was to be President at any cost. I admire the ambition, but again there seems to be more concern with acquisition of title versus desire to serve the country as a whole.
Sen. McCain is definitely not the orator that Sen Obama is, and gaffs occur. Sen. McCain's academic credentials are not as impressive as either Sen. Obama or Clinton, however, when one looks at the chronolgical time-lines for the three, the person with a much greater record (at the same point in life) of unselfish service-to-country and experience in leadership, management and understanding of how the world works, Sen. McCain excels.
There is still a lot of campaign to go. Ironically, the only thing they all have in common is that they are U.S. Senators. That being the case, it seems the most logical means of comparison as to how they would perform as President would be how they performed as Senators - who fulfilled the duties of the office, who showed up for votes, how they voted, their abilities to work across-the-aisles with others, their understanding of issues (domestic and international). For those who want to discount Sen. McCain's military record, and those who want to attack Sen. Obama's cadre of private friends, and those who want to see Sen. Clinton as the sock-puppet of her husband - what other objective criteria is left other than Senatorial record?
Yes, comparing the records means not being swayed by glib catch-phrases and sound-bites, and not getting caught up in emotional demogogary - but actually doing "homework" to determine who can do the job based on track record. I'd do that just trying to select the person to fix my toilet, let alone trying to select the person to lead the nation.