Two things..... experience and foreign policy understanding are important to be a viable Presidential candidate.

Using Obama is running out of steam as the time clock keeps ticking. It will be time for thoughts and ideas independent of invoking his term in office.

I am a bit confused CHI.

Nobody was "using" Obama. The question was how the dialogue has changed. When Obama ran, his lack of experience meant nothing to the Democratic Party...literally NOTHING.

NOW suddenly, a new canidate and experience is so vital.

That rings of hypocrisy to me. The standards change to fit the canidate,

Age was a big factor for the Democrats in 2012, and in 2008, and now it is meaningless.

How can you speak of those things without having the words choke you ?

The one thing I know for sure is based on Obama's behavior those cojoined twins are lucky he wasn't the surgeon assigned to their case.

Personal Best Regards:

How about based on Obama's education and experience in non-medical situations that cojoined twins were lucky that he was not assigned as their surgeon?

Personal Best Regards To Ya:

And yet, liberals are still invoking Bush's name every chance they get to excuse Obama's inept failure.

And yet, (your) President Obama made the economy rebound from the abject failure of Crapweasel Bush. Unemployment is down under 6 percent ( yes, that IS a real number), the stock market doubled, bin Laden is dead, and I shot an 83 at Fox Run yesterday (yes, 18 holes).

Well, what you said may have been credible until you undid it with the last statement.

Unemployment averaged 5.5% during the Bush administration. Economists said the rating was considered full employment. The difference now is, ALL the people that are NOT seeking employment after losing their jobs and being out of work so long. There is a record amount of NOT EMPLOYED working age people in America now. The economy is not doing so good, and any/any economist will prove it to you with their statistics, such as GDP or whatever. I'm not the expert and don't claim to be. Bin Laden is dead? Yep, an unemployed terrorist is dead. Not that he was doing much in the time before he was killed. How many did he kill? I don't know, but I do know that Sadaam was responsible for killing almost half a million civilians using WMDs. So, if you want to compare sizes........

To summarize, consider this analogy. Bush had a glass that was full to the brim (full employment). Obama lost how many thousands of jobs? He was working with a glass almost empty and now it's about half full. His unemployment figures are a play on figures, even if you wish to deny it's reality.
There are a record number of families still on food stamps.
Poverty level is high
Middle class is making less
Health care insurance has gone up more than ever before.

You know, I can go on with an unlimited list to show you how wrong you are, but would it really do any good? Would you acknowledge it?

The comment was the idea of blaming Obama for this long. MY comment was that this administration is still using Bush as an excuse and blaming him. My suggestion is don't throw stones until you open your windows.

While I offer a post earlier today from someone who objected to language used in talking about President Obama and offer to fuel discussion, you come on here and start with the immature insulting behavior....typical, BUT having said that...

A number of ways to measure what you have totally and completely oversimplified. I, personally, have never criticized his economic performance because I am more worried about how he has allowed the entire world to be lit up and on fire.

This is from 2014.....I will also provide a link more current for you reading. It is based primarily on an interview the President had with Steve Liesman of CNBC.

"As noted in an earlier post studying presidents by their records on poverty, the poverty rate has climbed since Mr. Obama took office. Through 2012, the most recent year available, the number of people in poverty had risen by 2.9 million."

"Studying presidents by their job creation record, also places Mr. Obama near the bottom of the pack. Since the presidency of Harry Truman, only three presidents have seen the level of employment grow by a smaller percent than Mr. Obama: the brief presidency of Gerald Ford, the one-term presidency of George H.W. Bush, and that of his son, George W. Bush which ended in the recession."

"Indeed, adjusted for inflation, incomes declined around the turn of the century and never quite regained their previous peak under President George W. Bush. Since Mr. Obama took office, the median income rate has continued to decline, according to Census Bureau data through 2012. The president agreed with Mr. Liesman that incomes have fallen and touted proposals to raise the minimum wage and invest in American infrastructure as policies that could reverse the decline."

Have Most Economic Indicators Improved Under Obama? - Real Time Economics - WSJ

I strongly suggest you read this link plus the next one if you wish to discuss economics of this President. You are doing more than skimming in your remarks....you are skimming the skim.

And again, it is not all bad...not meant to bash the President. It is an honest analysis of the economics while he was President. You opened this door so lets talk about it...

"The economy has done relatively well under Barack Obama. For most of this article, I’ve highlighted the good aspects of the economy. But there are some bad aspects as well. For example, income inequality has actually gotten worse under President Obama. Granted, this a trend that has been occurring in the United States since the late 1970’s, but this is an area that Barack Obama has tried to fix. So far, he has not succeeded."


- See more at: How Has the Economy Performed Under Barack Obama? - Equities.com - Global Financial Community

I highlighted in red what appears to be some sort of cornerstone for discussion with the Democratic party and one they will have a problem selling.

Lots of good and bad in these articles...i just feel if you are actually going to have a discussion, simply grazing over some headlines that help you and ignoring what actually has occurred is just not legit.

According to John Williams of shadowstats.com, the real unemployment rate in the United States right now is above 23 percent.

Nearly 33 percent of the Americans above age 16 are not part of the workforce, the highest number since 1978. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) report issued recently has found 92,898,000 Americans above age 16 not a part of the labor force of the country as of February 2015.

When Obama took over the office in January 2009, nearly 80,529,000 Americans were not a part of the labor force. The number has increase by nearly 12 million over the last few years.

Let me try to be explicit. Forget 2008 and 2012. Forget Obama and Carson. My point is that I like the idea of a Presidential candidate having political experience and an understanding of foreign policy. Just that simple. So tell me, what do you think about that? Remember, no other than that.

OK...got you and I understand.

Your point is well taken and I used to be that way...in other words, I wanted an experienced person who had hands on experience with foreign policy.

I was much younger and of course over the years I have changed.

I now believe that even more than this, I want managerial skills. Washington DC, good or bad, is loaded with experienced professionals and selection is important.

In addition, the President has to listen and have the skills to make a decision, and we are talking about foreign affairs, that will serve the country best, not popular, not political but the best interest of the country.

Fact is, when our current President was elected, while I surely did not support his election, I took a positive leaning watch and see attitude. I had read about his Chicago gang of advisors and that bothered me, but in any case watching how he acted with the ACA simply just put me off to never come back. He appears to listen to his PERSONAL advisors rather than his "experts". He is stubborn and very much interested in the political end game and how it will affect HIM.

Want to stop bashing, but my perfect President is a master manager. One who once he takes the oath lives the oath. One who is aware of politics (gotta) but it is not on his list of goods or bads on any issue. One who not only listens to opposing opinions but solicits them. One who understands that there are many opinions on all issues and probably not just one that will work. A good manager.

That certainly favors an ex governor who has been successful and I really felt strongly about Mitt Romney...think the country really really missed the boat on that one.

UNDERSTANDING foreign policy for sure, and having folks around him who will help formulating a policy that will help us economically, but insure we are represented in the world, and are safe.

I know much of what I am saying is general but after all that is all we got.

If you are looking for an endorsement of Hillary Clinton, sorry. First she was an average senator at best and on her watch as Secy of State so many bad things happened, it is hard to really relish the bad.

But most importantly, whatever she did do or didnt do, she is a terrible person. She is dishonest, conniving and so many more things that I can say DO NOT apply to our current President. I say those things, not lightly, but so much has been confirmed over the years and as I have said on here before, I have no idea how the democratic party call allow her to carry the banner.

You will not find a credible economist who believes in shadowstat. It is a paranoid site similar to a parallel universe.

"But there is another set of government statistics,” Sanders continued, “and that that real unemployment if you include those people who have given up looking for work and the millions of others who are working part-time 20, 25 hours a week when they want to work full-time, when you all of that together, real unemployment is 10.5 percent.”

July 6, 2015 Bernie Sanders

Quoting a socialist to prove an economic point? :1rotfl:

Actually, since no matter what you put on here, the liberals will dispute it. I wanted to prove that you could even put a liberal/socialist quote on here, and if it comes from a conservative poster, then the liberal will find something wrong. Either by attacking the poster or blaming Bush. It's quite entertaining to be able to predict their reaction. :highfive:

Currently Gallup estimates it (unemployment) to be more like 14.1% as of September 2015.

How about based on Obama's education and experience its amazing to see him intellectualize himself into stupidity because his ideological vanity operates on a continuum.

Two groups of Syrians were caught trying to cross the border. wonder how many terrorist have already used the same route. He would legalize their status. How about if its so true that ISIS is contained as he claims we even have a Syrian refugee problem and the continuation of innocence would not be occurring?

How about if you like your doctor......Heck United Health Care just announced its pulling out of Obamacare.

The two reasons the economy looks good are 1) fracking which Obama continues to destroy and b) the feckless FED policies which are feeding Wall Street but not Main Street and creating such uncertainty for businesses they refuse to invest and use surplus for mergers, etc

I could go on but my gut can't take the reality of Obama the Terrible and his destructive and divisive administration

This guy is a complete and abject failure.

Personal Best Regards

:thumbup:

Dear Guest: I agree with your statement concerning evolution and wonder why we are not still seeing fish walk out of the oceans and quite capable to breathing air straight up?

I also agree with your argument concerning a deity and in fact just as a guide this would be a better nation if more people followed the Ten Commandments. Wouldn't we be better off discussing God than Charlie Sheen or Kim Kardashian?

We have Ben Carson who broke though the barrier of political correctness at
a Prayer Breakfast and practically caused Obama to choke on his french toast ( pun Paris ISIS). Can he go the distance? Does political experience matter? In my view one could argue both sides but what matters is the candidate .

some folks are going gog-gog over Donald Trump but isn't Mitt Romney Donald Trump but without the theatrics and with a sound moral code?

I appreciate and sincerely thank you for speaking up and pray we have many more people who recognize that unless we return to the traditional values of this nation we are doomed to repeat Roman history.

Personal Best Regards:

It's in paperback now.

Attachment 56338

Chi, you are way behind the times. I am surprised of you, to be honest. I really thought you were smarter than that. Darwin walked back his "THEORY" of evolution before he died. There has never been any evidence of evolution, but the Bible is scientifically and mathematically accurate. I was privileged to attend a lecture by an archaeologist/scientist that attempted to dispute the Bible and prove the theory of evolution. He ended up discovering the Bible to be totally accurate and became a believer in creation. Granted, this lecture was back in the 70's but he gave a very factual and believing lecture. But, I find that attempting to convince rocks that they were created, not evolved to be very boring.

If you believe Darwin's theory, then you probably believe Bernie Sanders statement that terrorism is caused by global warming. :1rotfl:

That's pretty funny considering the overwhelming majority of Ku Klux Klan members are Democrats

You really believe that the Earth is 6,000 years old? Look at the Grand Canyon! The rock strata at the bottom is over 1.4 billion years old!

Look at all the fossils of early man. How can you say evolution is a myth?

You gotta be smarter than that.

Is it the King James version?

Apparently, you aren't that well versed on the fossils of early man, because there is still no evidence of evolution. Go ahead, show me a fossil of early man with gills, fins, or anything else that he doesn't have now. You can't. The only change in man is from interracial mating. But, this is not a thread about the validity of creation. It's a thread regarding Carson and his qualifications for the presidency. Are you going to ask each candidate his view on religion, his faith, whether or not he practices it, etc? Did you ask your messiah in the White House prior to voting for him?

Any question asked of our President, or his close relationship with his pastor was met with chagrin, calls of racism, etc.

Go back to high school and do some science reading. You say the Earth is 6,000 years old as dated in thr Bible! Poppycock!! Do some research on the age of rocks in the Grand Canyon and your stupid statement about the Bible being scientifically and mathemathical correct is pure nonsense.

Go to humanevolution.si.edu and do some learning. You will see that human DNA is only about 2 percent different from chimpanzees, bonobos, and gorillas.

Do yourself a favor and do some basic learning.

MD, c'mon you're sh------ ting me. Yout posts are too smart to be that stupid. Nice try.

Actually, it was recently proved that chimpanzee DNA is 2 percent greater than that of Tea Party members. :1rotfl:

Now you and your type have something to aspire to!!

Well Chi, at least I give you a substantive debate, and you yet you liberals have only attacks on the poster, nothing to convince. I guess that means that once again, you lose. Remember, Google is your friend.....try using it to discover some convincing facts. There is still some "hope and change" out there for ya.

This thread should be renamed.....

GIRLS NIGHT OUT GOSSIP

Thanks for the words of encouragement, and you are correct. You definitely give a substantive debate in your posts. Maybe a little snarky but still appreciated.

Here is a civil and informative debate. Two and one half hours but zippy.

https://youtu.be/wvO3zJaNBjs

I'm not going to debate religion on a thread with the subject of Ben Carson. However, since there is a question as to his qualifications to be president, based on his belief in God and creation, I will say that 75-80% of America believes in God. If you believe in God, then you believe in creation. Even though I have no intention of voting for Carson in the primary, if he does get the nomination, he will get my vote in the general. I think that I would rather put my faith in a leader that believes in God, than one that does not. If one does not believe in God, then can I really feel confident that he believes in America, democracy, and the constitution?

And I have yet to see any evidence of evolution. But, keep researching and studying because eventually you will come to the conclusion that creation is the only viable answer. They all do.

Most intelligent people know that the creationist theory is pure nonsense. And its a waste of time to try to talk logically to these nitwits who believe it, they seem unwilling or unable to understand logic of any kind. The way Carson is dropping in the polls, however, its probably a foregone conclusion that Trump will be the nominee. I certainly hope so. That will certainly guarantee a Democrat in the white house.

Who the hell are you to come on here, or anywhere and call anyone who believes in the bible a "nitwit" ?

Man that takes big ones. Who do you think you are ? You would object strongly if anyone said that about a muslim and their beliefs, and I picked Muslim simply because it seems to be timely.

How can anyone speak of another's religion in that manner ?

It does take a nitwit to believe that the Bible is "scientifically and mathematical correct" as was stated a few posts ago. You can see clear evidence in rocks and fossils that the Earth is many millions of years older than the 6,000 years if dated from the Bible.

I believe in the New Testament and all things in it.