Senator Barack Obama
Presidential Campaign
Admittedly, Senator Clinton has more parliamentary experience at the national level. However, we must take into account that Barack Obama does have as much parliamentary experience in the Illinois senate. The parliamentary wheel both at a regional and a national level is similar. The only difference is that the US senate deals with matters at the national and international level. Therefore, the long years spent by Barack Obama in the Illinois senate and the 3 years spent in the US senate at the national level is quite enough for him to act as Commander in Chief.
Moreover, Senator Clinton also claims experience through her First Lady role. I wonder whether someone can be a doctor simply by being the spouse of one. Without diminishing the First Lady function, I consider it to be a mere decoration in a presidential administration. Bill Clinton might be so if ever his wife is elected as the next president in November 2008. Therefore, the First Lady role does not amount to the occupation of a political function.
Finally, I conclude that Senator Obama does not lack any experience at all to act as Commander in Chief. I wish him good luck.
Published by Darrel Beltran
Hello, my name is Darrel Beltran and I'm really interested in working from home. View profile
- Barack Obama: The Black Nationalist Candidate
- Senator Barack Obama Wins Democratic Iowa Caucus
- Senator Barack Obama Promises to Improve American Lives in Speech After Iowa Cauc...
- Barack Obama: Facts and Fairytales
- Five Reasons Why I Will Vote for Senator Barack Obama Instead of Senator Hillary C...
- Why I Hope Senator Barack Hussein Obama Does Not Become President. A Debate with J...
- Barack Obama Defeats Senator Hillary Clinton in Wyoming and Gains Seven Caucuses i...
5 Comments
Post a CommentThank y'all guys!! Your comments re very important to me!!!!
Good work - welcome to AC. I look forward to reading more of your content.
"Admittedly, Senator Clinton has more parliamentary experience at the national level." Does that have to do with commander-in-chief? Obama serves on the Committee of Foreign affairs and has written and passed much legislation relating to our veterans. Hillary has co-sponsored some legislation of which I approve, such as Election Fraud Prevention, but Obama has a much more impressive list of his work in Congress, especially in relation to military affairs. I believe she looks to men for her answers, rather than having any clear intelligence in making choices. To Iraq she said: "we acted on faulty intelligence" and she said in one debate when asked what the government needs "we need better intelligence". She also lied about the Iraq vote, although I would have to look up what she said exactly about insisting it was not a vote for war, when the title clearly stated it was. She is not fit to be in charge of the military.
I often read blog posts by veterans who say they think Obama is qualified as commander-in-chief. Because they are more informed on the military having served in wars from Viet Nam until today, I tend to trust their judgment. I would prefer him in that capacity because of the reasons he was against the Iraq invasion (I was also) and saying we need to be "as careful getting out as we were going in". In addition I read an article about both candidates Military advisers. Hers are old style hawks, whereas his think the way I do. Hillary changes her mind too often in her choices and shows her incompetence by voting yes to Iran and calling that vote a "non-issue" "fantasize" and "make-up". She claims her "enemies" are spreading lies about that vote. A person like that is too scary to be in charge of the military. She appears unstable in other ways, during this long campaign.
Very nice!!!