The Audacity of Untruth
Once upon a midnight dreary, while I pondered weak and weary
over many a quaint and curious unchallenged item in the life of the Great Orator
While I nodded, nearly napping, suddenly there came a tapping
as if someone’s boldly knocking, knocking and mocking mine and everyone’s gray matter
‘Tis surely a lie,’ I muttered, ‘knocking and mocking mine and everyone’s gray matter
Only this, and nothing more.’
Many have wondered what is there in Senator Obama’s curriculum vitae that would qualify him as President of the United States, and it’s not merely dyed in the wool Republicans who’ve been busy so wondering. Since his school days, he has managed to amass some noteworthy titles indeed. Harvard Law School Review President, Lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, Illinois State Senator, and United States Senator are all enviable achievements worthy of notice. And… who can deny the power, the delivery of his superb keynote address at the 2004 Democratic Convention?
The impressive job titles in his resume show that he had every opportunity to shine, had he really cared to or been capable being capable of doing so. Instead he was too busy promoting himself, while running around with dubious associates some of them already criminally indicted. Even his staunchest supporters have finally asked him to define himself, to speak in concrete terms rather than spout lofty sounding but meaningless slogans. Will he? Can he?!?
Chaim
To read the rest go to: Freedom’s Cost
Sometimes people make the mistake that a great orator automatically means a great person. No it simply means a good speaker.
The WSJ MarketWatch had this editorial about MCCain’s weak resume - http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/republicans/moderate-republicans/21655/wsj-market-watch-lists-reasons-why-mccain-would-make-a-mediocre-president/?disqus_reply=1152477#comment-1152477
How is McCain’s resume any better, near the bottom of his class at the academy?
The article sounds incredibly biased.
Graduating near the bottom of one’s class, doesn’t necessarily mean one is not intelligent, one could have had emotional problems, a death in the family that affected ranking, a streak of bad luck.
The article you linked to, has nothing to do with this post, and it unfairly attacks McCain on things like his performance as a pilot, which is a difficult job that few can do well. The article then claims that McCain thinks Vietnam could have been won with "more bombing", which is absurd, but most historians agree that if the war in Vietnam had continued it would have been successful, but at what cost… a very high price. In contrast, the Iraq War is a war against Al-Qaeda, not against Iraqis. The Vietnamese were fighting for their homeland, while Al-Qaeda is filled with foreign fighters who are fighting for religion and killing innocent Iraqis along the way. So there are important differences.
McCain was a mediocre student who was more concerned with loose women and drink than his studies. His own biography tells this story. This post attacks Obama’s resume, yet when WSJ Market Watch calls McCain mediocre only the op-ed is biased?
Rudi666
You choose to gloss over the fact that McCain entered the US House of Representatives in 1982 and the US Senate in 1986. Now let’s see if my ‘rithmetic is right that means he’s been serving the country for 26 years (an easily known and verifiable record) without even counting his army service! Obama claims 20 but even with "creative accounting" it’s impossible to account for more than 13, hmmnnnn. Somebody must stretching the truth, in this case, and it’s not MCCain.
On at least two types of legislation Obama claimed credit for passing, while the record shows he clearly misspoke. McCain has initiated and passed many a law which show him a leader with experience. McCain has worked in very publicized cases with the Democrats in initiating laws, perhaps if Obama stays in the Senate long enough he might yet grow to the unifier he clearly isn’t.
Obama’s resume as, Chaim says, Obama’s resume is filled with impressive titles. Unfortunately, those titles remained as titles as he was too busy elsewhere to amass an impressive record of any kind. In fact CNN, The Boston Globe, the New York Times, the LA Times all of which are anything but Republican Party organs, have amply documented and decried Barry’s dubious "achievements" in Illinois as a State Senator and as a community organizer. Do your your research!!!
Rudi, you evidently didn’t grow up during the 60s and 70s!
It is worth remembering that McCain also has also had some seedy associates.
I point this out NOT to say that it disqualifies McCain, but only to defend BOTH candidates against unfair allegations of "guilt by association". It is the nature of power to act as a magnet for all kinds of hangers-on and hustlers. I would wager that every single person with any potential to ever run for President has some seedy associates built up around them by the time they get there. It’s not by the intention of the candidate, but by the nature of such seedy people to find any angle to glom themselves on to powerful people. What matters is ONLY whether the powerful people use their influence to actually help the seedy people when the inevitable call comes. And there is no evidence that either McCain or Obama has ever done anything like that.