TexasCHLforum.com

The Annoyed Man wrote: But even if he did run today, his relative inexperience would not be a detraction, given that the "loyal opposition" put that argument to rest back in 2008. I would LOVE to throw that back in an Obama supporter's face if given the chance. Why? Because they either have to agree that there's nothing wrong with Rubio's relative lack of experience, or they have to admit that they were wrong about Obama's lack of experience. If they agree that experience is unimportant, then that's one less stone they could throw at a Rubio candidacy. If they admit that they were wrong, then they have to either, in good conscience vote for anybody besides Obama, or they have to admit that they are not people of good conscience.

TAM -- I sure wish I had as much faith in the Obama-supporters sense of logic. However, this question WAS settled in 2008 -- and against what you are arguing. Remember, the left claimed Sarah Palin was unqualified because of "lack of experience". Even though she had FAR more experience than Obama, who had never run anything.

sjfcontrol wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote: But even if he did run today, his relative inexperience would not be a detraction, given that the "loyal opposition" put that argument to rest back in 2008. I would LOVE to throw that back in an Obama supporter's face if given the chance. Why? Because they either have to agree that there's nothing wrong with Rubio's relative lack of experience, or they have to admit that they were wrong about Obama's lack of experience. If they agree that experience is unimportant, then that's one less stone they could throw at a Rubio candidacy. If they admit that they were wrong, then they have to either, in good conscience vote for anybody besides Obama, or they have to admit that they are not people of good conscience.

TAM -- I sure wish I had as much faith in the Obama-supporters sense of logic. However, this question WAS settled in 2008 -- and against what you are arguing. Remember, the left claimed Sarah Palin was unqualified because of "lack of experience". Even though she had FAR more experience than Obama, who had never run anything.

True.... I forgot about Palin. Even so, the paradigm still holds. They pointed to her lack of experience, and we can say, "You were right! After all, look what happened with Obama and his lack of experience!"

The Annoyed Man wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote: But even if he did run today, his relative inexperience would not be a detraction, given that the "loyal opposition" put that argument to rest back in 2008. I would LOVE to throw that back in an Obama supporter's face if given the chance. Why? Because they either have to agree that there's nothing wrong with Rubio's relative lack of experience, or they have to admit that they were wrong about Obama's lack of experience. If they agree that experience is unimportant, then that's one less stone they could throw at a Rubio candidacy. If they admit that they were wrong, then they have to either, in good conscience vote for anybody besides Obama, or they have to admit that they are not people of good conscience.

TAM -- I sure wish I had as much faith in the Obama-supporters sense of logic. However, this question WAS settled in 2008 -- and against what you are arguing. Remember, the left claimed Sarah Palin was unqualified because of "lack of experience". Even though she had FAR more experience than Obama, who had never run anything.

True.... I forgot about Palin. Even so, the paradigm still holds. They pointed to her lack of experience, and we can say, "You were right! After all, look what happened with Obama and his lack of experience!"

Sadly, many of his supporters would not agree with you. They'd simply point to the number of things he's given them or promised them. Don't confuse them with facts....

TAM, I'm sure that you are keenly aware that logic is not actually a part of a liberal's thinking. They all have serious deficiencies in their pre-frontal cortex!!! Therefore, your experience paradigm will be met with the typical liberal response...they will just call you racist and demean you in order to discredit your "flawed" logic!

Blindref757 wrote:TAM, I'm sure that you are keenly aware that logic is not actually a part of a liberal's thinking. They all have serious deficiencies in their pre-frontal cortex!!! Therefore, your experience paradigm will be met with the typical liberal response...they will just call you racist and demean you in order to discredit your "flawed" logic!

I am a racist. I despise green haired purple people and think they should be locked up and sterilized. Purples are inferior anyway.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

Blindref757 wrote:TAM, I'm sure that you are keenly aware that logic is not actually a part of a liberal's thinking. They all have serious deficiencies in their pre-frontal cortex!!! Therefore, your experience paradigm will be met with the typical liberal response...they will just call you racist and demean you in order to discredit your "flawed" logic!

I am a racist. I despise green haired purple people and think they should be locked up and sterilized. Purples are inferior anyway.

BigPa wrote:The Constitution means nothing to ANY of these clowns any more.

The answer is unpleasant but clear.

all enemies
foreign and domestic

Obi-Juan wrote:

BigPa wrote:The Constitution means nothing to ANY of these clowns any more.

The answer is unpleasant but clear.

all enemies
foreign and domestic

What exactly are you suggesting?

The Annoyed Man wrote:Senator Marco Rubio schools Senator Kerry on the Senate Floor yesterday:

His closing statement:

I believe my time is about to expire, so let me close with this: compromise is fantastic! .....I would love to compromise, but I would say to you that compromise that is not a solution is a waste of time. If my house were on fire, I can't compromise about which part of the house I'm going to save! You save the whole house! Or it will ALL burn down! We either save this country, or we do not. And to save it, we must seek solutions.

I'd vote for that guy if he ever runs for president.

Most of my family still resides in the Sunshine State. My Mother and late Father were die-hard Democrats. While visiting my Mother last year, I grabbed her by her shirt collar* and took her--kicking and screaming--to a meet and greet political even in South Florida. After hearing candidate Marco Rubio speak she was slightly impressed. However, during the 'mixing with crowd' period he asked Mom if he had her support. Naturally, she expressed that I kidnapped her, made her attend, and then proceeded to tell him him she was a Democrat. He spent a very short time telling her what was wrong with straight party voting and what he intended to accomplish when elected. After, he again asked for her support and she said she would more than likely vote for him. A few weeks later when I quizzed her she said she had received some information in the mail and what he said made sense to her--yes, she would be voting for him. She said she believed he really cared and was not just going to Washington to line his own pockets. Let's hope Mom is right.

*No I really did not grab her by the collar but she would get a kick out me saying I did!

loadedliberal wrote:

Obi-Juan wrote:

BigPa wrote:The Constitution means nothing to ANY of these clowns any more.

The answer is unpleasant but clear.

all enemies
foreign and domestic

What exactly are you suggesting?

Maybe you ought to read the book.

http://www.amazon.com/Enemies-Foreign-D ... 0972831010

Anygunanywhere

The fault lies with both sides equally. The federal government throws away millions if not billions every day. The political appointees don’t have the slightest idea of how to begin to fix the problem.

The first step is to make the bureaucrats operate the government more efficiently and hold them accountable.

no more automatic yearly budget increases for federal agencies would be a good start.

Election day should be moved to April 16th. You can bet that taxes would go down along with spending.

The Annoyed Man wrote:Election day should be moved to April 16th. You can bet that taxes would go down along with spending.