A good leader must also possess both extraordinary intelligence and Leadership; especially in this day and age.  The reason why intelligence is highly important is because you have to know how to deal with complex situations, sometimes on the fly, and some issues that you must tackle requires alot of good thinking and good judgement.

I believe that both John McCain and Obama are intelligent however I believe that Obama is both more intelligent and has the right intelligence to be President.  First, there is alot of evidence to support this, mostly coming from what McCain has said himself.

Let me present you with the first case of evidence that supports my opinion on this: www.youtube.com/watch.  Essentially, once you do your own research, you'll find out that McCain graduated ranked 894th out of 899 people.  In his own words, "Barely passing by today's standards."

If you watch further you'll find out that McCain even admits that he doesn't know how to use a Mac or PC.  In today's computerized age both things, IMHO, are highly important.  Our President needs to have a firm grip of the current world and not the passed world in my opinion.

Now, on economic issues, which are very important to our country or any country.  I believe that a President doesn't have to be an expert in economics however I believe they should have some level of understanding of it.  With that, I present the following video: www.youtube.com/watch.

It's a combination of ignorance and corruption (I don't think McCain is corrupt though) that leads to bills which allow the mortgage crisis to happen.   That is why you cannot just rely on advisors, as the leader of this country, you must have enough intelligence to be able to have a fair judgement especially on the economy.

Phil Gramm, a former Texas Senator, helped pave the way for the current mortage crisis with some of the bills he co-authored.  He is also a former federal lobbyist for the Swiss Bank, UBS.  He is also famed for slipping in an amendment desired by Enron.  At that time his wife was on the board of directors at Enron.

The combination of a President (McCain), who has no understanding of economics, and a former federal lobbyist, special interest, etc is extremely dangerous for our economy.  Just choosing Phil Gramm as his Top Economic Advisor should make anyone question McCain's judgement, intelligence and ability to use experience.

to be continued...

What where Obama's grades while he was at Columbia?

Nice try.  I'll be writing about that in part 2.  However, research Obama and Harvard Law. =p

Magna Cum Laude (google that)

Originally posted by Dethnoble

Nice try.  I'll be writing about that in part 2.  However, research Obama and Harvard Law. =p

 

Nice try at what? This is why you guys on the left don't win elections. You try to fool people into your way of thinking (mostly out of some misguided ideology). Why can't you just be honest and admit that Obama won't release his grades from Columbia?

Also, in case you have never been in charge of a group of people, you don't have to be the smartest person in the room to make the best leader.

It is judgement (wisdom) and leadership they need. Intellegence has very little to do with judgement.  If Obama is intellegent then his intellegence was wrong on the surge and still is. His intellegence was wrong on suggestion to take Russia/Georgia situation to the UN securtiy council, which he continued to repeat even after he knew that Russia has veto power. 

cityzen,

First, I admit that he hasn't released them.  I have no problem with that.  But what about Harvard? Obviously, he had a high enough grade to get into Harvard Law.  Then, he graduates "Magna Cum Laude ."   Which means, at Harvard Law, he 'at least' had a 3.75 GPA. 

Just because you have leadership characteristics doesn't mean you are intelligent enough to lead.  Furthermore, as the President of the most powerful, and economically important, country in the world you need to have high intelligence.  And when you hae someone (Phil Gramm), as your top economic advisor, who had a hand in the S & L Crisis, Mortgage Crisis and a spouse who is on the board of directors (Enron) which fell apart due to corruption and scandals then your first economic decision is already a bad one. 

A great leader, especially in bad economic times, cannot make stupid economic decisions.  That right there is a stupid economic decision so it both shows McCain's lack of economic intelligence and ability to learn from experience (both something I believe a Presidential Candidate should have).

Then, to top it off, he picks up a communications-journalist major as his VP.  When you take the time to research Sarah Palin you'll find out that Wasilla went from no debt to being 23 million in debt.  If I remember correctly they have a yearly budget of 12 million or so.  Furthermore, Sarah Palin does have an ethics violation investigation against her going on and several other issues.

Her husband is currently employed by BP (a big oil company), a member of the AIP, who wants Alaska to cede from the United States and she also thinks that being Governor and also getting pregnant is responsible.

If you don't believe any of this stuff just research it and find out for yourself.  Read from various places as well and not just some left or right wing blog or news channel.

Vemoi,

Both experience AND intelligence are important to making the right 'judgement'.  Furthermore, with the surge, there was more than just the surge as factoring into the lowering of violence.  One example is Sadr having his army putting down their arms.  There is also a number of factors as well.  Though, I admit, without the surge the reported violence might not have gone down.

Now, what about the political side of things the surge was suppose to accomplish?  Oh yeah, the biggest thing, getting the political side to unify and work isn't going so well 'still'.  And, we don't know how long this reduced violence will last after we pull out the surge forces.

Is it just a bandaid fix, a temporary fix?

What about the fact that Obama was calling for a timetable of 16 months then Maliki even calls for it and then we have Bush and McCain calling for it (when they weren't before).  People seem to forget that Obama is who called for the timetable before both Bush and McCain.

Then we can get into voting for a war based upon shaky, at best intelligence, like McCain did and Obama did not.   Meanwhile, we hadn't finished the job in Afghanistan and now we find ourselves having to refocus on Afghanistan.   Oh and Obama voted 'No' to the Iraq war.

Vemoi,

On the issue with Russia/Georgia.  What do you think we should do? What do we do? Do we go in there with guns blazing, potentially starting a massive war or possibly even a world war?  Or do we take a cool headed diplomatic route first?

Furthermore, there is alot more to the conflict than what you just read or watch on Fox News, CNN, NBC, etc.  Go read up on the whole history of Georgia, South Ossetia, etc.   Find out more information from other news places as well.

Or watch stuff like this: www.youtube.com/watch

Funny how Fox likes to cut them off after they speak out and Fox doesn't like what they are saying.

Originally posted by Dethnoble

Then we can get into voting for a war based upon shaky, at best intelligence, like McCain did and Obama did not.   Meanwhile, we hadn't finished the job in Afghanistan and now we find ourselves having to refocus on Afghanistan.   Oh and Obama voted 'No' to the Iraq war.

Obama never voted on the WAR.

I apologize. He opposed the war but wasn't in the Senate at the time.

Originally posted by Dethnoble

I apologize. He opposed the war but wasn't in the Senate at the time.

He gave a speech  while he was a obscure state senator in Illinois, representing Ayers and Trinity church with a district in Chicago that has a strong antiwar and radical leftist constituency.

As reference and ease of access for everyone could you post a couple links for those things?  Furthermore, define obscurity? Just because, perhaps, you hadn't of heard of him from where you live doesn't constitute obscurity.

Originally posted by Dethnoble

Vemoi,

On the issue with Russia/Georgia.  What do you think we should do? What do we do? Do we go in there with guns blazing, potentially starting a massive war or possibly even a world war?  Or do we take a cool headed diplomatic route first?

Furthermore, there is alot more to the conflict than what you just read or watch on Fox News, CNN, NBC, etc.  Go read up on the whole history of Georgia, South Ossetia, etc.   Find out more information from other news places as well.

Or watch stuff like this: www.youtube.com/watch

Funny how Fox likes to cut them off after they speak out and Fox doesn't like what they are saying.

There is no reason to go through the UN security council as I said. Russia will veto it. Obama should know this being intellegent. I know what is going on over there. Russia went into a soverign country to take over. EU will do nothing about anything that is happening in their area of the world.

It would be like France going into Canada over their problems which pops up every 10 years or so. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_separatism. I have not watched anything about Goorgia on Fox, CNN, NBC but, all from the internet.

Actually, South Ossetia claims to be their own country  and Georgia is claiming South Ossetia is a province of theirs.  South Ossetia is roughly made up of 2/3rds Ossetians.  Additionally, it was in 1992 I do believe, that South Ossetia declared their independence from Georgia.  Essentially, Russia recognizes South Ossetia as an independent country from Georgia and Georgia (from their view) invaded South Ossetia first.

Now, I think it is intelligent to go to the UN first even if Russia vetoes anything.  The reason is it shows you are willing to take diplomatic routes and other methods first and foremost to handle conflicts.   If Russia begins abusing that veto ability then other countries will see this.  However, if we just start going in guns blazing, especially after Iraq, then that could backfire on us alot.

Originally posted by Dethnoble

What about the fact that Obama was calling for a timetable of 16 months then Maliki even calls for it and then we have Bush and McCain calling for it (when they weren't before).  People seem to forget that Obama is who called for the timetable before both Bush and McCain.

Slight correction: Bush now affirms that a timetable is appropriate, considering the Iraqi posture. However, McCain still opposes any form of timetable.

Then we can get into voting for a war based upon shaky, at best intelligence, like McCain did and Obama did not.   Meanwhile, we hadn't finished the job in Afghanistan and now we find ourselves having to refocus on Afghanistan.   Oh and Obama voted 'No' to the Iraq war.

While Obama didn't cast a vote regarding the invasion, he did come out against the invasion publicly, which wasn't a popular position at the time. If you have any questions regarding Obama's judgment, watch this. Notice how he was concerned about the reactions of Sunni, Shia, and Kurds 6 months prior to the invasion. Meanwhile, Bush didn't even know there are different sects of Islam.

It seems that McCain would like to pick up where Bush left off. Check YouTube for the numerous times McCain mixes up Sunni and Shi'a (only to be corrected by whomever he was standing next to at the time), makes false assertions that the Anbar Awakening was only possible because of the surge, flatly lied about the reduction in violence (and political progress).

Now, sandwich all this dumb between (1) Voting for the war to begin with and (2) thinking that America can occupy Iraq for 100 years without violence.

Daily, I am actually getting into alot of that in part two.

Originally posted by Dethnoble

cityzen,

First, I admit that he hasn't released them.  I have no problem with that.  But what about Harvard? Obviously, he had a high enough grade to get into Harvard Law.  Then, he graduates "Magna Cum Laude ."   Which means, at Harvard Law, he 'at least' had a 3.75 GPA. 

Just because you have leadership characteristics doesn't mean you are intelligent enough to lead.  Furthermore, as the President of the most powerful, and economically important, country in the world you need to have high intelligence.  And when you hae someone (Phil Gramm), as your top economic advisor, who had a hand in the S & L Crisis, Mortgage Crisis and a spouse who is on the board of directors (Enron) which fell apart due to corruption and scandals then your first economic decision is already a bad one. 

A great leader, especially in bad economic times, cannot make stupid economic decisions.  That right there is a stupid economic decision so it both shows McCain's lack of economic intelligence and ability to learn from experience (both something I believe a Presidential Candidate should have).

Then, to top it off, he picks up a communications-journalist major as his VP.  When you take the time to research Sarah Palin you'll find out that Wasilla went from no debt to being 23 million in debt.  If I remember correctly they have a yearly budget of 12 million or so.  Furthermore, Sarah Palin does have an ethics violation investigation against her going on and several other issues.

Her husband is currently employed by BP (a big oil company), a member of the AIP, who wants Alaska to cede from the United States and she also thinks that being Governor and also getting pregnant is responsible.

If you don't believe any of this stuff just research it and find out for yourself.  Read from various places as well and not just some left or right wing blog or news channel.

 

Doesn't that strike you as odd? Also you are comparing Annapolis with Harvard law? Kind of apples and oranges there. Its actually closer to compare undergrad to undergrad which in this case would be Annapolis to Columbia.

McCain has successfully lead several significant bipartisan efforts in the Senate. Can you name one significant bipartisan effort Obama has lead? You're kind of implying that McCain is stupid because of some youtube videos? Search for "Obama gaffs" on youtube.

McCain admits that the economy is not his strong suite. I defy you to find anything Obama admits is not his strong suite. Phil Gramm stepped down from the advisory position in the campaign after he made a derogatory comment about economic whiners. Also, not just one person makes economic decisions, McCain has said he would get the best and brightest involved, from any party. Of course its going to be along the lines of government deregulation, which was the draw of Phil Gramm. In case you didn't know though Pres. Clinton approved that bill with the Enron loophole.

McCain learned from experience and made adjustments after making mistakes all throughout his career. The most recent example I can think of is when it came to the border issue, not to mention his campaign for President. He also has military command experience. You can Google it. I hate to admit this but CNN also had a decent summary of both Obama and McCain this weekend.

Palin has a minor in Political Science. Not to mention she has more executive experience being a Mayor, then a Governor, than Obama has had in his career, and she isn't running for President. Waiting on the ethics violation probe myself. As to the other stuff, most of it is left wing rumors and smear, though it would be helpful if you could be specific. Debt is part of our economy, and our economic growth. People wave the government debt around without knowing what it means. It doesn't work the same way as having a credit card debt at that level. The truth is Palin cut property tax in Wasilla by 60%. As Governor she sold a $2.1 million jet that the previous Republican Gov. owned and cut $231 million from Alaska's $550 million budget. She wants to cut the federal debt as well. Despite the debt, she helped the Wasilla and Alaskan economies.

He was a member of AIP from 1995 to 2002, he is now a Republican. Are you saying he still wants Alaska to cede? I don't remember seeing that. From the wiki:

For 18 years, he worked for BP Oil in the North Slope oil fields of Alaska. In 2007, in order to avoid a conflict of interest relating to his wife's position as governor, he took a leave from his job as production supervisor when his employer became involved in natural gas pipeline negotiations with his wife's administration. Seven months later, because the family needed more income, Todd returned to BP. In order to avoid potential conflict of interest, this time he accepted a non-management position as a production operator.

As long as she can do the job while pregnant, why should it matter? She has an 80% approval rating as Gov, 75% among Democrats, btw.

So McCain doesn't have the institutionally educated pedigree that Obama does, so what? He more than makes up for it in his experience, that's my opinion anyway. And in tough economic times, I would rather not leave things in the hands of someone who is untested.

It looks to me like you need to follow your own advice.

Originally posted by cityzen

Originally posted by Dethnoble

cityzen,

First, I admit that he hasn't released them.  I have no problem with that.  But what about Harvard? Obviously, he had a high enough grade to get into Harvard Law.  Then, he graduates "Magna Cum Laude ."   Which means, at Harvard Law, he 'at least' had a 3.75 GPA. 

Just because you have leadership characteristics doesn't mean you are intelligent enough to lead.  Furthermore, as the President of the most powerful, and economically important, country in the world you need to have high intelligence.  And when you hae someone (Phil Gramm), as your top economic advisor, who had a hand in the S & L Crisis, Mortgage Crisis and a spouse who is on the board of directors (Enron) which fell apart due to corruption and scandals then your first economic decision is already a bad one. 

A great leader, especially in bad economic times, cannot make stupid economic decisions.  That right there is a stupid economic decision so it both shows McCain's lack of economic intelligence and ability to learn from experience (both something I believe a Presidential Candidate should have).

Then, to top it off, he picks up a communications-journalist major as his VP.  When you take the time to research Sarah Palin you'll find out that Wasilla went from no debt to being 23 million in debt.  If I remember correctly they have a yearly budget of 12 million or so.  Furthermore, Sarah Palin does have an ethics violation investigation against her going on and several other issues.

Her husband is currently employed by BP (a big oil company), a member of the AIP, who wants Alaska to cede from the United States and she also thinks that being Governor and also getting pregnant is responsible.

If you don't believe any of this stuff just research it and find out for yourself.  Read from various places as well and not just some left or right wing blog or news channel.

 

 

Doesn't that strike you as odd? Also you are comparing Annapolis with Harvard law? Kind of apples and oranges there. Its actually closer to compare undergrad to undergrad which in this case would be Annapolis to Columbia.

McCain has successfully lead several significant bipartisan efforts in the Senate. Can you name one significant bipartisan effort Obama has lead? You're kind of implying that McCain is stupid because of some youtube videos? Search for "Obama gaffs" on youtube.

McCain admits that the economy is not his strong suite. I defy you to find anything Obama admits is not his strong suite. Phil Gramm stepped down from the advisory position in the campaign after he made a derogatory comment about economic whiners. Also, not just one person makes economic decisions, McCain has said he would get the best and brightest involved, from any party. Of course its going to be along the lines of government deregulation, which was the draw of Phil Gramm. In case you didn't know though Pres. Clinton approved that bill with the Enron loophole.

McCain learned from experience and made adjustments after making mistakes all throughout his career. The most recent example I can think of is when it came to the border issue, not to mention his campaign for President. He also has military command experience. You can Google it. I hate to admit this but CNN also had a decent summary of both Obama and McCain this weekend.

Palin has a minor in Political Science. Not to mention she has more executive experience being a Mayor, then a Governor, than Obama has had in his career, and she isn't running for President. Waiting on the ethics violation probe myself. As to the other stuff, most of it is left wing rumors and smear, though it would be helpful if you could be specific. Debt is part of our economy, and our economic growth. People wave the government debt around without knowing what it means. It doesn't work the same way as having a credit card debt at that level. The truth is Palin cut property tax in Wasilla by 60%. As Governor she sold a $2.1 million jet that the previous Republican Gov. owned and cut $231 million from Alaska's $550 million budget. She wants to cut the federal debt as well. Despite the debt, she helped the Wasilla and Alaskan economies.

He was a member of AIP from 1995 to 2002, he is now a Republican. Are you saying he still wants Alaska to cede? I don't remember seeing that. From the wiki:

For 18 years, he worked for BP Oil in the North Slope oil fields of Alaska. In 2007, in order to avoid a conflict of interest relating to his wife's position as governor, he took a leave from his job as production supervisor when his employer became involved in natural gas pipeline negotiations with his wife's administration. Seven months later, because the family needed more income, Todd returned to BP. In order to avoid potential conflict of interest, this time he accepted a non-management position as a production operator.

As long as she can do the job while pregnant, why should it matter? She has an 80% approval rating as Gov, 75% among Democrats, btw.

So McCain doesn't have the institutionally educated pedigree that Obama does, so what? He more than makes up for it in his experience, that's my opinion anyway. And in tough economic times, I would rather not leave things in the hands of someone who is untested.

It looks to me like you need to follow your own advice.

Since your ignorantly comparing comparing Vice-pres to pres, I love how you don't mention Biden. Biden has more experience than McCain and Palin put together.

Originally posted by c1c3r0

 

Since your ignorantly comparing comparing Vice-pres to pres, I love how you don't mention Biden. Biden has more experience than McCain and Palin put together.

Biden is a plagiarist and a liar who claims to have exp.

Go Dethnoble go!

I watched both Obama and McCain's Q&A at the AARP 50th Anniversary event on CSPAN Saturday and I was actually suprised to see the lack of detail that McCain was able to put into his answers compared to Obama. It is hard to notice this stuff during Convention and Stump speeches, but I wonder how he is going to be able to disguise this in the 1 on 1 debates. On a question both he and Obama were asked about how they would put an end to political gridlock in government and especially the Congress he, just like Obama shortly before him, had a lot of "I will reach across the aisle.", and "we need to put an end to political bickering," He even had a few "In the past I have been able to do this while my opponent has not." arguements.However, after the politician-speech, Obama actually spent a few minutes of the answer laying out point by point plans involving televised meetings between all parties involved in the issue from Republican and Democratic Congressmen and women, to professionals involved in the particular issue like doctors and even drug manufacturers in the case of Healthcare issues.This way the people involved were completely exposed in how they handled the situation. If a drug manufacturer reached over and dropped 20K in the pocket of a Congressman everyone watching from home could clearly see it. He even gave an idea of how frequently he would hold such meetings. Not only are these good ideas, but he actually was able to provide these specifics in his answers.

I think McCain makes for a good Senator, but I believe he lacks the important "jack of all trades" grasp on all the issues out there to make a good President. I think being in the Senate for so long, and especially having such a secure seat for most of that time actually works against McCain. I don't believe his roots go too deep as far as lobbyist are concerned, but he has lost the sharpness that comes with balancing his Senate duties with the broad view that those who are more familiar with campaigning or running whole states like Governors are almost required to maintain. Obama obviously was not a Governor, but he has been campaining almost non-stop for the last decade or more for various offices and it is this constant debating, and stumping, and meeting with people of all trades and income brackets that has given him the tools he will need as President. McCain, like Biden would fit better as a Vice President who can work with both sides of both houses of the congress from an elevated position because he has the history with them and he has the maverick record.

They like to say that McCain's ticket has it right and Obama's ticket has it backwards, with the "experienced" one in the second spot on the ticket... but I think that it is McCain and Palin who have it backwards, and even then, completely wrong.

Lastly, this bit strays from the analytical way I have been coming at this, but I feel like it should be pointed out to those who haven't put it together yet. It is obvious to everyone now that McCain is trying to win over the undecided and independent voters with a strategy of attacking not only Obama, but the Bush Administration's Economic policies over the last 8 years, and by extension Bush himself. My problem with this is that it is fine and dandy to have 20/20 hindsight, but McCain is the same man who strongly supported and even helped Bush get elected not once, but twice. This part is more educated opinion, but it is also pretty plain that McCain gave his support and campaigned for Bush twice to be able to inherit the Bush/Rove campaign strategists. So, even worse, he sold out his own values and political views for selfish reasons.