Well that is great if this was the 1800s but it isn't. It's 2008. We need a leader and he lacks in that department.he certainly has much more experience that our founding forefathers had.
Looking at the big picture I don't think it's hard to see Hillary is the nominee for the Dems. To beat her in the general I feel Rudy has the best chance. I would be nervous if it was McCain. I like Romney but most of the country can't get past his mormon background and he has flip flopped badly.
Obama's ideas are not practical. This country will never have socialized health care. It's a train wreck and for him and Hillary to lie to the country and say they are going to persue it is just playing to the Bush haters who want any edge to get a Dem in office.
Pulling out of Iraq, again another lie. Even Obama knows deep down things are starting to improve for the country of Iraq and to pull out would be a disaster. Again this is catering to the codepink and moveon.org crowd who want to do anything and everything to get a Dem in the white house.
Nice summary, it's sad that age will play a part in his chances but sometimes he doesn't look healthwise on TV and other times he looks well. It is an issue though.Clinton: Grudgingly my second choice mostly because she's smart.
Obama: Zero experience and too left-wing for me. But he's a fellow smoker (to my surprise!), so I gotta give him props for that! lol
McCain: Too old.
Romney: Slimeball who changes his opinions all the time. Kinda like Kerry, except on the Republicans. What's with the Mass. politicians?
Edwards: Waaaay to left-wing for me.
Huckabee: Too redneck; wants religion to have too big a say, not smart enough and he flips-flops on a lot of issues (i.e. immigration and taxes).
Bookmarks