Obama's acceptance speech

[AquaMan]

Please refresh my memory, how much direct foreign policy experience did our sitting President have 4 years ago?

Why is this so hard to understand for you guys? He is not running against Obama 4 years ago. And there is no correlation that Obama's lack of experience, yet, in my estimation, success with foreign policy...would indicate that R&R would have the same success. That is a non sequitur.

Look at it this way. If you think Obama had very little experience in 2008 so it is okay that R&R do not have much experience then look at the outcome. You don't think much of Obama's foreign policy successes in office. It would follow then that you are willing to make the same mistake by electing more foreign policy novices.

But I guess it doesn't matter. Erfalf is losing the argument so he gives up on the value of foreign policy anyway. Who cares if the rest of the world finds that arrogant. It worked for Bush//Cheney didn't it?

[Red Arrow]

Why is this so hard to understand for you guys? He is not running against Obama 4 years ago. And there is no correlation that Obama's lack of experience, yet, in my estimation, success with foreign policy...would indicate that R&R would have the same success.

I see nothing that would indicate that R&R would NOT have the same or better success. What is so hard to understand about that.  Obama started with essentially no foreign policy experience.  He is not running against himself of 4 years ago.  If Obama's experience of 4 years ago is essentially the same as R&R now, why would R&R not be as successful as Obama?   Your evaluation obviously differs.  What did you think in the 2004 election?

[RecycleMichael]

Romney has announced his foreign policy team. 17 of the 24 members served in the Bush administration.

Great.

[Teatownclown]

Romney has announced his foreign policy team. 17 of the 24 members served in the Bush administration.

Great.

Ugh, are the other 7 Mormons by chance? 

[AquaMan]

I see nothing that would indicate that R&R would NOT have the same or better success. What is so hard to understand about that.  Obama started with essentially no foreign policy experience.  He is not running against himself of 4 years ago.  If Obama's experience of 4 years ago is essentially the same as R&R now, why would R&R not be as successful as Obama?   Your evaluation obviously differs.  What did you think in the 2004 election?

I'm sorry Red. Its not an evaluation. What you're saying is just not logical. You're asking for a conclusion not based on the premise. I also have essentially no foreign policy experience (I speak a little French and read political forums ). There is nothing to indicate that, like R&R, I would not have the same or better success as Obama. Yet, that is preposterous on its face. Hard to prove a negative assumption. In fact there is no correlation whatsoever. But even if there was, why would you want to make the same mistake again?

The 2004 election? I thought Bush was a lightweight but had heavyweights surrounding him. I don't see any heavyweights around R&R. Before you jump to any conclusion that those 17 were heavyweights, I don't see Rumsfeld or Cheney coming to serve with R&R.

[Red Arrow]

I'm sorry Red. Its not an evaluation. What you're saying is just not logical. You're asking for a conclusion not based on the premise.

What is your premise?  That Obama can enter the Presidency and make good foreign policy decisions without previous experience but that a Republican cannot?  We will have to disagree.

But even if there was, why would you want to make the same mistake again?

So you are saying that electing Obama was a mistake?  I would have to agree on that.

[Hoss]

I see the word-parser (erfalf) is at it again...LOL.

Edited to remove ego from a certain poster on here.

[AquaMan]

What is your premise?  That Obama can enter the Presidency and make good foreign policy decisions without previous experience but that a Republican cannot?  We will have to disagree.

So you are saying that electing Obama was a mistake?  I would have to agree on that.

Sometimes you're just wrong Red. Spinning planes? You're golden. But there is no logic I know of that would predict a candidate having success in office with lack of experience based on another's success with lack of experience. And the converse of that is killer for Erfalfs argument. If it was a mistake to elect a man with little experience, then why repeat the mistake?

It is not disagreement. Its just logic. I don't care if he's Republican or Independent or whatever. R&R's lack of foreign policy experience is not a predictor of success should he win.

That said, its the lifers in government and aides that do the heavy lifting for the head of state. It would be interesting to see who Romney prefers as Secretary of State.

[Hoss]

Sometimes you're just wrong Red. Spinning planes? You're golden. But there is no logic I know of that would predict a candidate having success in office with lack of experience based on another's success with lack of experience. And the converse of that is killer for Erfalfs argument. If it was a mistake to elect a man with little experience, then why repeat the mistake?

It is not disagreement. Its just logic. I don't care if he's Republican or Independent or whatever. R&R's lack of foreign policy experience is not a predictor of success should he win.

That said, its the lifers in government and aides that do the heavy lifting for the head of state. It would be interesting to see who Romney prefers as Secretary of State.

It might be Clint Eastwood...oops, did I say that out loud?

[Red Arrow]

Sometimes you're just wrong Red.

I agree, you are wrong.

[AquaMan]

Good night cap'n. We live to fight another day!

[Red Arrow]

I see the word-parser is at it again...LOL.

You promised you wouldn't respond to any more of my posts.  Cheez, what a Democrat you are.

[Red Arrow]

Good night cap'n. We live to fight another day!

Capt'n

[Red Arrow]

But there is no logic I know of that would predict a candidate having success in office with lack of experience based on another's success with lack of experience.

I know of no logic that would prohibit a candidate having success in office with lack of experience based on another's success with lack of experience.  Well, other than your personal opinion.

[Red Arrow]

Sometimes you're just wrong Red. Spinning planes? You're golden.

OK, so I'm not so good at metaphors. Give me a break, I'm an engineer, not an English Language degree holder looking for meaningful employment.