| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
aka Dave
Joined: 02 May 2008
Location: Down by the river
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 3:31 am Post subject: |
 |
|
The 57 state thing was a speaking gaffe where he obviously meant 47, whereas mispelling potato... Well, actually, I'm not the best speller so I wouldn't even blame Quale for that. I would say I've seen both men speak in *lots* of contexts, and the point is Obama clearly has 30 to 40 IQ points on Quayle and also has been more diligent in his studies.
Obama clearly is a self-made man, Quayle was given everything on a platter.
Comparing them on any level is moronic.
You know, arguing with conservatives like you is like arguing with a retarded, drunken, 5 year old.
It's unfruitful. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 3:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| aka Dave wrote: |
The 57 state thing was a speaking gaffe where he obviously meant 47, whereas mispelling potato... Well, actually, I'm not the best speller so I wouldn't even blame Quale for that. I would say I've seen both men speak in *lots* of contexts, and the point is Obama clearly has 30 to 40 IQ points on Quayle and also has been more diligent in his studies.
Obama clearly is a self-made man, Quayle was given everything on a platter.
Comparing them on any level is moronic.
You know, arguing with conservatives like you is like arguing with a retarded, drunken, 5 year old.
It's unfruitful. |
and if Quayle made a mistake it is cause he is too dumb
but when every Obama makes a mistake it just cause it was a mistake.
I gave the edge to Obama but if look at their resumes there isn't a big difference.
What I said to start this thread still goes Obama at this point is no better than is a new and improved Dan Quayle. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:56 am Post subject: Re: Dan Quayle 1988 Versus Barack Obama 2008 |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
How about no accepting early release during the Vietnam war? |
As the son and grandson of admirals, he knew his duty. He was a legacy, just like Bush. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 5:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
I gave the edge to Obama but if look at their resumes there isn't a big difference. |
I guess the one thing that shows is that you sure don't know how to evaluate resumes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 5:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Info/experience.html
| Quote: |
| Suppose you had to choose between two Presidential candidates, one of whom had spent 20 years in Congress plus had considerable other relevant experience and the other of whom had about half a dozen years in the Illinois state legislature and 2 years in Congress. Which one do you think would make a better President? If you chose #1, congratulations, you picked James Buchanan over Abraham Lincoln. Your pick disagrees with that of most historians, who see Lincoln as the greatest President ever and Buchanan as the second worst ever, better only than Warren "Teapot Dome" Harding. Both served in what was probably the most difficult period in American history, where slavery and secession tore the nation asunder. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 7:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
I gave the edge to Obama but if look at their resumes there isn't a big difference. |
I guess the one thing that shows is that you sure don't know how to evaluate resumes. |
show it.
up to now all I have seen is "if you don't agree with me than you are stupid. "
Do the wikipedia comparison. There is not much difference.
Mr. Obama up to now is just a new and improved Dan Quayle. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
endo
Joined: 14 Mar 2004
Location: Seoul...my home
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 7:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Seriously man, we're all biased at some point, but let's keep it real here.
Comparing Obama to Quyale is like comparing McCain to Kucinich.
It's just stupid, and this opinion that you're trying to maintain on this thread shows a complete lack of judgement and honesty on your part.
It's just pathetic.
Take a Meet the Press interview and compare how Obama and Quyale faired. No rational person would ever come to the conclusion that they're somewhat similar.
I don't mind your opinion Joo cause I actually agree with you on some points. But this argument you're making has led me to loose a lot of credibility in you and your overall state of mind.
You want to compare Obama to Bobby Jindal, fine. But Dan Quyale! 
Give me a break! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 7:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="endo"]Seriously man, we're all biased at some point, but let's keep it real here.
| Quote: |
| Comparing Obama to Quyale is like comparing McCain to Kucinich. |
You are welcome to compare their (McCain and Kucinich ) resumes anytime.
| Quote: |
It's just stupid, and this opinion that you're trying to maintain on this thread shows a complete lack of judgement and honesty on your part.
It's just pathetic. |
Why? How is it dishonest?
Obama doesn't have a top notch resume and I am not the first one to say it. More than a few of those who are going to vote for him also say it.
It is certainly not dishonest to make this comparison.
Here is another comparison: Obama 2008 and George Bush in 2000.
Both are /were good at giving answers that people want to here without offering much substance.
| Quote: |
Take a Meet the Press interview and compare how Obama and Quyale faired. No rational person would ever come to the conclusion that they're somewhat similar.
|
I said Obama is a better speaker.
Look at their resumes. and what they did. It is close.
that is why I put up the wikipedia
| Quote: |
I don't mind your opinion Joo cause I actually agree with you on some points. But this argument you're making has led me to loose a lot of credibility in you and your overall state of mind. |
Well it is a tough world and it is not always fair.
But I think I am being fair here. I gave the edge to Mr. Obama but from what I see what he has done isn't much more if that than what Quayle had accomplished when he was made VP.
Again anyone can go to wikipedia and make their case.
| Quote: |
You want to compare Obama to Bobby Jindal, fine. But Dan Quyale!
|
Well if Mr Obama has such great resume and has accomplished so many great things then anyone is welcome to show it.
I gave the edge to Obama - but I looked at what I did and I did not see Obama as being so much better.
and to tell the truth despite a lot of people being displeased such a comparison and this thread why hasn't anyone tried to show that Obama is so much better than Qualye
My first post on this thread:
Who has the better resume?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Quayle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama
Arguably (it really is hard to say )Obama -and not by much at all.
Granted Osama is more articulate and he has a more compelling personal story.
but that is all folks.
Obama right now is no better than a new and improved Dan Quayle. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 8:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jindal is a grad of Oxford and McKinsey & Company. M&C is the most difficult private sector job to get and hold on earth. Then he became a minority Governor of LA, which I assume is no small feat. He actually has executive experience. Obama is a slightly weaker potential candidate, based upon CV, than Jindal. He doesn't seem to suffer delusions of grandeur or a habit of talking down to normal people. The Repubs would be very wise to groom him for the presidency. I disagree with the guy on a whole hell of a lot of issues. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
