Say It Ain't So Joe The Plumber!!

[PN-G bamatex]

If "qualifications" was an issue, then Obama would not be the president.

I am not knocking his win nor failing to acknowledge that he is the fair and square winner. Being elected doesn't mean that someone is the "most qualified" but someone that hopefully more people agree with on opinions.

There were certainly way more "qualified" candidates that were Democrats than Obama. They had their shot and lost. So did the GOP in the general election. Does not being as qualified as some other person negate the winner's legitimacy or the fact that the person ran on a ticket?

If so, we need to stop selecting our party nominees by primaries and caucuses and appoint a blue ribbon panel to list the people according to "qualifications". In the name of objectivity, we could even scale it by giving points for such things as:

1. Prior Senate/House experience.

2. Prior state level experience.

3. Cabinet experience.

4. Committee chairmanship experience.

5. College Degree(s).

6. Etc.

That way we could get the "most qualified" candidate and not simply the most popular.

History and everyday events tells us that most individuals are selected based on their popularity or who they know. Or better known as the good ole boy system.

I think the timing was just right for a person like Obama to come in and win (obviously). What I didn't like was the hatred that came out towards the man.

And I just think that he had a very effective, successful marketing strategy.

Sometimes, I think that life experiences are as important and vital in a leader as experience as an elected official.  And, I would have to agree that his "marketing strategy" was very successful...but that doesn't mean that he will be any less effective than Bush.  Besides, every campaign (presidential or not) is a marketing strategy

Yes, all elections are marketing strategies, but President Obama's was, to me, more effective than most that I have seen in my lifetime. Why do I think this? Simple. Like most good advertisers, President Obama played more on slogans and emotions than he did points, plans, or experience. That, to me, is the single biggest problem with this election. I believe that more people cast an ignorant vote for both sides than in any other election in our history, and it saddens me to see our nation hit such a time in our history.

[stang4life]

Seeing and experiencing are too completely different things.  And, "all of the freeloaders" don't live in section 8...some of them are the reason that we are where we are today, economically speaking.  Some of them pay big bucks looking for loopholes that allow them to continue freeloading.

I guess that you feel that way because your candidate did not win.  Just because Obama won does not mean that the people who voted for him were ignorant.  Both sides did their fair share of playing on people's emotions and slogans.  These "sad" times have been here for quite some time...we didn't just get here.

[PN-G bamatex]

Seeing and experiencing are too completely different things.  And, "all of the freeloaders" don't live in section 8...some of them are the reason that we are where we are today, economically speaking.  Some of them pay big bucks looking for loopholes that allow them to continue freeloading.

I guess that you feel that way because your candidate did not win.  Just because Obama won does not mean that the people who voted for him were ignorant.  Both sides did their fair share of playing on people's emotions and slogans.  These "sad" times have been here for quite some time...we didn't just get here.

I did not say that people who voted for him, specifically, were ignorant. I said that there were ignorant votes on both sides, as displayed below.

I believe that more people cast an ignorant vote for both sides than in any other election in our history

Seeing and experiencing are too completely different things.  And, "all of the freeloaders" don't live in section 8...some of them are the reason that we are where we are today, economically speaking.  Some of them pay big bucks looking for loopholes that allow them to continue freeloading.

I guess that you feel that way because your candidate did not win.  Just because Obama won does not mean that the people who voted for him were ignorant.  Both sides did their fair share of playing on people's emotions and slogans.  These "sad" times have been here for quite some time...we didn't just get here.

Never did I say that all freeloaders live in Section 8 housing. Again, my response was to BLUEDOVE3's judgemental comment, which is pasted below.

Yep, she brought all the Goobers out of the beer joints

I love how you're not calling out BLUEDOVE3 for his judgemental comments, you're only calling me out for my seemingly judgemental comments.

Seeing and experiencing are too completely different things.  And, "all of the freeloaders" don't live in section 8...some of them are the reason that we are where we are today, economically speaking.  Some of them pay big bucks looking for loopholes that allow them to continue freeloading.

I guess that you feel that way because your candidate did not win.  Just because Obama won does not mean that the people who voted for him were ignorant.  Both sides did their fair share of playing on people's emotions and slogans.  These "sad" times have been here for quite some time...we didn't just get here.

What, exactly, is that supposed to mean? I've seen this ordeal countless times with my own two eyes. I've seen the freeloaders and the hard workers, and I've seen the children of the freeloaders who turn to crime and living off the system because they've never known anything better. I've seen all of it. Again, you're talking to the son of a social worker. I've grown up around this stuff, I've grown up going to the office with my mother and watching all of this unfold, and I can name countless experiences to back up everything I say. You're assuming that I have no experience in this field because of my point of view and the area in which I live and have grown up. You're taking the same judgemental action that you claim the good people of Southeast Texas do. You're characterizing me based on no factual information, whatsoever.

Seeing and experiencing are too completely different things.  And, "all of the freeloaders" don't live in section 8...some of them are the reason that we are where we are today, economically speaking.  Some of them pay big bucks looking for loopholes that allow them to continue freeloading.

I guess that you feel that way because your candidate did not win.  Just because Obama won does not mean that the people who voted for him were ignorant.  Both sides did their fair share of playing on people's emotions and slogans.  These "sad" times have been here for quite some time...we didn't just get here.

Yes, we have been here for a long time, and it's been getting worse and worse with every election, but we've reached a new level, and for you to deny that can be construed as the epitome of ignorance, much as you, BLUEDOVE3, and DickVitale (a.k.a. Quanell XYZ) like to try and characterize Southeast Texas as.

Seeing and experiencing are too completely different things.  And, "all of the freeloaders" don't live in section 8...some of them are the reason that we are where we are today, economically speaking.  Some of them pay big bucks looking for loopholes that allow them to continue freeloading.

I guess that you feel that way because your candidate did not win.  Just because Obama won does not mean that the people who voted for him were ignorant.  Both sides did their fair share of playing on people's emotions and slogans.  These "sad" times have been here for quite some time...we didn't just get here.

Oh, no ma'am. I don't feel this way just because Senator McCain didn't win. Most, if not all, of my opinions are based on my own real world experiences, of which I have many. I have felt the same way about these "freeloader" issues for most of my teenage years, and those opinions and feelings come from my own experiences with the welfare and social systems.

[BLUEDOVE3]

If "qualifications" was an issue, then Obama would not be the president.

I am not knocking his win nor failing to acknowledge that he is the fair and square winner. Being elected doesn't mean that someone is the "most qualified" but someone that hopefully more people agree with on opinions.

There were certainly way more "qualified" candidates that were Democrats than Obama. They had their shot and lost. So did the GOP in the general election. Does not being as qualified as some other person negate the winner's legitimacy or the fact that the person ran on a ticket?

If so, we need to stop selecting our party nominees by primaries and caucuses and appoint a blue ribbon panel to list the people according to "qualifications". In the name of objectivity, we could even scale it by giving points for such things as:

1. Prior Senate/House experience.

2. Prior state level experience.

3. Cabinet experience.

4. Committee chairmanship experience.

5. College Degree(s).

6. Etc.

That way we could get the "most qualified" candidate and not simply the most popular.

History and everyday events tells us that most individuals are selected based on their popularity or who they know. Or better known as the good ole boy system.

I think the timing was just right for a person like Obama to come in and win (obviously). What I didn't like was the hatred that came out towards the man.

And I just think that he had a very effective, successful marketing strategy.

Much better than McCAIN & Palin...obviously

[PN-G bamatex]

If "qualifications" was an issue, then Obama would not be the president.

I am not knocking his win nor failing to acknowledge that he is the fair and square winner. Being elected doesn't mean that someone is the "most qualified" but someone that hopefully more people agree with on opinions.

There were certainly way more "qualified" candidates that were Democrats than Obama. They had their shot and lost. So did the GOP in the general election. Does not being as qualified as some other person negate the winner's legitimacy or the fact that the person ran on a ticket?

If so, we need to stop selecting our party nominees by primaries and caucuses and appoint a blue ribbon panel to list the people according to "qualifications". In the name of objectivity, we could even scale it by giving points for such things as:

1. Prior Senate/House experience.

2. Prior state level experience.

3. Cabinet experience.

4. Committee chairmanship experience.

5. College Degree(s).

6. Etc.

That way we could get the "most qualified" candidate and not simply the most popular.

History and everyday events tells us that most individuals are selected based on their popularity or who they know. Or better known as the good ole boy system.

I think the timing was just right for a person like Obama to come in and win (obviously). What I didn't like was the hatred that came out towards the man.

And I just think that he had a very effective, successful marketing strategy.

Much better than McCAIN & Palin...obviously

Like I said, sometimes slogans and plays on emotions are the best kinds of marketing strategies.

Although it does sound to me like you're admitting that President Obama won just because he said "Change," "Hope," and said that Republicans were bad. 

[westend1]

If "qualifications" was an issue, then Obama would not be the president.

I am not knocking his win nor failing to acknowledge that he is the fair and square winner. Being elected doesn't mean that someone is the "most qualified" but someone that hopefully more people agree with on opinions.

There were certainly way more "qualified" candidates that were Democrats than Obama. They had their shot and lost. So did the GOP in the general election. Does not being as qualified as some other person negate the winner's legitimacy or the fact that the person ran on a ticket?

If so, we need to stop selecting our party nominees by primaries and caucuses and appoint a blue ribbon panel to list the people according to "qualifications". In the name of objectivity, we could even scale it by giving points for such things as:

1. Prior Senate/House experience.

2. Prior state level experience.

3. Cabinet experience.

4. Committee chairmanship experience.

5. College Degree(s).

6. Etc.

That way we could get the "most qualified" candidate and not simply the most popular.

History and everyday events tells us that most individuals are selected based on their popularity or who they know. Or better known as the good ole boy system.

I think the timing was just right for a person like Obama to come in and win (obviously). What I didn't like was the hatred that came out towards the man.

And I just think that he had a very effective, successful marketing strategy.

Sometimes, I think that life experiences are as important and vital in a leader as experience as an elected official.  And, I would have to agree that his "marketing strategy" was very successful...but that doesn't mean that he will be any less effective than Bush.  Besides, every campaign (presidential or not) is a marketing strategy

Yes, all elections are marketing strategies, but President Obama's was, to me, more effective than most that I have seen in my lifetime. Why do I think this? Simple. Like most good advertisers, President Obama played more on slogans and emotions than he did points, plans, or experience. That, to me, is the single biggest problem with this election. I believe that more people cast an ignorant vote for both sides than in any other election in our history, and it saddens me to see our nation hit such a time in our history.

I have to disagree, here.  I think he won because he picked up a lot of white votes that nobody expected.  He got those votes based on his platform, plans and experience, not emotion.  An obviously smart guy, who promised to get us out of Iraq and not cower down in the face of the right -wing religious fanatics.  It's what the majority of the voters wanted to hear.  They also wanted a leader who would try to mend relations with the rest of the world.  Good idea or not,  the voters like this plan as well.  He won because people wanted a change in direction, but not just any change.  They like his ideas. 

[thetragichippy]

Seeing and experiencing are too completely different things.  And, "all of the freeloaders" don't live in section 8...some of them are the reason that we are where we are today, economically speaking.  Some of them pay big bucks looking for loopholes that allow them to continue freeloading.

I guess that you feel that way because your candidate did not win.  Just because Obama won does not mean that the people who voted for him were ignorant.  Both sides did their fair share of playing on people's emotions and slogans.  These "sad" times have been here for quite some time...we didn't just get here.

I did not say that people who voted for him, specifically, were ignorant. I said that there were ignorant votes on both sides, as displayed below.

I believe that more people cast an ignorant vote for both sides than in any other election in our history

Seeing and experiencing are too completely different things.  And, "all of the freeloaders" don't live in section 8...some of them are the reason that we are where we are today, economically speaking.  Some of them pay big bucks looking for loopholes that allow them to continue freeloading.

I guess that you feel that way because your candidate did not win.  Just because Obama won does not mean that the people who voted for him were ignorant.  Both sides did their fair share of playing on people's emotions and slogans.  These "sad" times have been here for quite some time...we didn't just get here.

Never did I say that all freeloaders live in Section 8 housing. Again, my response was to BLUEDOVE3's judgemental comment, which is pasted below.

Yep, she brought all the Goobers out of the beer joints

I love how you're not calling out BLUEDOVE3 for his judgemental comments, you're only calling me out for my seemingly judgemental comments.

Seeing and experiencing are too completely different things.  And, "all of the freeloaders" don't live in section 8...some of them are the reason that we are where we are today, economically speaking.  Some of them pay big bucks looking for loopholes that allow them to continue freeloading.

I guess that you feel that way because your candidate did not win.  Just because Obama won does not mean that the people who voted for him were ignorant.  Both sides did their fair share of playing on people's emotions and slogans.  These "sad" times have been here for quite some time...we didn't just get here.

What, exactly, is that supposed to mean? I've seen this ordeal countless times with my own two eyes. I've seen the freeloaders and the hard workers, and I've seen the children of the freeloaders who turn to crime and living off the system because they've never known anything better. I've seen all of it. Again, you're talking to the son of a social worker. I've grown up around this stuff, I've grown up going to the office with my mother and watching all of this unfold, and I can name countless experiences to back up everything I say. You're assuming that I have no experience in this field because of my point of view and the area in which I live and have grown up. You're taking the same judgemental action that you claim the good people of Southeast Texas do. You're characterizing me based on no factual information, whatsoever.

Seeing and experiencing are too completely different things.  And, "all of the freeloaders" don't live in section 8...some of them are the reason that we are where we are today, economically speaking.  Some of them pay big bucks looking for loopholes that allow them to continue freeloading.

I guess that you feel that way because your candidate did not win.  Just because Obama won does not mean that the people who voted for him were ignorant.  Both sides did their fair share of playing on people's emotions and slogans.  These "sad" times have been here for quite some time...we didn't just get here.

Yes, we have been here for a long time, and it's been getting worse and worse with every election, but we've reached a new level, and for you to deny that can be construed as the epitome of ignorance, much as you, BLUEDOVE3, and DickVitale (a.k.a. Quanell XYZ) like to try and characterize Southeast Texas as.

Seeing and experiencing are too completely different things.  And, "all of the freeloaders" don't live in section 8...some of them are the reason that we are where we are today, economically speaking.  Some of them pay big bucks looking for loopholes that allow them to continue freeloading.

I guess that you feel that way because your candidate did not win.  Just because Obama won does not mean that the people who voted for him were ignorant.  Both sides did their fair share of playing on people's emotions and slogans.  These "sad" times have been here for quite some time...we didn't just get here.

Oh, no ma'am. I don't feel this way just because Senator McCain didn't win. Most, if not all, of my opinions are based on my own real world experiences, of which I have many. I have felt the same way about these "freeloader" issues for most of my teenage years, and those opinions and feelings come from my own experiences with the welfare and social systems.

GREAT RESPONSE PNG-BAND-KID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  She is picking on your statements because they are true (and sometimes the truth hurts) AND she is not picking on BlueDove because she agrees with him.  It's called RACIAL double standards!  They probably don't teach that in high school.  ;D

[stang4life]

Well, I guess that I wasn't offended by the whole goobers in beer joints comment like I was about the freeloaders from Section 8.  My point is you can see it from the outside and develop your opinions, but until you live in that world...you have no clue.  Seeing things from the outside doesn't compare to living in it.  You might have been exposed to some of it (seeing it in your mom's line of work), but it still is not the same. 

Trust me, my opinions are based on my life experiences.  I think that it would be a fair assumption to believe that most people do form their belief and value systems on their experiences.  Again, it all goes back to what people experience.

I, too, have seen kids of freeloaders turn to crime, but believe it or not, I have probably encountered as many who came from "non-freeloader" families who committed crimes, did drugs, etc.  I have seen many times (personally and professionally) what crack does to individuals, their families, and society, but I can't tell you why people "choose" to continue doing crack because I have never smoked crack.  It's too easy for us to sit on the outside and judge how & why people should act. 

I can tell you, though, that I have experienced Southeast Texas' ignorance on several issues...personally.  Based on those experiences, I have concluded that most of Southeast Texas could benefit from learning to respect others' cultures (and, I am not just talking about white people learning about black people...it should be across all cultural, racial, and religious spans).  I try to respect everybody's opinions...may not agree, but that doesn't mean that I won't voice my opinion.

P.S.  Could you please enlighten me on what new level we have suddenly reached?  I've had a long day and my brain isn't quite functioning like it should be. 

tragichippy...I don't recall much racial anything being taught in high school.  I would apologize for your thinking that I have been "racial double-standarding"...but, I don't believe I am. 

[thetragichippy]

tragichippy...I don't recall much racial anything being taught in high school.  I would apologize for your thinking that I have been "racial double-standarding"...but, I don't believe I am. 

Disagree, but understand   

[PN-G bamatex]

Well, I guess that I wasn't offended by the whole goobers in beer joints comment like I was about the freeloaders from Section 8.  My point is you can see it from the outside and develop your opinions, but until you live in that world...you have no clue.  Seeing things from the outside doesn't compare to living in it.  You might have been exposed to some of it (seeing it in your mom's line of work), but it still is not the same. 

Trust me, my opinions are based on my life experiences.  I think that it would be a fair assumption to believe that most people do form their belief and value systems on their experiences.  Again, it all goes back to what people experience.

I, too, have seen kids of freeloaders turn to crime, but believe it or not, I have probably encountered as many who came from "non-freeloader" families who committed crimes, did drugs, etc.  I have seen many times (personally and professionally) what crack does to individuals, their families, and society, but I can't tell you why people "choose" to continue doing crack because I have never smoked crack.  It's too easy for us to sit on the outside and judge how & why people should act. 

I can tell you, though, that I have experienced Southeast Texas' ignorance on several issues...personally.  Based on those experiences, I have concluded that most of Southeast Texas could benefit from learning to respect others' cultures (and, I am not just talking about white people learning about black people...it should be across all cultural, racial, and religious spans).  I try to respect everybody's opinions...may not agree, but that doesn't mean that I won't voice my opinion.

P.S.  Could you please enlighten me on what new level we have suddenly reached?  I've had a long day and my brain isn't quite functioning like it should be.   

tragichippy...I don't recall much racial anything being taught in high school.  I would apologize for your thinking that I have been "racial double-standarding"...but, I don't believe I am.   

When it comes to drugs, yes, I have probably seen just as much of it from families that aren't dependant on the government, but, when it comes to violent crimes (i.e. murder, gang-related violence, assault, etc.), I have yet to see it out of economically independent families on the same scale as we see it in government-dependant families and housing complexes. That doesn't mean that it doesn't happen; however, in my experience, it's less common.

Southeast Texas may be ignorant, but that is a societal problem, one that can (and probably will) work itself out in (a lot of) due time. The government has no place in telling people what their opinions should be, even on the race issue. Teaching people how to remain respectful, perhaps, but not their views on other races. I am not a racist, I just believe that people have a right to their opinion on anything for any reason at all, no matter how stupid that opinion is or that reason is, and that the government doesn't have the right to force people to have certain opinions. Everyone has a right to their own opinion, for whatever reason, and may freely express that opinion, so long as they do so in a respectful, courteous manner, and do not harm another. That's one of the founding virtues of our nation.

We've created a system for the "less fortunate" to sustain themselves with money from others while not actually earning money, themselves. Paychecks are earned, not given. We sustain ourselves through the fruit of our labors individually, not collectively. That's the beauty of America; we have the ability to chart our own course, put our own food on the table, clothe ourselves, and ultimately determine our own destiny. That's the idea this nation was founded on, and, in that light, the idea of providing for a class of people that refuses to provide for themselves is absurd.

That doesn't mean we need to do away with the welfare system, but we do need to revise it. We need to be rolling our able-bodied, able-minded welfare recipients, regardless of race, religion, or gender, into workforce development and place them in jobs, not allow them to sit at home (typically in Section 8 housing) and feed off the system and the hard-earned money of the working classes. The only people we need to take care of are the old, the orphaned, and the disabled (And when I say "disabled," I don't mean substance abusers. Other than the money used to throw them in jail, they have no business with our tax dollars.), and that's only if they can't afford to take care of themselves.

Again, and as I stated earlier, I don't believe that all welfare recipients are "freeloaders," but a great many of them are, and they have no business feeding off of our tax dollars. In other words, if you are physically and mentally capable of providing for yourself and intend to live off of government welfare, then you will work, you will contribute something to society, you will stay clean (mandatory drug tests all the way), and you will, eventually, become independent, regardless of whether or not you want too. Welfare should be about teaching capable people how to provide for themselves (much like the education system, which also needs some work, and I don't mean that we need to just throw money at it in hopes that it will go away), not providing for them.

[77]

I'am all for helping the helpless just not the useless!

[BLUEDOVE3]

The poor people should go on an economic strike for 2-days and the you will see their importance in our society. The govt. has had to take stands to get rights for it's working poor. The ending of slavery was due to government intervention. The ending of Jim Crowism was due to govt. intervention. I guess I can see why some of you hate the govt. for interferring into your lives.

[PN-G bamatex]

The poor people should go on an economic strike for 2-days and the you will see their importance in our society. The govt. has had to take stands to get rights for it's working poor. The ending of slavery was due to government intervention. The ending of Jim Crowism was due to govt. intervention. I guess I can see why some of you hate the govt. for interferring into your lives.

Did I say that all poor people are useless? No. I pointed out that there are quite a few who would rather sit at home and live off of our tax dollars than work (because, for some stupid reason, we enable them to do that), but I also said that there are working poor out there. These working poor have my respect moreso for their character and values than their importance to our economy. Those are the ones who, even though they know they can just live off the government like so many others, deserve the assistance and even commendation of our society.