Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

A Plethora of questions to ponder and discuss...

Do you think that Obama made a rush movement on Gitmo during the campaign? Then continued the rush by setting a date to close with NO solid plan? Are you happy with the people he has surrounded himself with to help him make important decisions on behalf of this nation?

Would you consider this type of rush to judgement a valid example of why a President should have SOME extensive foreign policy experience to be a leader of this nation?

Did you think Bush surrounded himself with the right people? The wrong people?

After 9-11 were you happy with the actions the Bush admin too before going into Iraq?

Do you think we have evolved globally to the point that makes it necessary for the US to have a President with extensive experience in? Foreign Policy? Military? Business? If not, what are your What are your priorities in looking for a political leader? City, State, Nation?

Answer Question

Asked by grlygrlz2 at 12:42 PM on May. 22, 2009 in Politics & Current Events

Level 39 (106,530 Credits)
Answers (17)
  • After 9-11 were you happy with the actions the Bush admin too before going into Iraq?

    Suppose to read,

    Up until going into Iraq, were you happy with the military decisions the Bush made in Afghanistan?

    Ran out of characters, tried to shorten'... Didn't come out


    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 12:45 PM on May. 22, 2009

  • Admit it, you just felt like saying "plethora" :p

    But to answer them all - I think Obama (or his handlers) were so big on trying to be "not Bush" they failed to consider the consequences of what they were saying. It's not just foreign policy experience, it's experience period. An experience politician would understand that some promises you just don't make because you cannot make a responsible judgment without all of the info. A congressman who'd spent many years on the committees that deal specifically with security and military issues - THEY could make that type of promise (though a smart one never would), just like one who served time on the budget committee could make plausable statements about what they want to do with the budget. Someone with no practical experience shouldn't commit to anything in those areas. Having the experience isn't nearly as important as understanding what they DON'T have.

    Answer by NotPanicking at 12:46 PM on May. 22, 2009

  •  Having the experience isn't nearly as important as understanding what they DON'T have.

    I did... I watched Princess Bride the other night and can't get that word out of my head.. :oP Well said.. I  think Obama made a rush judgement. I think it could impact his relation with the left, and hurt Democrats keeping control in 2010. I place experience very high on my consideration list. Living in the post 9-11 world. I have foreign policy high on my list of priorities for a national leader. City and State, I have Business Experience High. 


    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 12:51 PM on May. 22, 2009

  • Obama's whole close Gitmo thing is nothing more than a popularity stunt. It couldn't possibly be done with the steps he took in the time frame laid out- but it bounces the blame OFF of him and on to Congress, so he "kept his word." Just political BS to ice the cake for liberal voters.

    I honestly feel like Obama isn't even really President- that his inexperience is dwarfed by the maniacal Congress that are shoving legislation through the houses at warp speed because they have a yes man in office and the keys to the kingdom for the next year and a half or so.

    Yes, a president should have more foreign policy experience than a jr senator with a shaky voting record.

    Bush should have picked people that would have done a better job standing up for him. His whole admin sucked at PR. Made everything look even worse than it was. con't

    Answer by lovinangels at 1:28 PM on May. 22, 2009

  • I was pleased with the way Bush handled 9/11, up to and including Iraq (go ahead and lynch me). The intelligence at the time indicated that was an appropriate action. A lot of the Congress, including Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, among others thought that it was an appropriate course to take. Hind sight is always 20/20. IMO. And good has come of it.

    Bush's biggest mistake was trying to make everyone happy. He wasn't Conservative at all towards the end.

    All of those things in your last paragraph are important in a President/

    Answer by lovinangels at 1:32 PM on May. 22, 2009

  • I completely agree with NP.

    To answer the questions:
    I feel that Obama has a lack of experience at everything but campaigning.

    I think Bush had a good offense, but a practically non-existent defense.

    I don't know that I would say that I was happy about things before or after going into Iraq. I think that our elected officials were elected to made difficult decisions with the information they have at the time. At the time, both Republicans and Democrats (I know not all of them) agreed that this was the right thing to do. It was a bi-partisan decision, so I guess I am okay with that as well.

    I have always thought that experience in all of those fields was important to possess when asking for the job of Leader of the Free World. I still do (more than ever).


    Answer by QuinnMae at 1:56 PM on May. 22, 2009

  • lovin, I appreciate your honesty. I won't lynch. You stated your opinion and you didn't go anon. I believed in Bush up until Iraq. I never accused him of lying or deceiving. It was more of his "rush to react" based on what we now know as faulty intel. To be the leader of the free world following 9-11 I think history will place it as one of the most difficult Presidencies to endure.

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 1:57 PM on May. 22, 2009

  • I think Obama also "rushed to react" based on no experience and little to no intel. But I feel that Obama's motive is to satisfy the "left" and not protect the people. I feel that Bush worked hard to protect the people and didn't care who he satisfied.

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 2:00 PM on May. 22, 2009

  • OP

    OK your statement - I feel that Bush worked hard to protect the people and didn't care who he satisfied-So why didn't he care about people of Sudan? He went to war with Iraq to help the people there.


    Answer by Anonymous at 2:25 PM on May. 22, 2009

  • Well, I already stated in the other question that I think Obama was foolish to rush into promising to close Gitmo w/o any plan on what to do with those left there. I agree with closing it but he should have waited to bring it up until he he had a comprehensive plan from start to finish.

    No, I have no foreign policy experience and would not have made that promise and set a date w/o having a plan in place. It's as bad as Bush invading Iraq w/o realizing there would be an insurgency and no exit plan.


    Answer by Friday at 2:35 PM on May. 22, 2009

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.