Posted on 05/10/2007 12:27:04 PM PDT by Night Hides Not
Remember the 2000 election, when a major concern (among talking heads) regarding George W. Bush was his lack of gravitas?
At least Dubya was in his second term as governor of the second largest state of the country.
Fast forward to 2007, and of the Democrat candidates, who has the gravitas to be President?
Hillary? Please, don't make me laugh. She's been a Senator a total of six years, and she's cut-and-run from her most important vote.
Edwards? The Breck Girl? BWAHAHAHAHA!
Obama? Two years in the Senate? He's THE reason gravitas is not being discussed. All the man has are his platitudes and skin color. Nobody on the left or right dare raise his dearth of qualifications for the Presidency, lest they be cast as racist.
At this point in time, they’re much more concerned with “global”, “diversity” and “fairness.”
That is a brilliant observation!
Felice gravitas!,
Felice gravitas.........
That earns my vote for "post of the day"! LOL!!!
Hillary has done virtually nothing in the Senate but pontificate. What important bills has she sponsored?
Before that, the only real job she held was in a crooked lawyer’s office in Little Rock, where she helped manage the Whitewater affair.
Unless she wants to be known as the junior Democrat counsel who helped bring us Watergate.
Her sole real claim to fame is being married to an impeached president. When she was playing “two for the price of one” in the White House, her sole accomplishments were Travelgate, FBI files gate, and Hillarycare. And she is said to have ordered clinton to bomb Iraq to distract attention from Monicagate.
. . . probably in a jar or a vise or something . . . .
Isn't that a Senator's job? /s
“Ina a vise” You mean in a vice???
LOL!!!
**************
Hey. The man's italian. Cut him some slack, paisan.
The 2008 election is shaping up to be a "gravitas free zone."There is not an unambiguously successful governor in the carload. The ones with executive experience are Republicans (Romney and Guiliani), and either of them would be a shoo-in on the other party's ticket. As Democrats, they'd have gravitas big time. As Republicans, they have "issues." Minor stuff like abortion, gun control . . .
CIC, your entire post is spot-on. I'm still puzzled, if not surprised, over the dearth of discussion regarding "gravitas". Weeks were spent on this non-issue during 2000, and it's a non-issue with me. I simply think that the Drive By Media needs to be called to account for their inconsistency.
There is not an unambiguously successful governor in the carload. The ones with executive experience are Republicans (Romney and Guiliani), and either of them would be a shoo-in on the other party’s ticket. As Democrats, they’d have gravitas big time. As Republicans, they have “issues.” Minor stuff like abortion, gun control . . .
Great analysis but I must disagree with your first statement. Think Duncan Hunter.
Hunter has it in spades. Not to mention he does not have an apeeasing, politically correct bone in his body.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1831682/posts
I wish someone would ask Senator Obama why he doesn't speak out for the rights of Muslim women. Is he afraid of alienating Muslim men?
I simply think that the Drive By Media needs to be called to account for their inconsistency.
You don't call people to account when they are your superiors, and people who have broadcast licenses are your superiors - just ask them, they'll tell you.They tell you all the time, just not in those words. But what does it actually mean, when journalists claim to be "objective?" Nothing else but that when they talk, your proper function is to shut up and listen. It is pure sophistry. "Soph" is Greek for wisdom, and "sophistry" is simply shutting down debate by claiming superior wisdom. "Philosophy" is simply refusing to claim wisdom but only claiming to love wisdom - being openminded.
There is really only one way to call broadcast journalists to account - sue them and the FCC to enforce the requirement that broadcasters operate in the public interest. And not merely to interest the public, which (e.g., pornography) is in principle an altogether different thing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.