Would You Want Obama To Be The Commander-In-Chief?

@gewcew23 (8011)
United States
July 18, 2008 2:30pm CST
On the night of January 20, 2009, a new commander-in-chief will leave the inaugural podium, parade, and festivities for the Oval Office. A national security staff ready with the latest “threat briefing” will join him there. On his desk, they will place a thick binder of reports, each focusing on real or emerging threats to our national security. In the quiet of the Oval Office in the presence of these stern-faced, deadly serious briefers and advisers Barack H. Obama, should he be the next president, will come face-to-face with reality. The New York Times and CBS News released a poll this week that American are not exactly looking forward to this day. 46% of those respondents thought McCain would very likely be effective as Commander-in-Chief. 24% of those respondents thought Obama would very likely be effective as Commander-in-Chief. More importantly 36% of those respondent think it is not likely Obama will be effective as the Commander-in-Chief.
2 people like this
6 responses
@Taskr36 (13925)
• United States
18 Jul 08
I've seen various polls on who would be a more effective CIF and all of them have McCain by a large margin. The last one I saw was 72% for McCain and 43% for Obama. Unfortunately, the American public rarely votes on who they believe will be more effective. They vote on who they "like". The polls on who they would vote for still show Obama with a 3% to 7% lead. The reason being that he's young, black, and most importantly, says the word "Change" as often as possible.
2 people like this
@Destiny007 (5820)
• United States
19 Jul 08
Obama has no business in the Oval Office. His experience is sorely lacking as is his common sense, and he has absolutely no qualifications. Given his background he would not even be able to get a security clearance, so why the hell would we want such an unknown and potential liability such as him as president? He has not been vetted and there is much that he seems to be hiding... and the MSM is all to willing to help him to gloss over whatever it is he is hiding.
1 person likes this
• United States
20 Jul 08
McCain sold out his fellow veterans, and would sell us out in a heartbeat. I don't like Obama either, btw. He can't even salute our flag. What is to make us think his motives for running are for the good of America?
1 person likes this
• United States
23 Jul 08
Obama has saluted the flag plenty of times--in fact, he's led the Pledge of Allegiance many times himself as a Senator.
• United States
24 Jul 08
Big deal.... his associations and the things he supports and his supporters show him for who he is, and he has no business in ANY position of power... but especially as president.
1 person likes this
• United States
20 Jul 08
We are so screwed no matter which one of those warmongering idiots takes the helm. In answer to your question tho: Hell NO!
19 Jul 08
No I do not want this man in any office of power as he has no idea what is going on. Mc Cain is not much better, we are in a world of trouble no matter who wins.
1 person likes this
• United States
18 Jul 08
The vast majority of military officers, current and former, do not want to see Obama as Commander in Chief. He has said too many naive things. He does not understand the psychology of the enemies of America. Obama has hurt national security by only opening his mouth. This is not an easy feat. Obama NO. McCain YES.
1 person likes this
@ClarusVisum (2163)
• United States
23 Jul 08
Yes, I would. At least Obama knows who's who over there, unlike McCain, who mixes up Sunni and Shia even after being corrected (Shiite Iran training Sunni Al Qaeda? On what planet, Senator?), and talks about countries that haven't existed for 15 years (Czechoslovakia, anyone?), and borders that have NEVER existed (Iraq-Pakistan border?). Obama knows what's going on, and Prime Minister Maliki agrees with his plan for Iraq, which shows that he understands Iraq's interests, and would be willing to turn them into a good ally, as opposed to just a means to an end (namely, oil).
• United States
30 Jul 08
Unlike what talking heads would have you believe, Obama is not for setting some timetable in stone and then making it happen regardless of conditions on the ground. What he actually is doing is what anyone in a leadership position should be doing, especially now that Maliki has clearly stated that he wants us to leave: set a GOAL, then work towards it. Maybe something will happen that will make a 16-month withdrawal unwise, but if you set NO goal at all, there's nothing to work towards, no direction. It's kind of like the difference between saying "I'm going to lose some weight" and saying "I'm going to lose 20 pounds by the end of this year." Maybe the latter won't happen, but it's practically and psychologically more effective to set a clear goal to work towards, rather than abstractions.