Is Mr Obama too young (at 46)to be the President?

Question

i ask(partly because i am a committed fan of selecting our
political leaders by random selection-from the population by
the population!)because some of you think that he needs
"more experience";
So should he have served in the military;Or brought-up 2.4
children,successfully,without divorcing his wife?
So,there must be a million ways in which to (supposedly)
gain just one person's Experience(!)
Are we perfect-having thus a perfect knowledge of the perfect
required "experience"?
Do you think that we will ever get a (near)perfect President?
When is there going to be an ethnic-colored female President?One who is almost "perfect",except,say.that she
happens to be blind too(!)
i dont want a list,either-if thats at all possible;what id like from
you is similar to what id like from all the presidential candidates;and that is your thoughts and preferences on ones
likely "experience" at that age("exp"because everyone differs!)

Answer 1

No, but he is a little too Muslim

Answer 2

Your question is a little convoluted, but I'll take a crack at it because these are important questions.

I feel that Mr O taken as an individual is a little young, and that may lead to some arrogant mistakes. On the other hand, the present one proves that you can get older without becoming more wise or being humbled by your mistakes.

The kind of innocence that comes with youth only lasts as long as it takes for that person to exchange their integrity for money. I'd kind of like to see someone who has been tested and has resisted that kind of evil.

If we wait for a candidate of perfect character we will go leaderless. But we do need a person who will be able to do the work of considering and evaluating all viewpoints, without having been bought by any special interest.

We need someone who is not threatened by people with opposing views. A president who is so insecure that he must surround himself with yes-men is bound to become delusional, and make bad decisions.

A leader must constantly consider and evaluate the results of his actions and the lessons of history and use that feedback to guide future decisions. I want someone able to stand up and admit they were wrong. And I want them to then learn and become better because of it.

That would be a person who is qualified to lead and worthy of my loyalty.

So far, nobody I can think of from either side has demonstrated these qualities. Honorable people are especially vulnerable in the rough-and-tumble world of political infighting. The last one who seemed to have a moral backbone, Jimmy Carter, aged twenty years in office.

What will we do? Continue to look for a candidate with a brain, a spine, and a heart. Who cares if they're a black woman or a two-headed transvestite? Maybe a little less testosterone would be a good thing. But a woman would need to act tougher than a man to get elected. And that would be just as bad as having the real thing.

Answer 3

Interesting - I've also long thought that we'd be better off with a House ten times as big, chosen at random.
My concern about Obama is his complete lack of experience of foreign policy. It really is the President's primary job, and he can screw up big time without any obvious way of stopping him (guess who I have in mind ?)

Answer 4

He technically qualifies, but is relatively inexperienced. I think he's actually hoping to get the vice-presidential nomination.

(By the way, he's not a Muslim, as the first poster said--he's Baptist.)

Answer 5

What about J.F.K, he was our youngest president and was widely celebrated as one of our best as well, minus the bay of pigs stuff of course.

Answer 6

SURE HE IS NOT. CHANGES ARE ALWAYS REFRESHING. BESIDES HE HAS THE ACADEMIC BONES FOR IT.
HILLARY