Is Bill Clinton's assessment of Obama a valid one, why or why not?

Question

"There is one job we can't afford on-the-job training for -- our next president. That could be the costliest job training in history," Clinton said. "Every day spent learning the ropes is another day of rising costs, mounting deficits and growing anxiety for our families. And they cannot afford to keep waiting."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/11/19/clinton-takes-swipe-at-ob_n_73307.html

Opps Sorry the quote is from Hillary, but Bill has made similar comments.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/12/mr-clinton-ques.html

Answer 1

I believe he should know what qualifications a person should have. but anyway just look at obama's immature responses at some of the debates and interviews. that show his inexperience! we are at a crucial point in our history, in which we need some one more experienced either in the democratic or republican party!!!

Answer 2

It's probably accurate to an extent but I don't know if she's really one to talk.

Sure, she's the wife of a former-president and has been a senator for several years but I don't really understand where she gets this idea that she's an ideal shoo-in and Obama is inferior or less qualified. She has more things to credit her political career to, but in reality, she isn't that superior to him when it comes to qualifications. She's right, people can't afford to keep waiting but until she presents a solid plan for what she'll do to put an end to it, I have no reason to believe she's a better option than him. The same can be said for Obama and every other candidate.

Answer 3

Is it a valid one? Yes

Unfortunately, coming from Hillary at this stage of history a new question pops up and one that should be avoided though considered yet shouldn't be raised at all and it is the strawman you see in the comments under that topic which is "what is it that makes Hillary more qualified than him?" and I worry that many will either use this straw man to answer you or they will disqualify the validity of this question "because Hillary said it" and downplay the validity of this question by assuming the stance of "No."

As for going into details as to why that's valid, I have several reasons why I choose not to go beyond "yes":

1. Answering in absolute details why puts me above even Obama in knowledge and clearly I'm not. Of course you have no reason to even consider that I am, however by trying to explain this to you, in principle, I am assuming the stance that a "less qualified" person (me) can indeed absolutely know why it's valid and henceforth be as qualified as Obama/Clinton/etc. and that's hypocritical on my part.

2. I'm not American so even if I believe I have done enough research to answer your question, the fact is, I'm not and that is almost the same principle as to why a newcomer can be costly in assuming presidency especially politics where even Clinton has shown the ability to not fully understand the law (or intentionally go against it though I'd rather avoid going with the ad hominem "spread through gossip" without facts route)

3. Ron Paul. He's the only US Presidential Candidate I feel I can use as an example. Unfortunately, he composes almost the entire argument I have as to why it's a valid one due to the limitations of the political knowledge that I have.

This is further enhanced by the fact that due to the internet popularity of Ron Paul, it's too easy for anyone writing his policies under a positive light to be assumed a supporter of him. More worrying, being accused as a blind supporter aka a Ron Paul spammer, the RP Army, Paulidiot, Paulbot, Paulcaholics, etc.

I'd like to believe I am neither and have avoided any blind bias towards Paul in this reply however I can never be too sure.

If you are still interested in the Ron Paul related view I've concluded, I won't still go into details because I believe that violates the first reason however I'll try linking to two examples here. You may have to know more about Ron Paul to understand why these are notable so I'll provide a brief context prior to each

Ron Paul against Amber Alert

Source: Comments under http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/12/13/131540/47/78/420978

Slightly modified so the words would stand on their own:

"Ron Paul voted against the Amber Alert System, who does that?"

Reply: "Maybe he's concerned with a system that can be abused later on? Does anyone doubt that Cheney or his proteges couldn't think up some nefarious use for this?"

"Dick Cheney is an evil smear on mankind but I'm not sure even he could do something nefarious with the Amber Alert system"

Reply: "A nationwide apb system where the "suspect" will automatically receive so much directed hate, that whoever does "capture" them can do nearly do anything without anyone intervening or thinking to report it later?

Hell, the alleged child won't even have to be found in the vehicle or whatever, everyone will just assume they're dead. I'm not Tom Clancy, but I bet you could work up a story where this is abused in the extreme."

Ron Paul against anti-Flag Burning Amendment
Source: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/11/12/paul/

Attempt at summary without going into details:

P.S. Modified words of one commentor (I forgot where):

It's almost widely known that the Patriot Act does not indeed protect the Patriot, yet how come many still assume that this cannot be applied to other bills?

Can a newcomer figure this one out? Yes, I believe so. Can people afford this? That's up to them. The fact that I answer with that, rather than an absolute "yes" is for me, a sign that it might be a valid question. Could I defend the answer I gave you, especially in absolute details if not "absolute" as considered by you, absolute as considered by me? No, I will not even if I can and I know I cannot.

Answer 4

Its been working pretty well for Presidents up till now. I'd rather someone fresh and new then someone who has tried and accomplished nothing. Not that Im a big fan of Obama. I just really don't like Hillary aka Bill aka Hillary

Answer 5

Yes. Obama has NOT the experience we need at this periless time in our history.

Answer 6

I don't think it's anyone's place in the Hillary camp to be criticizing any other candidate's lack of experience.

Answer 7

Clinton doesn't know what he's talking about. He's got a personal interest in this election.

Answer 8

Consider the source.He was nothing but a draft dodging governor of ARKANSAS before he was president.Oh I guess it was ok back then.

Answer 9

no, because the only reason he is saying this is because his wife is running against obama. If she wasn't he would probably be campaigning with him.

Answer 10

Like any of the candidates has Presidential experience.