Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: First Lady Time: Experience for Running for Office, or Not?

  1. #1

    First Lady Time: Experience for Running for Office, or Not?

    Obviosuly, this is about Ms. Clinton, as she has claimed repeatedly that her time as First Lady qualifies her (along with her other experiences) more than anyone else to be President.

    What is the general opinion on this claim? Does time spent as First Lady count as experience as you see it, for running for other Politcal Office (or specificly for President)?

    And for those who beleive it does, were any other first ladies qualified, based on their time as first lady, to run for President?

    (In the interest of full disclosure, this thread was inspired by a comment made on the Sean Ins-Hannity :P Radio Program).

  2. #2
    All League
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Forked River, NJ
    Posts
    4,730
    [QUOTE=Warfish;2298877]Obviosuly, this is about Ms. Clinton, as she has claimed repeatedly that her time as First Lady qualifies her (along with her other experiences) more than anyone else to be President.

    What is the general opinion on this claim? Does time spent as First Lady count as experience as you see it, for running for other Politcal Office (or specificly for President)?

    And for those who beleive it does, were any other first ladies qualified, based on their time as first lady, to run for President?

    (In the interest of full disclosure, this thread was inspired by a comment made on the Sean Ins-Hannity :P Radio Program).[/QUOTE]

    I will keep my opinions of her to myself. I don't see how she could be married to a 2 term president without something rubbing off on her (no pun intended :D ). However, does that qualify her to be president? Hardly. Her time in the senate (which has been relatively short) is more applicable here than her time in the White House.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    L.I
    Posts
    2,435
    To steal a line from Chris Rock last night:


    I think America's ready for a woman president . . . just not that woman. Being married to somebody doesn't make you good at their job. I've been with my wife 10 years now. If she got up here right now, y'all wouldn't laugh. At all. You get on a plane tomorrow, you want the pilot's wife flying you?"

  4. #4
    Warfish,

    First of all, my condolences for your Hannity exposure. Hopefully you had the right shots.

    As for the question at hand, I would say that its experience that can't be discounted altogether, but is not as valuable as Hillary keeps suggesting it is.

    Obviously, the experience gives her some first hand knowledge on how the levers of power work, some face time with world leaders, and some bruises from being involved in policy fights.

    In the first and last case, I think she was unusually involved compared to other first ladies, in part due to the "two for the price of one" conceit of the Clintons. That, and her successful law career, probably make her a very different case than most first ladies.

    That said, being an involved (probably the most involved) first lady is not the same thing as being president by osmosis.

    As Chris Rock recently put it: "I've been married 10 years. If my wife got up on this stage y'all wouldn't laugh at all."

    While she boasts of having met Benazir Bhutto, it was one time over tea with their children present -- they weren't exactly plotting to drive Islamists from Pakistan. Her recent claim of playing a major role in jumpstarting the Northern Ireland peace talks was equally laughable. And she wasn't on speaking terms with Bill because of Lewinsky when he tried to kill Bin Laden, so it's a little different than a cabinet post in that regard.

    All told, her experience as first lady is a positive for her, but it should be looked at as secondary to her tenure in the Senate (and probably to her law career as well).

    She is more experienced than a typical 1+ term senator, but not as much more as she likes to pretend.

  5. #5
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Virginia fromerly New Hampshire
    Posts
    753
    [QUOTE=nuu faaola;2298939]Warfish,

    First of all, my condolences for your Hannity exposure. Hopefully you had the right shots.
    [/QUOTE]

    That was cheap, I 'm just not sure against who, Hannity is far from the only one raising that question, and if goes beyond right wing talk shows as well. You need only look at her closest opponent in the primary.

  6. #6
    [QUOTE=ptath2;2298964]That was cheap, I 'm just not sure against who, Hannity is far from the only one raising that question, and if goes beyond right wing talk shows as well. You need only look at her closest opponent in the primary.[/QUOTE]

    I have no problem with the question. Probably the most fair issue Hannity has ever raised concerning a Democrat. (The other day he was comparing Obama's church to a cult while declaring Romney's Mormonism off limits.)

    Doesn't change the fact that Sean Hannity is a douche of the highest order.

  7. #7
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Virginia fromerly New Hampshire
    Posts
    753
    [QUOTE=nuu faaola;2298981]I have no problem with the question. Probably the most fair issue Hannity has ever raised concerning a Democrat. (The other day he was comparing Obama's church to a cult while declaring Romney's Mormonism off limits.)

    Doesn't change the fact that Sean Hannity is a douche of the highest order.[/QUOTE]

    Don't get me wrong I am not defending Hannity, I am not a huge fan, I may not go as far as "douche of the highest order", just a blow hard that is 50-50, when he is right he can't defend it, and when he is wrong he is contradictory to when he is right, your example above is a good example. I also get a kick out of his shows devoted to religious persecution during the holidays.

  8. #8
    [QUOTE=ptath2;2298997]Don't get me wrong I am not defending Hannity, I am not a huge fan, I may not go as far as "douche of the highest order", just a blow hard that is 50-50, when he is right he can't defend it, and when he is wrong he is contradictory to when he is right, your example above is a good example. I also get a kick out of his shows devoted to religious persecution during the holidays.[/QUOTE]

    Ah, yes, The War on Christmas.

    My issue with him is his fundamental dishonesty. He treats the news like a party operative, distorting with malice whenver possible. There are people on the left who do it too, of course (Olberman is drifting in that direction), but I just prefer to ignore them all as much as I can. (But lately I've been hooked on the news channels due to Iowa, so they get harder to avoid.)

  9. #9
    This is dumb logic, but I'm ready for someone [U]NOT[/U] named Bush or Clinton.

  10. #10
    [QUOTE=nuu faaola;2298939]Warfish,

    First of all, my condolences for your Hannity exposure. Hopefully you had the right shots.

    As for the question at hand, I would say that its experience that can't be discounted altogether, but is not as valuable as Hillary keeps suggesting it is.

    Obviously, the experience gives her some first hand knowledge on how the levers of power work, some face time with world leaders, and some bruises from being involved in policy fights.

    In the first and last case, I think she was unusually involved compared to other first ladies, in part due to the "two for the price of one" conceit of the Clintons. That, and her successful law career, probably make her a very different case than most first ladies.

    That said, being an involved (probably the most involved) first lady is not the same thing as being president by osmosis.

    As Chris Rock recently put it: "I've been married 10 years. If my wife got up on this stage y'all wouldn't laugh at all."

    While she boasts of having met Benazir Bhutto, it was one time over tea with their children present -- they weren't exactly plotting to drive Islamists from Pakistan. Her recent claim of playing a major role in jumpstarting the Northern Ireland peace talks was equally laughable. And she wasn't on speaking terms with Bill because of Lewinsky when he tried to kill Bin Laden, so it's a little different than a cabinet post in that regard.

    All told, her experience as first lady is a positive for her, but it should be looked at as secondary to her tenure in the Senate (and probably to her law career as well).

    She is more experienced than a typical 1+ term senator, but not as much more as she likes to pretend.[/QUOTE]

    I tend to agree with that.

  11. #11
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    22,105
    [QUOTE=NYSE;2298898]To steal a line from Chris Rock last night:

    I think America's ready for a woman president . . . just not that woman. Being married to somebody doesn't make you good at their job. I've been with my wife 10 years now. If she got up here right now, y'all wouldn't laugh. At all. You get on a plane tomorrow, you want the pilot's wife flying you?"[/QUOTE]

    That is a great line.

    I always thought Hillary's claim of "experience" was bogus. She has as much "experience" as other 2-term first ladies, that doesn't mean each of them could be president.

  12. #12
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,974
    [QUOTE=SanAntonio_JetFan;2299013]This is dumb logic, but I'm ready for someone [U]NOT[/U] named Bush or Clinton.[/QUOTE]

    How about Hilorge Clintush?

  13. #13
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    [QUOTE=Big Blocker;2299026]I tend to agree with that.[/QUOTE]

    ditto.

    I'd also say that I think being married to a President is probably VERY value experience for [I]running[/I] for office, but considerably less so for actually [I]holding[/I] that office. I mnean, Hillary has essentially had a front-seat view of two Presidentla elections. That has to be valuable experience for her current campaign. Has to be.

  14. #14
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Virginia fromerly New Hampshire
    Posts
    753
    [QUOTE=nuu faaola;2299006]Ah, yes, The War on Christmas.

    My issue with him is his fundamental dishonesty. He treats the news like a party operative, distorting with malice whenver possible. There are people on the left who do it too, of course (Olberman is drifting in that direction), but I just prefer to ignore them all as much as I can. (But lately I've been hooked on the news channels due to Iowa, so they get harder to avoid.)[/QUOTE]

    drifting? He is pretty much advocate/activist, he is a little worse as his show is on a mainstream supposedly objective news network, Hannity like him or not makes no bones about what his show is and you can take it or leave it.

    but i am drifting off topic.

  15. #15
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Montville, NJ
    Posts
    5,473
    [QUOTE=nuu faaola;2298939]Warfish,

    First of all, my condolences for your Hannity exposure. Hopefully you had the right shots.

    As for the question at hand, I would say that its experience that can't be discounted altogether, but is not as valuable as Hillary keeps suggesting it is.

    Obviously, the experience gives her some first hand knowledge on how the levers of power work, some face time with world leaders, and some bruises from being involved in policy fights.

    In the first and last case, I think she was unusually involved compared to other first ladies, in part due to the "two for the price of one" conceit of the Clintons. That, and her successful law career, probably make her a very different case than most first ladies.

    That said, being an involved (probably the most involved) first lady is not the same thing as being president by osmosis.

    As Chris Rock recently put it: "I've been married 10 years. If my wife got up on this stage y'all wouldn't laugh at all."

    While she boasts of having met Benazir Bhutto, it was one time over tea with their children present -- they weren't exactly plotting to drive Islamists from Pakistan. Her recent claim of playing a major role in jumpstarting the Northern Ireland peace talks was equally laughable. And she wasn't on speaking terms with Bill because of Lewinsky when he tried to kill Bin Laden, so it's a little different than a cabinet post in that regard.

    All told, her experience as first lady is a positive for her, but it should be looked at as secondary to her tenure in the Senate (and probably to her law career as well).

    She is more experienced than a typical 1+ term senator, but not as much more as she likes to pretend.[/QUOTE]

    pretty well said

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us