Quote:
Originally Posted by DBlack
Are you serious? Just read that pathetic and petty list of bills. Surely you aren't trying to conclude that he's presidential because of such meaningless and ineffective bills?!
... And Anyone can sponsor a bill. It's more symbolic than anything else, so that would hardly count as a qualification. Just because one is a senator doesn't automatically qualify them as President and it would be different if he came up with a bill that became law; that shows effective leadership, the ability to bring about...yes, change, rather than rhetorical hope!
And since you are bringing up his senatorial record, please include the 100+ no votes (one of the worst in current senate) and an attendance below 30%. In order to make Change, you actually have to participate in the government. You can't call yourself an agent of change if you are given a job to do so and you don't make the most of it.
|
First let me say that I'm impressed you actually read the bills in their entirety and presented an informed opinion about them being pathetic, particularly the issues that minority farm owners face --definitely well informed.
Sponsoring a bill is hardly just symbolic. Its part of the long process of having a bill introduced for its first reading, debate, and if applicable amendments and second reading and eventually voting. Voting is just part of the formula. I agree his attendance and consistency are sub par, but a congressmen who does not sponsor bills or introduce new legislation is neglecting the voice of his constituents. Bills aren't written by single senators most of the time, they're usually joint efforts such as committees.
Also, I did not imply that simply being a senator makes a person qualified.
I'm hardly enthusiastic of any of the candidates, but its pretty clear who the lesser evil is. Any other inferences you make are on you.