AJ Wade wrote on October 12, 2008 01:27 PM: MR WATTS,AFTER READING YOUR COMMENTARY IN SUNDAYS PAPER,I HAVE COME TO THE CONCLUSSION THAT YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IS GOING ON AROUND YOU OR IN THE WORLD FOR THAT MATTER.FIRST OF ALL,BEING A BLACK MAN MYSELF AND BEING IN THIS WORLD A LOT LONGER THAN YOU HAVE,(I AM 60 YEARS OLD),FOR THE LIFE OF ME I CAN'T UNDERSTAND HOW YOU CAN BE ASSOCIATED WITH A PARTY(REPUBLICAN)THAT HAS IN IT'S PRESENT RASCIST SUCH AS WHAT WE HAVE SEEN ON TELEVISION.I HAVE YET TO HERE OR SEE ANYONE FROM THE DEMOCRATIC SIDE SHOWING SUCH IGNORANCE OR CONTEMPT AND OUTRIGHT BIGOTRY,HAVE YOU? AND AS FAR AS SARAH PALIN GOES,ME AND MY WIFE JUST RETURNED FROM AN ALASKA CRUISE IN SEPTEMBER AND FOUND THAT THE PEOPLE IN ALASKA WERE NOT TO PLEASED WITH HER.THE MAJORITY THAT I TALKED TO WERE LOOKING FORWARD TO A RALLY BEING HELD ACROSS ALASKA.DON'T YOU THINK THAT IT'S ODD THAT NO RALLY'S ARE BEING HELD IN HER OWN STATE UNLIKE HER COMPETION? AND BY THE WAY,A HAR

Brad Thompson wrote on June 04, 2008 09:32 AM: Please, please reconsider being Sen. McCain's VP running mate!!! We/America needs you!

Michael Vernotico wrote on April 01, 2008 09:32 AM: Excellent commentary. I hope JC Watts as at the top of McCain's VP list.

Mel C. Thompson wrote on February 25, 2008 12:49 AM: And that's why you lost the last elections and why you will lose future elections, because use of the word "whining", while it gives people a macho charge, is not an actual policy statement. By the way, 100% of the people I know who use the word "whining" all the time just happen to be healthy and have money. (By the way, you think you have families, but that's only because nothing really huge has gone wrong yet. I used to guard a hospice, and guess what, all those "family values voters" simply abandoned their dying. I know, because I watched them all die alone. The only people that didn't die alone were ones leaving huge estates behind.) So, Conservatives, either take care of your own weak and sick and dying, or expect to be taxed so that society can take care of them. Sorry kids, but I worked at nursing homes. I know all about what Republicans do with their own poor and their own weak. They toss them overboard. Sorry, you're heartless. You're not "motivated" or "positive." You're heartless. And that goes for all the New Agers who "don't like to be around negative energy." Warning, New-Ager Philosophy is thinly disguised Social Darwinism. If you have New Age friends, prepare to be abandoned if you get chronically ill. They won't like your "harmful karma."

boji wrote on February 24, 2008 12:46 PM: This is a defeatist attitude. Last night with friends, I named Watts as a possible vp for McCain. He is young, and he takes the racism off the table.

His apologist writing for McCain seems to lean that way too. However, I believe, with the right leader, we can take away the lobbyists power by limiting their access. Second, we can just stop ear marks. Those two things are easy, and everyone would support it.

Watts has been in Washington, and he should have other ideals to get it done. Otherwise, we are just a country of the rich and we will continue to empty out the middle class. Isn't it interesting, that the number of low income workers is almost equal in both parties. Both parties should be able to run on this populace theme!

I wrote on February 19, 2008 04:19 AM: While Washington is not a human body, it is an entity that requires outside observation and intervention in order to correct problems that occur within it-just like with a human body. It might not be your favorite metaphor, but I feel that it is fitting.

And of course I would not want a surgeon with NO experience operating on me.

However, the question does not seem to be does Obama have ANY experience, but whether he has enough.

Barack Obama was an Illinois senator from 1996 to 2004. He has been a member of the United States Senate from 2004 to the present.

That gives him over 11 years of professional political experience as an elected official.

Hillary Clinton has been a member of the United States Senate from 2000 to the present. She has held no other elected office in our government.

This means she has over 7 years of professional political experience as an elected official.

These are facts, and may be checked at your leisure at votesmart.org.

There are many venues through which one can gain experience relevant to the oval office. Hillary spent many years as the First Lady of Arkansas, and later as the First Lady of The United States. And I think it's fair to say that she gained meaningful experience applicable to the presidency from these positions.

I wrote on February 19, 2008 04:17 AM: I think it's also fair to say that Barack Obama's experience as a community organizer, his extensive legal education (he has received honorary Doctorates of Law from six different colleges and
universities in addition to his JD from Harvard Law school and the BA he earned at Columbia University), his work as a civil rights attorney-as well as his tenure as president of the Harvard Law
Review and the 11 years he spent as a lecturer of constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School-are also valuable and relevant to the role of president.

The argument that Obama is too inexperienced is as widespread as it is because Hillary's campaign and supporters have repeated it so often that, for many people, the mere repetition of it has made it seem like a fact.

I'm not saying that Obama is MORE experienced than Hillary, though that he has more experience as an elected official in our government is a matter of public record.

I'm suggesting that the experience argument has been greatly overblown, and that the difference between the candidates in this regard is far greater in the minds of Hillary supporters than it is in reality.

I encourage anyone who reads his-whether you support Obama, Clinton, or remain undecided at this point in time-to research the candidate's backgrounds and careers, and see if your own investigation of the matter of their experience leaves you with a different point of view than the one expressed by
Hillary's campaign.

I wrote on February 19, 2008 04:12 AM: And were I to fall ill, I would much rather have a bright and optimistic doctor or surgeon with SUFFICIENT experience who believed I could be cured work on me, as opposed to having an
embittered, cynical, but perhaps relatively MORE experienced doctor or surgeon tell me there is no hope, and
that I should go home to die.

And this is the very difference between one who accepts the status quo and common belief, and one who challenges it. One offers hope and the possibility of improvement, and the other resigns themselves to the acceptance of what should be fought against with all the force of their being.

I do not want a "leader" who seems to lack the heart or conviction to cure those diseases in Washington that undermine our democracy's ability to function AS a democracy.

While I'd much rather have Hillary as a president than Bush, I do not believe she'll fight for the sort of change we need right now.

I believe Obama will. I believe he's imperfect, but I believe he's remarkably capable, and I believe he's sincere. And I believe that his tremendous showing in this campaign against a more "experienced" Washington powerhouse like Hillary Clinton speaks with equally tremendous optimism to his political ability.

So say what you will about Barack. And I'll continue to say what I've said all along on this site, and to people I know, to people I don't know who I call in support of his campaign, and in various corners of the web:

OBAMA '08!

Vic wrote on February 18, 2008 02:25 PM: Indeed, the human body may benefit at times from outside intervention BUT, Washington DC is not a human body. And, would you want an inexperienced doctor or surgeon operating on your human body? I wonder how thankful any of us would be if we found out on the morning of our surgery that the surgeon had no experience.

I wrote on February 18, 2008 02:06 AM: When a human body is ill to a certain degree, it is often no longer able to overcome the disease by it's own devices. It requires the aid of doctors and surgeons-of people outside the system-taking a look inside and helping it to repair itself. This is part of why I believe that Barack Obama's plans to increase government transparency-such as his "google for government"-which will "enable citizens to easily track online federal grants, contracts, earmarks, and lobbyist contacts with government officials"-are exactly the sort of medicine needed to remedy the sickness in Washington you speak of. With increased visibility will come increased awareness, and increased support for the questioning and changing of the status quo in Washington. Thank God he's not as "experienced" as the other candidates, so accustomed to going along with the way it's always been done that they have all hope and willingness to try and change the system sucked out of them. OBAMA '08!

Read All Comments