Thinks the new guys are too "green" for the Whitehouse.
_____

Sen. Rand Paul: Limited Washington experience isn�t always bad



Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul is brushing aside the notion � aired recently by former Sen. Bob Dole � that he and some of his GOP counterparts in the Congress are too green to be the nation�s next president.

�I was a physician, and then a U.S. Senator, and people said, �You need to be a state legislator and a mayor and all of these other things before you�re in the U.S. Senate,� and I absolutely disagree with that because I think in some ways, when you have people who are career politicians, they�ve been beaten down by the system and are so part of the system that they can�t see all the problems of the system,� Mr. Paul told reporters Tuesday after an event on school choice in Chicago.

Mr. Dole, the GOP�s 1996 presidential nominee, said last week that �first termers� � including Mr. Paul and fellow Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida and Ted Cruz of Texas need to get some more time under their belt in Washington before they are ready to be commander-in-chief.

�I don�t think they�ve got enough experience yet,� Mr. Dole told the Eagle newspaper of Wichita, Kan.

Mr. Paul, Mr. Rubio and Mr. Cruz are among a number of Republicans who are thought to be considering running for the GOP presidential nomination in 2016.

On Tuesday, Mr. Paul suggested his limited experience in Washington is a plus and that some people can spend too much time in the nation�s capital.

�I think that over long periods of time, people lose their zeal for change in Washington, and they become part of the system,� Mr. Paul said.

Didn't stop Hussein.

Bob Dole isn�t sure who Ted Cruz is, doesn�t think he should be president

The most hardcore conservatives within the Republican Party have never been too fond of RINOs like Bob Dole, and it�s quite unlikely that the ex-senator and former presidential candidate�s recent comments in an interview with the Wichita Eagle will change their minds.

Speaking of the GOP�s chances in a hypothetical 2016 face-off with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Dole expressed skepticism that some of the party�s newest and most talked-about figures are ready to challenge the former first lady.

�A number of the younger members [of the Senate], first-termers like Rand Paul, [Marco] Rubio and that extreme-right-wing guy � Ted Cruz? All running for president now,� Dole said, �I don�t think they�ve got enough experience yet.�


While Dole leveled criticism toward Democrats, too � most notably saying he doubted the administration�s Obamacare enrollment numbers were true � the former longtime U.S. senator from Kansas chastised his party in Congress for being overly confrontational and not unifying around a single alternative to Obamacare.

�They ought to have their own plan, but they don�t,� Dole said of the GOP on healthcare reform. �They need to get together and coordinate, but they don�t.� He also claimed that members of the Republican Party �need to get together with the others and form a plan� rather than simply oppose everything Democrats want to do.

If I recall correctly, Dole didn't have what it takes to get elected. Yet he feels qualified to comment on it?

^
Yep...that!

Didn't stop the electoral college nor the masses either!

Obama was in the Senate,what 100-150 days before he started running for President. All he did in the Senate was vote "Present."

ETA,I prefer Governors to Senators/Congressman. At least some Governors know to run government.

Like McCain, he wanted that position of power so bad he could almost taste it.

No, Dole was the sacrificial lamb of the GOP in '96. The economy was good and Klinton was popular. Nobody the GOP had was going to beat Klinton. Mondale was not going to beat Reagan. Dukakis was not going to beat Bush. They ran any way because their party needed them to.

I agree with this. Ironically, Palin had this logic turned against her when she ran with McCain. The press was saying that all she had ever done was be a mayor and governor of a far away State.

"Plans" and meddling in things that need to be left alone, like healthcare, are a very large part of the problem now. Dole was part of the problem. Thank God he's gone. Now Sebelius is running for Jerry Moran's seat, supposedly. Moran is a good man but Sebelius has a lot of name recognition. She was a [bleep] governor too. Almost as bad as Brownback.

Well, we decided to re-elect someone on the basis of OTJ training alone before...

Can't believe somebody woke Bob Dole from his nap for that.

Dole represents the establishment "wisdom" that we ought to act against decisively.

So we should ask Dole what he thinks and then do the exact opposite. Karl Rove same/same.

Exactly, hard to hear someone that didn't make it espouse what they think is required for the position. TFF IMO

That would be like a fry guy at the local McD's letting folks know what he thinks is required to be a good Police Officer.

y'all know that Bob Dole has a 'withered' arm, right? Know how it got that way?
Bob might be out to lunch on a lot of issues, but personal courage and personal sacrifice are things he understands.

Yes. It's called the "halo effect". We love our war heroes, therefore they can do no wrong.

Dole is like McCain. He may have started out good but at some point he went off-track. With Dole one of the big crossroads was when he supported NAFTA and GATT. He was getting three or four thousand calls per day against them yet he supported them anyway. I don't know what to make of him casting THE deciding vote on the AWB. He did trade his support for the Sunset Clause. Without it, I doubt the ban would ever have lifted, especially when Dubya said he'd sign another one if it crossed his desk. I voted for Dole many times, but he ended up sucking ass. Sam Brownback is the same thing.

Not so, he lost because he had no nutts. Like Letterman said, all he had to do was make a commercial and say, "Hello, I'm Senator Bob Dole, I'm a war hero, and no one is suing my azz for sexual harrasment. I'd like to be your President."

geez Pat, did I say he 'could do no wrong'? No, I did not. Lets stay focused on the issues.

Yes, I am aware of the man's sacrifice and courage. However that does not mean that the man still isn't a few fruit loops short of a full bowl. Not saying he is wacko, but his antiquated views of conservative policy are what got us in this predicament in the first place...IMO.

I like the idea of a president who has not been a career politician. I want a president who actually represents the people who put him their. A guy who has started from the bottom, and worked him self up, a guy who has owned and operated a successful business, that he built up from nothing. Some one who can run this county with limited government interaction but take the "investment" of tax revenue and turn a profit for our country. Someone who will stop sending aid to every third world country when we don't have the money. Some one who will put a stop to paying to keep farm fields empty, stop funding for dumb government funded studies. I want some-one financially responsible who understands what "trust fund" means.

So this relates to people saying that he has nothing worthwhile to add to the conversation about potential candidates in 16 HOW????

Sam you waiting to hear McLame's opinion too, since he understands courage & sacrifice?

Not you Sam...but lots of people suffer from the halo effect. For instance, I'm sure John McCain was a great POW, but he's not a good Republican, yet people still elect him.

Why would Rand Paul hope to have a chance in '16? Nothing separates him for his father, and the 'fire badly excoriated him in favor of a RINO loser in '12.

What was that about Paul bot?

Yep.

Romney was infinitely worse than the McCain, yet many voted for him. Apparently a lot of log burners at the 'fire like the idea of a Democratic president.

Nice, but why would THAT guy quite such a successful career...

McCain, Romney, Dole...they're all the same.

I would pose one question for Mr.Dole
How did all of that experience of yours work out for your presidential bid?

Minimal experience has be a boost for Obama!

Didn't your support and vote for Romney?

No and yes.

How would have electing a problem been beneficial for America, especially considering that Romney had signed gun control legislation?

I see these 'less experienced' candidates as a much more viable choice than anyone currently out there.
I will also add that I think that Mark Warner Va. will be in the mix for the D's if not in 16 then in 2020.

Where did all the Romney supporters and voters on the 'fire go?

Since they excoriated Ron Paul, I know that they'll vote Romney again before they'd vote for Rand Paul, for Rand Paul is a Paul bot.

How would voting for Obama be better?

You sure are comfortable with the 'Fire for somebody that registered two days ago.

And you've just explicated the foundation of Romney's blind support from the 'fire's log burners. It was all about emotionalism and defense of log burners' two pettifogging messiahs. Reason, logic, and common sense were relegated to pine riding in deference to blind loyalty to an illusion. I sure as hell that your Romney supporters and voters have learned a valuable lesson about blindly following two pettifoggers whom were probably Obama shills.

Refute facts, Itppowell, and not adolescent arguing ability. And I'd bet that were I to do a site search I'd find your support of a gun controller who was every bit as bad as the scourge he had tried to unseat.

It is a condition of our republic that Romney supporters were able to destroy the candidacy of an authentic patriot in preference to a Democrat wearing an elephant cloak.

Are you implying that Romney was better than Obama?

Itppowell,

Here's a far more wise idea. Identify the candidate deserving your vote and vote for her/him. That way you won't be burned voting for a charlatan who had absolutely zero chance of pulling it off. And other than proving that you were willing to compromise the Second Amendment, what did you get in return for supporting and voting for Romney?

That's why I always write in Pat Paulsen. At least I can feel good about myself and sleep at night.

He's either a past or present member running another username. Once a troll, always a troll.

SansSouci, thanks for joining up, posting a dozen times to this short thread, and telling us how we should be doing. I appreciate that, ya know?

Since he knows all about the "log burners" here, makes me wonder under what name he previously posted - both here and at The Democratic Underground.

yeah, a effing sock puppet for sure.

Nope, he is Laguna/raisuli