Skip to comments.The experience trap
Posted on 09/07/2008 12:58:59 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Good thing George Stephanopoulos wasn't a Sunday morning TV pundit in 1912.
That was the year an egghead named Woodrow Wilson won the Democrats' nomination for president -- on the 46th ballot -- and chose Thomas Marshall as his vice president.
Based on his agitated reaction on last weekend's show to Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin being picked as John McCain's VP, Stephanopoulos would have had a stroke over the combined executive inexperience of the Wilson-Marshall tandem.
And what qualified Wilson to become president of a far simpler, humbler America? Besides writing books and running Princeton University for eight years, that is? How about two years, one month and two weeks as governor of New Jersey.
Wilson's veep actually had more executive experience than Wilson. Tom Marshall had been governor of Indiana for more than three years, having been elected in 1908 as a dark-horse compromise candidate.
And what else had qualified Marshall to be placed a mere heartbeat or stroke away from the presidency? Nothing.
Stephanopoulos is a devout Democrat, so he wouldn't have noticed Wilson's and Marshall's shallow leadership credentials -- which still surpass Barack Obama's and are almost the equal of Gov. Palin's career executive experience.
But let's get real. This whole debate over experience is foolish. No rookie president or rookie VP is really ever ready to do his job. And as for Palin, she's Maggie Thatcher compared to many recent No. 2 choices -- most of whom have become political trivia questions.
(Excerpt) Read more at pittsburghlive.com ...
Political Gravitas is inversely proportionate to accomplishment
In other words, the world MUST turn itself on its head so that Obama may be elected.
Stephanopoulos is like all the rest of his kind. Blind as bats, and still thinking they can see from here to eternity
This article makes a little mileage off of the issue, but falls short of making a foray into the real world, even if the know that Palin is a Thatcher. Whence courage? Whence bravado?
The logic is that experience doesn't matter. This is not 1912. The world is just not the same place it was then.Now experience does indeed matter.
They can't have it both ways, as much as they'd like too. Rather sordid attempt at a blazee attitude.The fake yawn.
Yeah, lucky for them, our silly, primitive ancestors didn't have any wars, diplomatic issues or economic problems to deal with back then. They were happy if they could just find a mastodon to throw a spear at.
just quote Clinton during the Democratic Convention. He was talking about himself as usual and saying remember when I (Clinton) ran for office, ppl were saying he was too inexperienced
Barack Obama has been in the Senate for almost 4 years now. That's a full Presidential term. What changes has Obama accomplished in that time? What about the past 3 1/2 years makes him so much more qualified than he was before joining the Senate?
If the media would, for just one moment, ponder those questions. Then take an honest look at the records of the candidates, they would have a difficult time dismissing Sarah Palin while defending The One and The Negative One.
Experience doesn't matter one lick if you cannot demonstrate that you accomplished something or at least learned something from it. Biden, for all his experience, has very little to show for it. Obama can talk a good game but has never scored any points.
When some Obamist brings up the “experience doesn’t matter” canard, ask them the following questions:
1. Do you choose a doctor based upon how little experience he has?
2. Do you only hire attorneys who have never practiced law before?
3. Do you only allow fresh-out-of-school teachers to teach your children?
4. Do you only accept newly-minted CPAs to do your taxes and your books?
If the answer to any of these is no, then why make an exception for the Presidency?
No it don’t.
I had the same crap presented to me by Mom.
You just throw it right back in their face: how many “months” has NoBammaMessiah’ been a senator?
One is invariably met with the response that NoBamMessiah jus sppears to be more that the “figure” of a Statesman.
“And what qualified Wilson to become president ...”
This is too easy.
What qualified Wilson to be the democrat president was that he was a racist, a KKK supporter and a segregationist and those views reflected perfectly the majority of the democrat voters.
And today we have nobama whose racist views reflect perfectly the views of the majority of the democrat party.
Nothing new under the sun for the rat party.
Especially with the poo flinging monkeys...
Good grief, he ranks as one of the worst presidents of all time, right down there with FDR and Carter.
His desire for the world to be one big happy family and the founding of the League of Nations (forerunner to the United Nations) was a disaster. Just like Obama and Carter, Wilson was merely a the puppet of powerful special interests in DC.
From a New York Times editorial on July 3, 1984, on Geraldine Ferraro's nomination for vice president:
Where is it written that only senators are qualified to become President? . . . Or where is it written that mere representatives aren't qualified, like Geraldine Ferraro of Queens? . . . Where is it written that governors and mayors, like Dianne Feinstein of San Francisco, are too local, too provincial? . . . Presidential candidates have always chosen their running mates for reasons of practical demography, not idealized democracy. . . . What a splendid system, we say to ourselves, that takes little-known men, tests them in high office and permits them to grow into statesmen. . . . Why shouldn't a little-known woman have the same opportunity to grow?
You're right, it does. The debate should be more about judgement than experience. What have the candidates done when faced with difficulties? Have they compromised their principles or have their characters given them the strength to make the tougher choices & not only live with the consequences, but get stronger in the process?