Flashback: Does Experience Matter in a President? (TIME Magazine - February 2008)

TIME ^ | February 2008 | David Von Drehle

[DaveLoneRanger]

There's something egglike about the concept of experience as a qualification for the highest office. At first blush, the idea appears to be something you can get your hands around. Presidential experience means a familiarity with the levers and dials of government, knowing how to cajole the Congress, understanding when to rely on the Joint Chiefs of Staff and when to call on the National Security Council — that sort of thing. But bear down even slightly, and the notion of experience is liable to crack and run all over. If knowing the system is so useful, then second-term presidencies should be more successful than first-term. Instead, many Presidents lose effectiveness as they go along. Lyndon Johnson, for example: his experience as a master legislator no doubt helped as he steered his historic civil rights and welfare agenda to passage. By the end of two years as President, however, "he was out of gas," recalls Johnson aide Harry McPherson. The longer Johnson was in the Oval Office, the more feckless his presidency became.

...

An ideal President is both ruthless and compassionate, visionary and pragmatic, cunning and honest, patient and bold, combining the eloquence of a psalmist with the timing of a jungle cat. Not exactly the sort of data you can find on a résumé.

[DaveLoneRanger]

Interesting this article was written to defend lack of experience before Sarah Palin was even considered. I doubt they will take such a positive view of it now.

[Hoodat]

To Time, the only thing that matters is that the President have a D after his name.

[unspun]

Nothing matters, if you can bring down freedom and hail in the neo-Marxist state.

Saul Alinsky, paraphrased

[ken21]

the truth is like a bowl of jello knocked off the kitchen cabinet

for the liberal-socialist media;

it can morph into many shapes and still taste good.

[ccmay]

An ideal President is both ruthless and compassionate, visionary and pragmatic, cunning and honest, patient and bold, combining the eloquence of a psalmist with the timing of a jungle cat. Not exactly the sort of data you can find on a résumé.

Except for the eloquence part, this all describes Sarah Palin to a T.

Dear lady, I will follow you to the gates of Hell.

-ccm

[grandpa jones]

[AmericanGirlRising]

bleck!
If TIME would do a little research every once in a while, they might learn something. From IBD: "Finally, history shows that since World War II, our best results-oriented presidents were Truman, Eisenhower and Reagan. They were much older — in their 60s and 70s — more experienced and made sounder, more productive decisions. The three youngest presidents — Kennedy, Carter and Clinton — all had more problems, particularly with national defense and dealing with dangerous dictators that were threats to America's security."
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=308530236252361

[OldNavyVet]

“Experience is the name everyone gives to his mistakes.” — Oscar Wilde

[101voodoo]

Yes, having experience was seen as being important...before it wasn’t...unless you are a Republican running as a VP for an older man.

Understand?

[sobieski]

Having experience was seen as independent, unless you are an affirmative action baby running for the Democrat party.