Read other letters about this article

• Thursday, January 24, 2008 03:24 PM

  Re: Experience & e_five

  My point is that "inexperience" is a code word

  I agree that "experience" is a code word, but unlike you I don't think it's racist,

  Not experienced enough... hmmm.... isn't that what they always say when folks show up for the interview and they find out one of them is a Negro?

  By 'experience' I think the "Coventional Wisdom-Main Stream Media" mean years in state-wide or national office: Governor, U.S. Senator, Vice-President or President. This standard is, after all, consistent with Edwards being too inexperienced to be VP in 2000 and with Kucinich having less "experience" than Obama, Edwards or Clinton. It's also consistent with Obama having less 'experience' than Edwards or Clinton.

  If people want to argue there are other experiences that are as important as or more important than "conventional experience", or that should least be considered when evaluating a candidate, fine. Clinton is effectively trying to do the same thing by arguing that being First Lady gave her experience.

  I live in Illinois, and as communications director of a state planning agency in the late 90s, I was contacted constantly by Obama's office with in depth and thorough questions. His office was in contact with our agency about as much as all the other state legislators put together. He hires brilliant people-- such as when he snapped up Tom Daschle's chief of staff upon entering the Senate. I've followed his career since then, and I've been extremely impressed at every level

  I think this is a more effective argument for supporting Obama then arguing that 'experience' is a racist code word.

  Vis a vis the disingenuousness of your replies-- the William Jennings Bryan administration

  My remark about the Bryan administration was hardly disingenuous; he was your example. I merely pointed out that Bryan had never been elected despite his oratory. Since he was nominated 3 times for the Presidency by a major party, thus becoming the founding member of the Bryan-FDR-Nixon club, he had plenty of chances.

  We would prefer candidates that didn't perform well academically? We would prefer candidates that are mediocre orators?

  I can't say what we would prefer, only that I'm not looking for a President to knock my socks off in the State of the Union address. And I prefer a candidate who's an effective communicator. Given his recent Reagan and 'party of ideas' snafus, I'm not sure how effective Obama is as a communicator.

  Lincoln, Eisenhower, and Teddy Roosevelt had less experience upon becoming president than Obama. Kennedy, Teddy Roosevelt, and Bill Clinton were younger.

  Eisenhower was Supreme Allied Commander in Western Europe -- or whatever his title was -- for much of World War II and was also Supreme Allied Commander of NATO. Voters in Cold War America might consider this relevant experience.

  Lincoln was arguably a compromise candidate at the 1860 Republican Convention. But even if not, how many Lincolns has this country had in the past 220 years?

  Teddy Roosevelt became President becasue Czolgosz shot McKinley. That wasn't the plan. The plan was to kick Roosevelt upstairs into the obscurity of the Vice President's office.

  Thanks to Oswald we'll never really know how Kennedy would have turned out as a President (I'm not a paid up member of the Camelot fan club). He also ran against an opponent with about the same amount of "experience" (8 years as Senator for Kennedy; 10 years as Senator and VP for Nixon) (on the other hand, Kennedy also had the support of a Chicago Mayor named Daley, hmmmm.....).

  Bill Clinton was younger when elected, but he also had a lot of "conventional experience" having been elected President of Arkansas for life (or some such thing).

  Mitt Romney's only political experience is four years as Governor of Massachusetts, and yet you don't hear people questioning his experience.

  Puzzling indeed. Romney is the living embodiment of a resume padder and why 'experience' is overrated. See for example Romney left Mass on 212 days in '06, http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/12/24/romney_left_mass_on_212_days_in_06/

  Why more emphasis hasn't been placed on this, I don't know. Perhaps the other Republicans are waiting until after Florida (or perhaps the Democratic nominee will have to point it out).

  —Green Job Read Green Job's other letters
  Permalink
  Flag
  Click "Submit Flag" if you feel this post is inappropriate. Explain why below if you wish.

  Cancel