The False Argument of Obama's Inexperience

[Bullet1987]

I'm tired of hearing people say Obama only has 2 years experience. Not only is this a blatant lie...but it's totally misleading. These pundits like Joe Scarborough on TV act as if Obama's political career began in 2004. Ignoring the fact that he was a State Senator for 8 years before 2004. What...that holds no importance? I could see if Barack was fresh off the block and was a lawyer before 2004, THEN I would say Obama needs to wait. But he has a combined 10 years of experience in US politics. You can compare his time as a state senator to that of a Govenor.

Now, the foreign policy argument is also misleading considering the fact that the only Presidential potentials that have any resemblence of foreign policy knowledge is John McCain, Hillary Clinton, and John Kerry. What foreign policy experience does Brownback have? What about Kucinich and Vilsack? Guiliani (no 9/11 does not mean he has uber foreign policy knowledge now)?

Barack Obama is much more polished than the media is giving him credit for. And if he runs, I hope he confronts this inexperience argument.

[illinoisprogressive]

1. Obama's minor in college, Harvard, was international affairs

plus his life experience with different cultures and lives.
But, I'd wait for him to run and then sit back and watch as the naysayers have thier jaws on the floor.

[baldguy]

2. Grover Cleveland

In 1881 he was the Sheriff of Erie County. In 1881, elected the Mayor of Buffalo. In 1882, Governor of New York. In 1884 he was elected President.

[kskiska]

5. Grover beats Abe Lincoln for experience

Abe served in the Illinois State Legislature, then two years in the U.S. House of Representatives.

[beaconess]

3. If the past 6 years have taught us anything, it's that we should be less concerned with

the previous jobs someone has had and take a closer look at their character, intelligence, thought processes, world view, approach to solving problems, and how they gather and synthesize information.

George W. Bush could have been governor for 10 years, senator for another 10 and vice president for 8 - but he STILL would have been a disastrous president because of the kind of person he is.

[Bullet1987]

4. Very true Beaconess....

[baldguy]

7. Check if they can read and write and speak English

[Sparkly]

10. Well, yes and no...

I've seen this now as an argument for more than one potential candidate, and I think it's not quite logical.

YES, any Democrat would be better than Bush in judgment, etc. But Bush's inexperience is not an excuse for others' inexperience. That "Bush was inexperienced too!" rationale doesn't really make sense.

Judgment is important, yes; BUT, it doesn't follow that experience has no bearing on judgment.

I'm just sayin'.

[beaconess]

12. I agree that experience is important . . .

I just have a broader view of what "experience" means - I think there are a variety of ways to gain valuable experience for the presidency beyond a handful of specific jobs (senator, governor, general, vice president) and I think the determination of the value of one's experience shouldn't be limited to the four corners of one's resume.

[Sparkly]

13. I agree. I've long said there's no one "President School."

But I still think foreign policy experience has become very important given BushCo's disasters.

[beaconess]

15. I don't think Bush's problem is lack of foreign policy "experience"

His problem is an utter lack of interest in or intellectual curiosity about anyone or anything outside of his extremely constricted world view. His ignorance, arrogance and sense of entitlement doomed him to be a foreign policy disaster, not his lack of foreign policy "experience." He now has 6 years of the most in-depth foreign policy experience anyone could ever have and he's STILL a disaster because his world view and approach have not changed one iota.

Bill Clinton was, by all accounts, a brilliant foreign policy president. Jimmy Carter is still regarded with reverence for his foreign policy work. Yet, neither man had any real foreign policy "experience" when they took office. But they performed well because of the type of men they were and the kinds of other experiences they had.

In my view, dealing with foreign countries is really a matter of human relations. I have found, in my own experience and in watching others, that people who have empathy, curiosity, interest in others, a keen mind, a willingness to listen and understand that, just because others may do or see things differently, they are not necessarily wrong, or crazy or evil and that there are many ways to see issues and many ways to find common ground to get to a common goal, can translate those skills to any forum, domestic or foreign.

People like Obama and Edwards, who have experience dealing with different kind of people, have developed a talent for convincing people to come around to see things in a comprehensive way and work toward a common goal, who understand that the world is not strictly black and white, good and evil, are the kind of people I would like to see representing our country to the world. They are, in my view, just as qualified (and in some cases, even more so) than those with mile-long "experience" in government service or foreign policy.

[Imagevision]

6. Compare & total the years of experience cheney & Rumsfeld have combined, then take a look at how

they've run this country for the past 6 years alone! I'll take my chances with Barack Obama in a new York minute!! experience you say? surely you jest?!!

[Sparkly]

8. Add General Clark to your list

of "the only Presidential potentials that have any resemblence of foreign policy knowledge."

To a lesser extent, Joe Biden does, too.

[depakid]

9. Actually- its a very good argument

and his lack of experience on the national stage has already shown itself several times in the form of poor judgment and ill considered statements.

I fully expect that we're going to see more of that in the coming year.

[Mass]

11. Add Clark, Dodd, and Biden to the list. This said, I agree with your

argument. Before being the US Senate, Obama had a lot of various experiences that need to be added to that, starting by his tenure in the Illinois Senate.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

14. Yes, but...

Politically he's only won two local elections in heavily-Democratic South Chicago (and one of these was unopposed), and his lone victory in a statewide election was against certifible-nutcase (and non-resident) Alan Keyes after Jack Ryan withdrew from the race.

It's not Obama-bashing to say that the jury is still out on whether he was the wheels to win a national election.