2008 Woodie Awards
Experience Not Necessary
Marina Shmidt
Issue date: 10/3/08 Section: Opinions
I'm confused.
If I would need a doctor to perform a life-altering procedure, I would choose the person with the most experience possible, whose walls were plastered with certificates for everything and anything (I wouldn't care if they were awards for a pie eating contest, just as long as they show that this doctor's got commitment). An Ivy League degree wouldn't hurt, either. The same goes for the plumber I would hire to fix my leaky sink. I want the guy who went to the Harvard of plumbing schools.
Why doesn't the same logic apply to selecting the most powerful person on Earth?
The last president we had with considerable experience was the first George Bush, the one without the cowboy hat. And despite the unpopularity he gained for going back on his promise not to raise taxes, he did a decent job as president.
Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard Nixon were also presidents who had a lot of experience prior to their respective presidencies. Although LBJ's presidency is most remembered for the horror of the Vietnam War, he was the one who passed Civil Rights Legislation and not John F. Kennedy. JFK is most remembered for his charisma, handsomeness, and unfulfilled potential. However, during his truncated presidency, JFK accomplished very little on his legislative to-do list. Despite Nixon's very flawed character, he managed to get a lot done in his six-year presidency. Nixon, a Republican president, even created the Environmental Protection Agency.
There is inherent value in having prior experience before taking on any job, including the presidency. Knowing how Washington works is an important prerequisite to getting business done in Washington. As anyone who has taken a class on U.S. government knows, just getting lawmakers to look at a piece of proposed legislation requires a lot of nuanced back room dealings. That may seem just plain wrong and un-American, and it is. Unfortunately, it is also the reality of how Washington works. As both McCain and Obama call for change and reform, the only way to make it happen is to work through the system. As the adage goes, "Know thy enemy."
If I would need a doctor to perform a life-altering procedure, I would choose the person with the most experience possible, whose walls were plastered with certificates for everything and anything (I wouldn't care if they were awards for a pie eating contest, just as long as they show that this doctor's got commitment). An Ivy League degree wouldn't hurt, either. The same goes for the plumber I would hire to fix my leaky sink. I want the guy who went to the Harvard of plumbing schools.
Why doesn't the same logic apply to selecting the most powerful person on Earth?
The last president we had with considerable experience was the first George Bush, the one without the cowboy hat. And despite the unpopularity he gained for going back on his promise not to raise taxes, he did a decent job as president.
Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard Nixon were also presidents who had a lot of experience prior to their respective presidencies. Although LBJ's presidency is most remembered for the horror of the Vietnam War, he was the one who passed Civil Rights Legislation and not John F. Kennedy. JFK is most remembered for his charisma, handsomeness, and unfulfilled potential. However, during his truncated presidency, JFK accomplished very little on his legislative to-do list. Despite Nixon's very flawed character, he managed to get a lot done in his six-year presidency. Nixon, a Republican president, even created the Environmental Protection Agency.
There is inherent value in having prior experience before taking on any job, including the presidency. Knowing how Washington works is an important prerequisite to getting business done in Washington. As anyone who has taken a class on U.S. government knows, just getting lawmakers to look at a piece of proposed legislation requires a lot of nuanced back room dealings. That may seem just plain wrong and un-American, and it is. Unfortunately, it is also the reality of how Washington works. As both McCain and Obama call for change and reform, the only way to make it happen is to work through the system. As the adage goes, "Know thy enemy."
Viewing Comments 1 - 2 of 2
Sarah
posted 10/05/08 @ 8:21 PM EST
I'm not sure why Sarah Palin's experience, or lack thereof, is considered more appalling than Obama's. He was a "community organizer" and a law professor before entering the Senate, where he immediately started campaigning for President. (Continued…)
Evan
posted 10/06/08 @ 4:10 AM EST
"However, during his truncated presidency, JFK accomplished very little on his legislative to-do list."
1. Prevent nuclear war during Cuban Missile Crisis
2. (Continued…)
Post a Comment