Presidential candidates should have experience
Experience is one of the themes that keep coming to the forefront of our presidential elections. Some say experience is a key factor, others say not. For most of us in America, when we apply for jobs, we must establish experience. Experience is key. I don't want a physician operating on me who does not have experience. I do not want a lawyer defending me if he or she does not have any experience.
But when it comes to filling the office of the president in this current election, some are saying experience is not necessary. Go figure! That's like telling the owners of a mom-and-pop store that they need no experience to run a Fortune 500 company, isn't it?
Well, all I can say is that if experience is not required to handle such issues as national security, balancing a budget, etc., then whoever becomes the next president of these United States had better surround himself or herself with some very experienced Cabinet members and advisers.
Barbara Brimmage
Greensboro
Comments (9)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Barbara, are you advocating a third term for W?...
:]
Posted on January 13, 2008 8:58 AM
So Barbara, who do you suggest? Do you have someone in mind, or are you just building a case against certain people?
You must admit, the job is the ultimate "step up". While in your example a mom and pop can't move to CEO, this job opening doesn't have the same criteria as a typical chief executive. If a company is looking for a CEO, the candidate pool often includes CEO's of other companies. But we can't exactly look at Tony Blair and Margaret Thatcher for this job.
The only people who meet your requirements are Bush I and Jimmy Carter, and they aren't running. Bush II and Bill Clinton have the experience you detail, but they are prohibitted from seeking the office. So incumbent with this job is the understanding that some amount of on-the-job training will be required. Clearly, if experience were the only criteria, Hillary Clinton would be the best choice. She knows where all the rooms are in the White House, and she'd have a definite leg up on some who have never spent any time there.
Posted on January 13, 2008 11:15 AM
`
We need someone who can forge relationships with the foreign governments that "W" has ignored---after all, this is a global economy and we never know which country we will be in debt up to our eyeballs, next time! We need a "fixer" for the next President, and then Barbara can go get her experienced President--wherever she thinks they exist! I pity the poor bloke who is elected--they will have the weight of the world on them, and will have a mess to clean up.
As to the points trying to be made, I believe some "mom & pop" business owners actually could be better CEO's of large corporations. Why? They are closer to the end user and they are less likely to demand exhorbitant pay packages that rape the coffers of public corporations.
`
Posted on January 13, 2008 11:22 AM
Hillary claims to have 8 years experience in the White House while Slick Willy was president.
Yeah? So did the pastry chef.
Posted on January 13, 2008 11:40 AM
Pastry chef -- good one 'cack.
Posted on January 13, 2008 1:18 PM
Perhaps we could sway the Presidents of Iran, Russia or Argentina to run for office here in the USA. I mean, hey, at least they've got experience...
Posted on January 14, 2008 12:05 AM
Oooh...so you are saying that W should not have been allowed to run since he had none of that experience when he was elected. As I recall, the Presidency was his first national office (the Rangers are American League :D ).
So, judging by HIS performance, you may be right :D.
I think the sort of experience the writer would require is not possible since no one in our government has experience balancing a budget. Nor do any of the candidates have any sensible foreign policy plans or experience.
No one has experience being president until they are elected and of course they each intend to surround themselves with competent people, though clearly Bush surrounded himself with buffoons, dingbats, morons, whackos, nutjobs, liars and nincompoops. And Bowles was part of the Clinton Clan. Then again, that seems to be the sort of people who have "experience." I think we need some outsiders and it does not look like we're going to get any choice. Everyone running with a chance of election is a hand-picked special interest group representative.
I had to laugh out loud at jcackbar's witty observation.
This LTE was a summary of the text from McCain's talking points despite his lack of foreign policy experience, so how about equal time, N&R?
Posted on January 14, 2008 10:57 AM
`
Yep! Another GOP letter disguised as something else.
Check this out for the GOP playbook---one that hooks nitpicker everytime!!!
http://www.newsweek.com/id/86280
Oh, I'm sure Danny would say claim that Lee Atwater and Karl Rove are just good Americans...LOL!!
`
Posted on January 14, 2008 11:07 AM
Oh, please don't confuse me for a Democrat, I am not a member of any party. When a party is formed to represent the people, I will be first in line.
Posted on January 14, 2008 2:20 PM