A debate about experience

In the contest between John McCain and Barack Obama, nobody is confused about which candidate has experience and qualifications for the job of president. Two recent developments have brought the
issue of preparedness to the forefront. And the truth is that, of the four major party candidates, Obama is the least experienced.

And as senator and former Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Lieberman said Tuesday night, “Sen. Obama is a gifted and eloquent young man who can do great things for our country in the
years ahead. But eloquence is no substitute for a record — not in these tough times.”

First, Obama picked Senator Joe Biden as his vice presidential partner, saying Biden was ready to step into office on day one if necessary. This of course begs the question — is Obama ready to step
into the office, or should we just let Biden have the chair? It didn’t help that Obama mistakenly introduced Biden as “the next president.”

Biden’s choice was interesting, given that virtually no Democrat wanted Biden as president when he ran for the office. While Hillary was getting over 17 million votes from her fellow Democrats, Biden quit
without picking up a single delegate.

But Obama needed somebody on the ticket who seemed prepared for the job, and Biden was his choice. Biden of course didn’t feel the same way about Obama. During the primary, Biden argued that
Obama was ill-prepared for the job, saying “I think he can be ready, but right now I don’t believe he is. The presidency is not something that lends itself to on-the-job-training.”

Then McCain chose Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate. Now, Palin was hardly the most experienced candidate McCain could have chosen. But how was Obama, a neophyte in his own right,
going to make the argument?

It turns out, rather badly. Anderson Cooper on CNN asked Obama how his “experience” matched up with Palin. It’s more than a bit embarrassing when the presidential nominee gets compared to the
other party’s vice presidential pick.

Obama responded with the bizarre argument that running a campaign was “executive experience” for the presidency. “My understanding is that Gov. Palin’s town, Wasilla, has I think 50 employees.
We’ve got 2500 in this campaign.”

Of course, Governor Palin leads Alaska, not just Wasilla. Alaska has over 25,000 employees, and a budget quite a bit larger than the Obama campaign. Worse, Obama doesn’t actually run his
campaign — his campaign manager does. So essentially Obama argued his campaign manager was qualified to be president — maybe more qualified than Obama.

Governor Palin has eight years of executive experience, while Obama has none. Palin ran a business, Obama didn’t. Palin has been in public office longer than Obama. Palin took on her party, Obama
has not.

Of course, Obama comes out even worse compared to McCain. McCain served in the military, Obama didn’t. McCain was a Representative as well as having two decades of Senate experience to
Obama’s 3 years. McCain has two presidential campaigns to Obama’s one.

Now, Joe Biden certainly has more experience in Washington than Governor Palin. He has been there forever. But Biden has never served in an executive position. He’s never had to make the decisions —he’s just been one vote among 100.

The Democrats like to make fun of Wasilla for its population of about 10,000. But that’s about as many people as voted for Biden in the Democratic primary. They ignore that Palin is governor of Alaska,
with a population of over 670,000 people. Biden is just one of two Senators representing Delaware’s population of about 850,000. In 2002, Biden won his senate seat with 135,000 votes. In 2006, Palin won
the Governorship with 115,000 votes.

Others can argue whether Palin’s years of executive experience make her qualified. But when Obama tries to compare his “experience” to hers, he falls woefully short. Making speeches in a campaign
doesn’t compare to running a state with a multi-billion-dollar budget. Frankly, experience is secondary to understanding the issues and being able to get things done to fix what needs fixing. We’ve had
good presidents who had very little “experience” in public office.

But when a presidential candidate is reduced to arguing that simply running for president is what makes him qualified to be president, I think it’s fair to ask the question: “Why make that argument if you
have a better one?”

Charles Reichley has been a Prince William County resident since 1981. He can be reached at: critically thinking@msn.com.