Previous Experience (Not) Required: Who is Really Qualified to Be President?

One of the unifying themes of last week's speeches at the Republican National Convention seemed to be that Barack Obama lacks the experience necessary to be an effective president. While both campaigns are guilty of making these kinds of lowbrow claims that detract from the real issues, I have a particular problem with this one. I began to take issue with this argument a few months ago after hearing "yeah but Barack Obama has no experience" for the 93^rd consecutive work day during one of the many daily arguments between two people in my office. Up to this point I had silently supported my right-leaning coworker, only occasionally interjecting my opinion on free trade or taxes into their generally repetitive debates. But it was on this one day in particular, after listening to some relatively well thought out arguments for Barack's policies met with the standard 'lack of experience' response, that I truly began to question the validity of this argument. Although I didn't agree with the Obama advocate's views, I began to share his frustration with the McCain follower's lack of creativity and insight in his responses. I found myself questioning what qualifications were really necessary to be the President and what experiences would adequately prepare someone for such a role. The realization that I eventually came to was that the role of the American President is an extraordinarily unique position that nobody is truly prepared for. It is absolutely absurd to try to equate experience as a Senator, community organizer, or mayor of a small Alaskan town to that of the American President. For any candidate to argue that their previous experience adequately prepares them to be the leader of the free world is ignorant and an insult to the intelligence of the American people. Of course I kept this thought to myself and I secretly hoped that the two campaigns (and my coworkers) would eventually move on to debate more important and legitimate issues.

Unfortunately for me, and the American people, this argument was made with renewed intensity by a tag team of speakers at last week's RNC. I winced as I listened to Rudy Giuliani (my former Presidential Candidate of choice) declare that Obama has "never had to lead people in crisis", hoping no one else pick up on the irony of this statement coming from someone whose only experience leading people in crisis came after he was elected to office. Giuliani certainly had no experience dealing with large scale terrorist attacks before he was elected Mayor of New York and his success in leading New York through 9/11 should only further prove that it is a person's character and presence of mind that are the keys to leading in a crisis, not previous experience. Hillary Clinton made similar claims during the primaries implying that her experience as a Senator and as someone who once lived in the White House made her more prepared to answer the phone at 3 a.m. to deal with national crises. Maybe things have changed since I took U.S. Government in high school but it has always been my understanding that the Pentagon isn't in the business of consulting first ladies or Senators from New York when dealing with national security issues in the middle of the night, so I don't think her argument carried any weight either.

Sarah Palin chose to continue this ridiculous argument when it was her turn to speak at the RNC and she did so in a rather poor fashion. While she was trying to prove that her experience as a leader outweighed Barack Obama's, to me it displayed poor character when she said "I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a 'community organizer,' except that you have actual responsibilities." Not only did this come off as petty and childish, but it was an insult to thousands of community leaders and volunteers across the country. She managed to trivialize the work of people who have given themselves the responsibility of improving their own community. I tried to rationalize her statement by telling myself that she was only trying to illustrate her proven experience as a leader, until I learned that during Palin's time as mayor most of the responsibilities for running the city were assigned to a city manager. In many towns, like my own, the mayor is simply a figure head that cuts ribbons at store openings and shakes hands with residents while the real responsibility lies with administrators. She should know better than to insult well intentioned people while boasting about her "real responsibilities" as the mayor of a 5000 resident town.

If we absolutely must debate about experience (and we really do not), I don't think the argument can be made that Barack Obama isn't qualified. If voting for the president were like selecting a candidate for any normal job where we were forced to view resumes and nothing else, Obama's credentials would stand up very well. He has a B.A. from Columbia University and graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law. Beyond his work as a community organizer, he spent 12 years teaching constitutional law at the University of Chicago while practicing at a firm specializing in civil rights and economic development. That seems to me like the type of resume one would search for when looking to hire the top lawmaker in the land. I bring this up not in an effort to support or defend Obama but in a plea to everyone (especially in my office) to drop this argument about experience because it has no merit.

So if no one is really prepared for the job of President how are we supposed to choose our candidate? The answer is simple: stick to the real issues at hand. Determine what is most important to you and find the candidate that is most closely aligned with those values. Ignore the attempts by both parties to play to the lowest common denominator and make a decision based on issues that matter. I'm so tired of hearing that Barack Obama has no experience or that John McCain is George W. Bush II. These kinds of arguments make the people they come from sound ignorant and uninformed. If you're going to burden the people around you with your political views at least come up with some intelligent and insightful thoughts; that way, even if people don't agree with you they won't think you're an idiot.

Sources:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/03/rnc.day/index.html

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/an-wasillan-on.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrack_Obama