Th[e] argument seems a bit tautological: A candidate who runs for President has sufficient experience to be President because he ran for President. Any candidate who runs a successful campaign is qualified due to that success, and that a candidate's lack of experience will be cured if only we support him or her so they can campaign long enough to be qualified. It also suggests that any candidate that has not imploded by November is, ipso facto, qualified for the job.Last night I watched Part IV of John Adams on DVD. McCullough's portrayal of Washington is that of a man deeply sensible to his role in history, howbeit reluctant --he honestly did not want to be President. The man whispered when he took the oath of office because he did not want to seem proud (nb not just actor's prerogative, that's how it went down). Washington exhibited gravitas, a virtue sorely lacking in today's politics. To be qualified for President because one basically "wants" to be President --this would have been anathema.
Mojo Bison's Range
(Where
Unintended Consequences Roam)
"Horror of horrors, a historian who is not a progressive or a Democrat!
Will we never see the backside of him?" (Be careful what you wish...)
One man's musings on history, politics, education, recipes, and other
things (including the occasional paean to Manly Outdoor Pursuits)
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Why Does Campaign Experience Count?
The Volokh Conspiracy - Why Does Campaign Experience Count?:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Experience doesn't matter for President. It matters for Vice-President. Ask any Obama supporter.
For President, "Judgment > Experience". SRSLY.
Let's look at his judgment, shall we?
"I hope I shall always possess firmness and virtue enough to maintain what I consider the most enviable of all titles, the character of the Honest Man."
-George Washington
i find your blogs very fascinating.
Post a Comment