Barack Obama has some genuine strengths: He is good looking, he is unusually serene for a man so young, and he seems decent and straight-talking for a politician. Also he is a man comfortable in his own skin, which is refreshing coming after people like Bill Clinton and Al Gore who are still "growing up" in their fifties.
Obama's weakness is that he is inexperienced. This shows in his numerous naive and inane statements which I will be blogging about in the months to come. But what intrigues me is Obama's insinuation that experience doesn't matter. Whever Hillary chides Obama with inexperience Obama basically replies, "Look where experience has gotten us."
There is some truth in this. Abraham Lincoln had no experience and yet he became America's greatest president. Nixon was experienced and yet his presidency ended in disgrace. Reagan had limited experience and yet his two terms were a triumph. Hillary's own experience is mainly in screwing up.
But this historical record cuts both ways. Eisenhower's experience in foreign policy contributed to American power and prosperity in the 1950s. Jimmy Carter's inexperience resulted in American abandonment of the Shah of Iran and brought us the Ayatollah Khomeini. George H. W. Bush's experience helped assemble an international coalition that won the Gulf War. His son's inexperience led to some serious mistakes in the early period of the Iraq war.
Obama's non-sequitur is that experienced people have screwed up, therefore experience is irrelevant. Apply this reasoning to other areas and its absurdity becomes obvious. Consider the following extensions of Obama's argument: "The experienced CEO made a bad investment, so let's replace him with the least experienced guy at the company." "The skilled skater fell during the Olympic trials, so let's put a guy on a team who has never skated before." "The general made a flawed maneuver, so let's turn over the company to Pee Wee Herman."
The Lincoln analogy--which others have applied to Obama--is flawed. The 1860 election was a single-issue election and focused on a grand struggle that would determine what kind of country America would be. That single issue was slavery. Lincoln had been an anti-slavery man all his life and on this issue he was thoroughly experienced. He had addressed the slavery issue in a series of profound debates with Stephen Douglas, debates that are still studied in classrooms today. Lincoln was inexperienced on matters like the economy, but those issues didn't matter very much.
So what is Obama's great issue? Where are his profound meditations on it? These may be forthcoming, but so far we have seen no signs of it, and my sense is that with Obama, what we've seen is what there is. Perhaps Gertrude Stein's words are applicable: "There is no 'there' there."
Reader Comments ( Page 2 of 40)
16. brian and DD are doing the same thing, it is called character assassination. Both spend a lot of time and thought doing it. I imagine they think Jesus would be proud of how well they do it.
Jerry Brown at 2:17PM on Mar 5th 2008
17. What an astoundingly sexist thing to say.
Strados at 2:18PM on Mar 5th 2008
18. Strados; Bryan Leeds may have hit on why Dinesh will be focusing on Obama. His comments about The Sermon on the Mount and Romans are reflective of a wider movement within the Christian Churches that has recently taken root.
These more socially liberal Christians will be a major threat to people like Dinesh who seek to use christianity as a tool to control society. Especially now that the republican power is waning.
For them to lose both the political party and the church would be devestating.
Great for us though!!!!!
Ryan Anderson at 2:18PM on Mar 5th 2008
19. Experience should not be the be-all,end all in choosing who leads the U.S..Whoever gets the job in November would be inexperienced in the sense that he/she has never been the President before!
Let me add a name to the list of "inexperienced':JFK.He made mistakes,eg in handling Cuba,but he also got things right(Civil Rights,the space challenge,etc).So,let us be clear;inexperience should not be a barrier to being president,because all contenders for the job are INEXPERIENCED!
aniekan thomas at 2:24PM on Mar 5th 2008
20. Today Dinesh employed simple and meaningful reasoning, a great improvement over his other posts. At least in today's attempt to erode Obama he explores the relevant "experience" issue, rather than the "Hussein" one. I'm not a Dinesh fan, but I won't disagree with him for the sake of disagreeing with him.
Mokele-Mobembe at 2:21PM on Mar 5th 2008
21. Nancy, switch that comment around a little.
Imagine if I said I was voting for Hillary because she's white. That I'm doing it for my white family, my white friends, and all white people through history. You'd say I'm a horrible racist. So why isn't what you said horribly sexist?
AndrewV at 2:21PM on Mar 5th 2008
22. Sorry, but with one of the most "experienced" staffs in modern politics, (Cheyney, Rumsfeld, et al) and a stint as Governor, Obama's thoughts on experience hold water just fine with me.
And given that Homphobic God-Nazi's like D'Idiot and brian are so eager to rip their hairs out over Obama, all the more reason to vote for him.
Besides, another bloodthirsty warmonger like John "100 Years War" McCain is exactlry what we DON'T need more of.
Tim at 2:25PM on Mar 5th 2008
23. All anybody does is complain and show disdain for politicians and especially congressmen. So...when it comes to electing a president, why in the pluperfect hell do we use someone's experience as a politician and a congressman as the most important criteria???
Allrightythen....
Oh, and dd...nice understatement, saying that due to bush's inexperience, some mistakes were made in the early stages of the Iraq invasion...Yeah, like starting the damn thing in the first place! By your logic, we should have had a chimp then running the war, or perhaps Pee Wee Herman!
America's Most Gangsta at 2:59PM on Mar 5th 2008
24. By the way, dd, do you or any of your pseudo-intellectual buddies have any explanation as to how it was strategically sound to take out the enemy of our enemies.
Could Pee Wee Herman himself not have predicted the rise of Iran after the downfall of Iraq?? Did you??
America\\\'s Most Gangsta at 2:59PM on Mar 5th 2008
25. jerry,
good to hear from you!! the democrats have an old tired rhetoric. its worn out lines that exaccerbates my lack of patience for this drivel. i cannot vote for a democrat in good concious because in my mind its the party of death. its purely that simple to me. though i must say if any democrat wants to vote for death then vote democratic and i fully support your rights-fully. for me i cannot see hussien or hilary as viable leaders. hilary is a mean-sprited person. hussien is just hyperbole and talk. but he is personable which hilary is not
brian at 3:01PM on Mar 5th 2008
26. I wonder why the first positive attribute you list for Obama, is that he "is good looking".
This either shows how superficial you truly are, how envious you truly are, or how stupid you truly are. No other explanation is possible...unless of course you are gay and simply superficial.
America's Most Gangsta at 3:06PM on Mar 5th 2008
27. Vote Death '08
Mokele-Mobembe at 3:06PM on Mar 5th 2008
28. Amazing that brian can see democrats as the party of death, and I see republicans as the party of death.
Of course I am right.....
America's Most Gangsta at 3:09PM on Mar 5th 2008
29. brian; Please enlighten us as to why we are the party of death. It's idiotic, but I think I know why.
Also, what is the "worn out lines that exaccerbates [your] lack of patience for this drivel"?
You use a lot of words (incorrectly), but never really say much.
Ryan Anderson at 3:08PM on Mar 5th 2008
30. Obama's main issues are "hope" and "change".
Bob at 3:16PM on Mar 5th 2008