Today we have McCain taking up the same failed “experience counts” meme that helped defeat Hillary.

“Experience” = Washington fixture!

(McCain has other baggage as well.)

Look I’m running based on my record; my record of 35 years of making positive change for people.

”Nobody had a better track record in experience than Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, but they had bad judgment … The people who have been criticizing me over the past two weeks are the people who engineered what is the biggest foreign policy fiasco in a generation.”

Some still don’t get it that experience got trounced by change among Bush-weary Iowans. I believe that sentiment-yearning for change-pervades the country. And though Obama has not been my choice, I believe he will be honest with us and stand against the corruption that has disgusted so many voters.

But I don’t see a great deal of data to support the claim that prior experience is particularly useful.

Bush effectively had no prior experience but hired a bunch of really experienced people to guide him. Lot of good it did him. But it should also be noted that Bush used his ignorance of world affairs to gain popularity.

Clinton had no prior experience and hired a bunch of young turks to run the show. They had some missteps but made some sound choices.

HW Bush had 8 years under Reagan. His foreign policy was an extension of the Reagan years. Other than going after Noriega, a general waste of time, and moderate nuclear arms control agreement his 4 years can be summed up in “No new taxes. Oops. I mean after these”.

That brings us to Ronald Reagan. Reagan had virtually no foreign policy experience, like most new Presidents. He made some huge mistakes such as Lebanon and Iran-Contra. But he was able to keep his people on message and now he’s considered, by Conservatives, the man who toppled the USSR.

Carter’s failure are wildly overstated other than his failure in Iran. However that can’t be chalked up to inexperience as he was in office for over 3 years by the time that happened. Most of the other things he is branded with are more wrong place wrong time than poor policy ideas.

Nixon, lots of experience. Terrible President. Secret bombing campaigns. Price freezes. Other than talking with the Chinese I can’t think of one sound policy initiative of his(I don’t consider our leaving Vietnam his achievement).

It goes on and on. LBJ was experienced but a poor foreign policy president. JFK had none but a mixed result. Ike had lots of experience and did reasonably well but missed quite a few issues as well. Truman had very little and was effective.

So I would like to know how I am supposed to determine when someone’s experience or lack thereof is relevant. How does Hillary have relevant experience? Because of pillow talk with her husband? How does Rudy or Romney or anyone other than Richardson?

Please let me know.

I still think its a great day for America, however, because so many white Iowans of both parties were able to put race and ideology aside and go to bat for him.

http://maps.google.com/maps/mpl?moduleurl=http:%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fmapfiles%2Fmapplets%2Fiowacaucus%2Fiowacaucus.xml&ie=UTF8&ll=42.0656,-93.6914&spn=5.040111,5.493164&z=7&om=1

I also wonder if elections are going to become like the NBA draft where individuals are selected on potential instead of performance. Is Senator Obama the 18 kid leaving college early for the NBA before his weaknesses are discovered.

Bush was a knee jerk to Clinton. Obama will be a knee jerk to Bush….and this entire election will be about racial bigotry……..if you oppose Obama your a racist.

Just as we heard that if we opposed the last immigration bill we were Homophobes. The left is learning very well the power of labels.

For the next year anyone opposed to Obama is a racist white man with a hood and a burning cross.

I would VOTE for Obama if he had a clue. If he had 10 or 15 years of public service in which he was actually involved in something more then who gets the next beer license.

I watched a Peanut farmer from Georgia sweep into the White House on a promise of change and royally screw things up. I watched a former managing general partner of a baseball team and a couple year governor from Texas sweep into the White house with the promise of change and to be a uniter only to watch this country splinter.

I have seen this message over and over during my life time. Everyone promises to be the agent of change. Everyone lies about that. But as Shaun Mullen points out, if you can convince a bunch of the new voters who forgot to attend history during their school daze then once again we will get saddled with a clueless candidate who will be in WAAAAYYY over there head.

Bush was a knee jerk to Clinton. Obama will be a knee jerk to Bush….

The United States certainly has racial problems. But so does the rest of the world. And it seems to me that Obama is the first black person who can really appeal to both sides of the racial divide.

However this notion that white people need to come to grips with their racial demons is just downright absurd. Of course there are racists in America. But most people are not, by a good margin.