So there's been a lot of blathering on by the talking heads lately about which candicate, Sen. Obama or Sen. McCain, has more "experience" to be president. The argument goes that because McCain is as old as god and he was a POW he now has the experience to be president, while Obama, being just a young pup, doesn't know what he's doing (I know, I know -- it doesn't make any sense to me either).
I've got news for you folks: no one ever has just the right experience to be president except someone who has already been president.
I was reading a story on the McClatchy site today that said the Russia-Georgia conflict "is a reminder that Obama is a first-term U.S. senator with no diplomatic background, while McCain may have a longer resume, but also more of a taste for military action."
This gives rise to my question: exactly what "diplomatic background" does McCain have that Obama does not? Being tortured as a POW? Being hornswoggled by Ahmed Chalabi into invading Iraq when there was actually no reason to? I'm not sure the former qualifies as "diplomacy" and I think the latter would actually be a blemish on McCain's resume. So this is the meat of the argument. No matter how many years of public service someone might have, nor what branch of government they might have been in, they simply don't have the kind of "diplomatic experience" that a President will need to deal with other world leaders. No job can prepare a person for that except actually, you know, being president.
Keep this in mind the next time you hear McCain talk about his "experience." And also keep in mind that he will be 72 years old this month, and airline pilots have to retire at 60.
Categories: Democrats, Election Coverage, Republicans, worst. president. ever.