Barack Obama’s Experience — What Experience??
Barack Obama’s Experience — What Experience??
By Ken Eliasberg
Having looked at Obama’s “feisty” wife and given some preliminary attention to his racial concerns (with lots more to come), let’s look at the other quality he informed us that Republicans would examine as part of their “fear and smear” campaign — his experience, i.e. he’s “risky” (his words, not mine), and he is!! And here, like in our preliminary consideration of race, it is important to remind the reader that it was Democrats, not Republicans who first raised the experience question, i.e. his presidential eligibility. And, in doing so, they raised the subject in the context of his race, suggesting that he was being given favorable consideration because he was black. That is, contrary to most concepts of discrimination, Obama was not being unfavorably prejudiced by virtue of his race; rather he was being given favorable treatment because of it — treatment a member of another race with his qualifications would not receive. Geraldine Ferraro made this point, and her doing so resulted in her being thrown under the Clinton campaign bus. And, while she was attacked (and, as noted, unceremoniously dumped by the Clinton campaign) for crossing the line with this observation, she was merely acknowledging the obvious — it is only because Obama has become the great black hope that he is being given serious consideration with respect to his presidential ambitions. How do we know? Simple, never in the past has anyone with a resume as thin and undistinguished as Obama’s been given serious consideration for a position far less significant than that of the presidency.
As noted in a previous column I addressed Obama’s admonition to keep hands off his wife, his pastor, his race, and other areas where he is politically vulnerable. What might those be? Every area that you can think of, but, for purposes of this column, let’s just look at his “experience.” What experience you might inquire, if you are the curious type? Precisely my point — he has none. By way of jest, I received the following email from a friend.
“Executive Summary:
Some of us don’t like to read long drawn out missives, so here’s the executive summary.
CongressMilitary
John McCain28 years 22 years
Barack Obama143 days 0
Summary Concluded.”
And, as I have noted on previous occasions, many a true word is said in jest — and nowhere is that more true than in this brief missive. Once again, it is important to point out that this this accusation is not some Republican calumny; on the contrary it is a fact first publicized by some of his Democratic compatriots.
Another example would be Hillary Clinton’s observation that she had a lifetime of experience (with what to show for it, one might ask), John McCain had a lifetime of experience, and Barack Obama had a speech. And, in this observation she was absolutely correct. In a pointed Chris Matthews inquiry(and clearly biased, since it was obvious from the outset that Chris Matthews was a devoted Hillary supporter) directed to Obama supporter, Texas Democrat State Senator Kirk Watson, Matthews probed Watson for an example of Obama’s “experience.” The Senator seemed perplexed as he groped for the requested example. The inquiry, becoming somewhat more heated, turned into an interrogation as Matthews pressed the point. The Senator, looking increasingly more like he wished he was somewhere else, could not come up with the requested example. The entire episode can be found on the February 19, 2008 edition of the Huffington Post, under the title Chris Matthews Humiliates State Senator Kirk Watson On MSNBC. The Senator, understandably embarrassed by the inadequacy of his effort, sought to restore some measure of credibility to his defense of Obama by elaborating on his position (and poor defense thereof on the Matthews program) on his own website Kirk Watson.com on February 20, 2008 under the title MSNBC and Me. Frankly, while you are free to make your own determination as to the adequacy of Senator Watson’s explanation, I found it almost as inadequate (but no less revealing) as his effort on the Matthews show.
Another interesting illustration of Democratic discomfort with Obama was provided by Bill Clinton. When asked if he thought Obama was “qualified” to be President, he appeared to be choking on his response, offering up only the observation that no one is really qualified to be President (an observation whose fundamental truth is borne out by Clinton’s Presidency). If he was really on Obama’s bandwagon, I have to believe he could come up with something a bit more convincing.
Finally, if you watched the Democrat Convention, and observed some of the interviews conducted by pundits, e.g. Hannity & Colmes, you might have noticed that Michael Dukakis (former Governor of Massachusetts and Democrat candidate for President in 1988) and the current Governor of Montana, Brian Schweitzer, when asked for specific examples of an Obama accomplishment could come up with absolutely nothing — just the usual batch of clich