Experienced Applicants Only

It’s not Iraq, or Darfur, not the price of gas, or global warming: as we begin the last two years of the George W. Bush Presidency, the most important issue facing our country is the experience, or lack thereof, of our next President.

As I write this I am watching President Bush conduct a news conference and I am filled with conflicting emotions.
One part of me despairs at our President’s obvious inability – six years after his original election, to communicate clearly on the important issues of our time.
Another part of me cannot help but like the man – and sympathize with his predicament.
Asked to explain inconsistencies in the manner in which his administration is pursuing the war in Iraq, he stammers, fidgets, and seems about to drown in his own tormented rhetoric.
When no one throws him a life-line, like a student surprised by being called on by the teacher, he makes a joke: when that breaks the tension, he makes another. It’s the highlight of the news conference.
There was a movie, recently, about a comedian elected President: look for it soon, on DVD.
Unfortunately, the American people can’t do the same: its experiences like this, which make a Parliamentary system look very appealing.
But my point is not that we should remove him from office but, rather, that he never should have been elected in the first place.
Even President Bush’s most ardent opponents – myself included, would have to admit, by now, that he’s a nice guy. If a group of friends were arguing over what to do on a Saturday night, George would be the ‘decider’.
Even his most ardent supporters would have to admit – by now, that he doesn’t have what it takes to be President, and see that, after 9-11, his lack of experience made him an intellectual captive of his more experienced White House advisors.
It wasn’t just 9-11 either. It wasn’t just Iraq. On almost every serious issue that he has faced, President Bush’ lack of experience has cost us dearly.
Without a world view, he assessed Russian President Vladimir Putin on a personal basis, and concluded they could be ‘buds’. Today Putin rules Russia like a 13th Century Tsar, assassinating opponents, intimidating neighbors, and arming our adversaries.
With a misguided sense of where his personal and public lives could, or should intersect, he allowed religions zealots to suppress American scientific and medical research.
Most importantly, without real executive experience – and I am including his so-called ‘ownership’ of the Texas Rangers, and his several failed oil businesses, he was forced to rely for advice on Vice President Cheney.
Vice President Cheney may be the single strongest argument for making experience the greatest factor in choosing who is elected President.
No one votes for Vice President, the pundits say: but perhaps we all now understand that, when you vote for someone with little or no experience, you are in effect voting to give great power to those around them.
Very few Americans had even heard the names Pearle, Wolfowitz, Libby or Bolton before President Bush was elected. But they know them now, and regret having made their acquaintance.
It’s no excuse. Call him what you will - the ‘decider’, the ‘commander in chief’, W or Shrub, he may not know what he is doing, but he is the President.
He may not accept the buck, but it’s stuck to his desk.
And we elected him.
Senators and Congressmen have begun to call the Iraq War one of the greatest foreign policy blunders in the history of this country, but I think it pales in comparison to the blunder in 2000: President Bush’s election.
American’s are taught from childhood that ‘anyone’ can be President, but we need to realize that not everyone should have that opportunity.
Can we at least have some minimum standards?
Can those who seek the Presidency, at the very least, be able to say that they have dedicated their lives to the service of others: their lives, not the last two years, or a summer internship with one of dad’s contributors.
As young man – the record indicates, President Bush showed no interest in public service of any kind. He was ‘born again’ in religion, and in politics, and so came in to the White House with all the ignorance and fervor of the recently converted.
America cannot be governed by faith alone.
Lord knows they have tried, for six years, and it has been a disaster.
Would it really have been any different, if someone else were President?
Republicans like to ridicule Al Gore – but their attacks are usually based on personality, not capability.
Would an ‘official’ Gore Presidency have kept the planes from crashing in to the towers on September 11th? Probably not.
But there is a high likelihood that a Gore Presidency would have resulted in the defeat of the Taliban, and the capture or death of Osama.
Would a Gore Presidency have prevented the collapse of Enron and the loss of its employees’ retirement funds? Probably not.
But there is a high likelihood that it would have saved the American people the billions wasted on overpriced gasoline - because of a more stable oil market (with no Iraq war), and have put America far ahead in the research in to the causes and cures of Global warming.
Would a Gore Presidency have been able to end the suffering of the people of Darfur? Yes.
With America able to commit more resources, and unafraid to do so because it was not already spending half a trillion dollars, bogged down in Iraq, Darfur’s pleas for help would not have gone unanswered.
I am not announcing my support for Al Gore.
I am simply questioning the rationale that says that ‘anyone’ can be President.
I am questioning as well, assertions like Barack Obamas – whom I admire, that all you need is enough experience to know things must change.
You don’t have to be a Senator to know that.
Anyone can be a critic.
But it takes a mixture of superior intellectual skills, years of hands-on experience, and demonstrated commitment, to lead – at any level.
Shouldn’t our President have an excess of those qualities and experience?
Don’t you want a President who can both speak from the heart, and make himself understood?
Don’t you want a President who takes the job seriously, even before things go wrong?
Don’t you want a President who doesn’t need on the job training?
It’s not Iraq, or Darfur, not the price of gas, or global warming: the big issue facing America today is where to find someone who has what it takes to be President.