Kudos to Senator Hillary Clinton for bringing the word "experience" back into our lexicon. After all, it's refreshing to see a candidate campaign on their credentials rather than campaign on the idea of being a political innocent, as is the case with many Conservative politicians who have come and gone.
But Senator Clinton's use of the experience card is not only grossly exaggerated it smells of an individual who is historically challenged.
Senator Clinton's thesis is that Barack Obama is unqualified to be commander-in-chief because he isn't experienced enough to cross that threshold. 3 years in the Senate is insufficient. Trusting your future to a gentleman who's had 3 years in the Senate is almost as dangerous as trusting a man who showed such blatant incuriousity over matters concerning the world. I'm referring to our current President, Mr. Bush.
Well, Senator, if you and your acolytes bothered to read a history book, you would find out that the idea of which you're campaigning on is just plain wrong.
Allow me to list, in no particular order, the credentials of gentleman who once occupied the most powerful post in the world:
1 year in Congress.
11 years as a United States Senator, representing the State of Pennsylvania.
4 years as Secretary of State.
1 year as ambassador to Russia
3 years as ambassador to England.
The person I'm referring to is James Buchanan, the 15th President of the United States. A gentleman, who from beyond the grave has more credentials
and is highly qualified to be President that any of the 3 nominees running in this current cycle and highly qualified than any of our last 5 Presidents.
Yet, President Buchanan is widely considered to be one of the worst Presidents ever, and to quote Conservative Columnist George Will, Abraham Lincoln had an easy act to follow.
History has told us, some of our greatest Presidents lacked the supposed neccessary experience to become commander-in-chief.
Prior to winning the White House in 1932, Franklin Roosevelt only served 2 years in the New York State Senate and three years as Governor of New York.
Abraham Lincoln, served just one term as United States Congressman from Illinois.
Woodrow Wilson, two years as New Jersey Governor, and prior to that his highest level of executive experience was an 8-year tenure as President of Princeton University.
This isn't to suggest that Senator Barack Obama will indeed take his place among the greatest Presidents, should he in fact win the general on November 4th.
What this suggests is that Hillary Clinton's definition of experience is not what it seems to be.
Quite frankly, Senator Clinton's resume is almost as thin as Senator Obama's.
But to distance herself from that, the Junior Senator from New York is running on the successes and triumphs of her husband's administration.
Her Presidential campaign isn't a window to the future, it's a blast to the past. A manufactured reminder of how things used to be, before George W. Bush stole his way into the White House. Sure, the Clinton years will be remembered for its Peace and Prosperity, and quite frankly the last 2 years will also be remembered for the nightmare that was known as the Monica Lewinsky saga. Senator Clinton is playing off the good feelings that many people have of the 1990's, instead of offering real solutions. Her belief is that since a Clinton cleaned up a mess left from a Bush, that suddenly lighting can strike twice. The only problem with that theory is, George W. Bush will seriously leave this country completely fucked that not even Jesus Christ can clean up this garbage being left behind.
But Clinton's most ardent and arrogant supporters don't see it that way. To them, she can perform miracles, because her last name is "Clinton." Because she lived through the golden era known as the 90's, and that Barack Obama should take what it is being offered to him, even if it's scraps from the dinner table, like the Vice Presidency, or that political graveyard known as the Illinois Governor's mansion, or as feminist writer Erica Jong suggested, a spot as a Supreme Court Justice to counter Clarence Thomas. Thank you Ms. Jong. You proved to me that white Liberal racism still exists. My hats off to you!
To run on someone's resume shows two things: One, that you lack the creativity, judgment, and imagination to be President. And, two, you're really, really, and I do mean, REALLY, dangerous.
That might sound to some as exaggeration. That running on someone's resume isn't as dangerous as an individual showing blatant incuriosity of how the world actually works. I disagree, they both go hand in hand. With the exception that Senator Clinton is much more smarter than the current frat boy-in-chief.
As a nation living through the last 7 years of George W. Bush, we're due for a fresh start. A clean slate. We can't simply move forward by electing politicians who want to take us back to the past. We can't move forward into next decade, with a leader who's an artifact from a different era. There's too much at stake here and I don't think the Clintons and their surrogates realize that because everything is about them and the rest don't matter.