Why is Obama considered inexperienced?

[NJSecularist]

If he is elected as president, he will have served 11 years in elected office.

By comparision, Bill Clinton served 11 years in elected office. George W Bush served 5 years in elected office. Hillary Clinton will have served 8 years in elected office.

[ColbertWatcher]

1. It's code for his age. n/t

[Jed Dilligan]

4. Like "underqualified"

which has meant "black" for decades now.

[ColbertWatcher]

5. Yeah, could mean "woman" too. n/t

[bellasgrams]

23. It's not just his age. He hasn't done anything yet. He doesn't

do anything in the Senate and this is his 3rd yr. You never heard of him until he started running. He doesn't even show up for the committee he is supposed to chair.

[stillcool]

29. There is some reading material here...

from his time in the U.S. Senate...

Senator Obama has sponsored or co-sponsored 570 bills in the 109th and 110th Congress.

Senator Obama has sponsored or co-sponsored 15 bills that have become LAW since he joined the Senate in 2005.

Senator Obama has also introduced amendments to 50 bills, of which 16 were adopted by the Senate.

His record is in fact quite impressive for a junior Senator from Illinois.
Below I summarize Senator Obama's legislative record in the US Senate.

First I list the bills he sponsored that have become law.

Next I summarize the bills that he has sponsored or cosponsored since he became a US Senator in 2005.

I have only included major pieces of legislation and have not summarized continuing resolutions or naming post offices, for example.

His record suggests several priorities and the bills he supports address many of our most pressing problems.

Most of his legislative effort has been in the area of Energy Efficiency and Climate Change (25 bills), health care (21 bills) and public health (20 bills), consumer protection/labor (14 bills), the needs of Veterans and the Armed Forces (13 bills), Congressional Ethics and Accountability (12 bills), Foreign Policy (10 bills) Voting and Elections (9 bills), Education (7 bills), Hurricane Katrina Relief (6), the Environment (5 bills), Homeland Security (4 bills), and discrimination (4 bills).
***Lots more to read at the link***
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/2/21/164117/783/290/461422

[democrattotheend]

30. I think that's been debunked. But I have a few other good articles.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/03/AR2008010303303.html

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-01-16-obama-experience-cover_x.htm

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/01/16/politics/main3720763.shtml?source=RSSattr=Politics_3720763

[stillcool]

35. bummer...I didn't know that...

but thanks! I like that "Judge him by his Laws" piece, and I had not seen the others.
Here's an article from 1993...
http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/January-1993/Vote-of-Confidence/
and the Vanity Fair piece..
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/03/obama200803?printable=true¤tPage=all

[ColbertWatcher]

41. I said it's "code" for his age.

And I disagree that he hasn't "done anything yet".

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

2. Obama's experience doesn't count

[Mike Nelson]

3. I thought Bill Clinton served much more than 11 years...

huh?

[NJSecularist]

6. 13 if you include Attorney General. n/t

[depakid]

7. He's never run anything

and his legislative experience isn't particularly distinguished (basically, 2 years in the US Senate before he began running and fundraising).

Had Bush not lowered the bar, it's doubtful that anyone would have taken his candidacy seriously.

[backscatter712]

9. You forgot his seven years in the Illinois Senate.

I know you think that's mickey-mouse experience, but that body's been in existence for more than a century, and makes real laws and has real politics and everything!

You forgot to mention that Hillary hasn't run anything either... Except for running her own election campaign into the ground.

[Tim4319]

15. How about his years as a Civil Rights attorny and pro bono cases!

I know it is not work that can go on his resume as an elected official. But, it does put him in the position to interact with the working class people. He get to know the ins and outs of cases of the ordinary person, who has found themselves caught in a particular position, and the causes that put them there. I think that experience is just as important!

[backscatter712]

17. Good point! n/t

[NJSecularist]

10. What has Hillary Clinton ran?

She was a senator for 4 years. That's it.

Her "experience" isn't anything to write home about.

Would the American people take her candidacy seriously if it wasn't for Bush?

Obama has 11 years of experienced in elected office.

[AllentownJake]

13. Yeah

:sarcasm: Because Abe Lincoln, Woodrow Wilson, FDR, and Jimmy Carter were the models of experience

[Hugabear]

14. What exactly has Hillary run?

Eight years as First Lady, and several years in the Senate.

[bellasgrams]

25. She was a First Lady like in Eleanor Roosevelt, not like pickles.

She was involved in everyday business. If she hadn't married Bill she may have been president before now.

[Tim4319]

8. It's the "what ever sticks theory"!

If you notice, Obama non-supporters are constantly throwing things at him to see if it sticks! They will stop at nothing to try an derail him, but they only thing that is happening is, all of these issues are making him look more and more presidential!

[splat]

11. Obama who? Where'd he come from?

[KAZ]

12. What other meme are they going to run against?

Play the hand you're dealt, or bluff.

[MADem]

16. Being a state senator isn't like being on the national stage.

The depth and breadth of issues is not the same--the entire exercise is much smaller and more confined.

It's way harder to be a governor than it is to sit and vote on legislation. Yes, No, or Present, if you will.

And have your hack staffers, if you're disinclined, prep the legislation you put forward.

George Bush was an idiot, and his inexperience (TX is a "weak governor" state, where the governor has little actual power), even with former Congressman, SECDEF and WH Senior Staffer (in the Nixon and Ford Era) Cheney by his side, was bad fucking news.

Hillary Clinton, FWIW, is on her SECOND term. Senate terms are SIX years.

She's in YEAR EIGHT, not six, of her tenure. http://www.senate.gov/~clinton/about/biography/index.cfm

[Hugabear]

18. Abraham Lincoln wasn't very experienced either

But people start frothing at the mouth when you mention that fact. How dare you compare Obama to Lincoln! Lincoln was one of the best presidents EVER!

Of course, Lincoln's greatness came AFTER he was elected president. Can anyone on here name anything that Lincoln accomplished PRIOR to being elected president?

[madrchsod]

36. they had equal experience in public office and mistakes

lincoln had more legal experience where obama has more "social" service. lincoln had some military service and obama has none. otherwise they have about the same experience before lincoln went to the whitehouse

[Yupster]

40. The Lincoln - Douglas debates

were pretty famous even at the time.

I'm actually not a fan of Lincoln comparisons though.

His inexperience about Washington was a disaster to the country as he bungled his way to war. His behavior between November and March from election to inauguration was particularly ugly.

[mrcheerful]

19. It's BS talk for lets not vote for someone

because I'm a racists plain and simple. Remember 2000? * claimed he was a Washington unknown, he wasn't in the "Washington circle" an out sider. When Gore said * lacked experience, * said yep I'm not one of those career politicians from Washington. It wasn't a matter of experience, * told america experience was bad and they ate it up. Regardless of the hanky panky with the vote, the point is, * said experience bad, inexperience good. Enough people believed that and bought into the lie to give * enough votes to pull off the great theft of the century.

[BenDavid]

20. he's of two minds and conflicted..so much for sound judgement!

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jobycom]

22. Because he is. He's been a local politician and a local activist until three years ago.

His experience is local, and he was a legislator, not an executive. He's never born the full responsibility of a state, much less the nation.

Bill Clinton was governor 11 years in Arkansas, and many felt he wasn't qualified when he took office. As an executive, though, he had performed duties similar to what the presidency requires, though on a much lower level.

Bush wasn't qualified, either. He's been an abysmal failure, and he at least had five years as governor, plus exposure to national politics through his father. The Texas governor has very little power (though a lot of influence), so he wasn't tested as governor. Look at what a mistake he's been.

Hillary Clinton has spent seven (not six--she was elected in 2000 and re-elected in 06) years in federal office as a powerful senator. Before that she was a top cabinet-level advisor in the White House for eight years, where she held more power and higher duties than any previous presidential spouse. She performed the same duties in the Arkansas mansion for eleven years.

Plus, both Clintons and even Bush (I'm just using your examples) worked with campaigns and issues at the national level in addition to their elected and appointed roles. Hillary even in college was working on legal causes involving federal policy, including Watergate. None of that qualified her as president, but it shows a career of increasing responsibility in national politics throughout her lifetime. Obama has little if any such experience.

Compare Obama to other presidents. The others mentioned with little experience are Lincoln, Wilson, and FDR, and sometimes Reagan. Reagan was governor of California for eight years, and had been involved in national politics for years before he was elected president. FDR had been raised in a political family, and groomed for national office. He'd served in the cabinet of Woodrow Wilson, run for VP, and been governor of New York for four years. Lincoln had a lifetime of political involvement, though his only elected positions were local, except for two years in the US House. He had worked in Zackary Taylor's campaign, was offered the governorship of Oregon Territory, and refused so he could remain in Illinois, where he was a powerbroker and very powerful attorney for decades. In 1854 he joined the new Republican Party and helped create its success. His experience was outside of elected office, but it was impressive. And still many thought of him as inexperienced. Woodrow Wilson had only been governor of New Jersey for two years when he became president, but he had been president of Yale, and had been a renowned scholar on US government, having written definitive books on them. He also had a history of reforming institutions, from Yale to the New Jersey governship. He's about the least experienced president we've had, and he had mixed results. He opposed women's suffrage until it was passed in spite of him, and accomplished few of his reform goals. Helen Keller, who had campaigned for him, said he was a great disappointment at the end of his terms.

Even compared to Wilson and Lincoln, Obama's experience seems limited. He's dealt mainly with local and some state issues. He hasn't shown a strong progression of responsibility towards national government over his lifetime. When a candidate puts Law Review President on their resume, it's not a strong resume. Clinton was a study body president at Wellsley, was on the Yale Law Review board, had articles published in the Yale Law Review that were cited by other lawyers and academics, and did significant legal work as a law student, but people rarely mention that because her career afterwards has been more significant.

Also, to many, Obama sounds inexperienced. His statements on lobbyists and oil money, for instance, sound naive, as do his explanations of how he would handle different issues. He has good policy positions--the same as everyone else--but he gets vague when it comes to plans on how to enact them.

He's inexperienced. If you like him anyway, cool. Experience isn't everything. He could be a fast learner and a natural leader, combined with a late bloomer. I don't believe he is, but that's why we have elections. :)

[Lucinda]

24. Well...maybe it's the fact his state legislative work was a part-time gig

and he's been busy running for POTUS since about the one year mark in his senate term?
See: Lack of meetings in committee he chairs for further info.

[Neshanic]

26. Uh, because he is.

[stillcool]

27. because you say so?

[Neshanic]

28. Just answering the question.

[BzaDem]

31. Is my local town clerk, who has 30 years of elected experience, qualified to be POTUS?

[NJSecularist]

32. Is he a senator? n/t

[BzaDem]

33. If my local town clerk won an election against Alan Keyes to the US senate

and then ran for president one year later, would he be qualified then?

[NJSecularist]

34. There is a big difference between town clerk and state senator. n/t

[Hippo_Tron]

38. Depends on who your local town clerk is

IMO some of my professors would make better presidents than most of the people in congress.

[gear_head]

37. three years of service to country

along with no executive (for example, governor) experience,

[Hugabear]

39. Personally, I don't give a flying fuck about experience

I'd vote for anyone if they had good solid ideas, the ability to communicate those ideas, and the ability to work with people. I want a president who can INSPIRE people to greatness, not someone who is simply looking to climb the final rung on their political career.

Bush had experience. Cheney had experience. Rice has experience. McCain has experience. Strom Thurmond had PLENTY of experience, yet I would have never voted his sorry ass into the White House.