How many times have you heard during this election cycle that Trump does not have the "experience" to be President and Clinton does? Do you think that argument has merit? I don't and that is the basis of this blog.
Look at Obama's prior experience. He went to law school but never passed the required bar exam. How does graduating from law school give a person the experience to be President? Would it have been better if he had graduated from the top business school in the USA? Obama was elected to the Illinois state congress and then to the US Senate from a Democratically dominated Illinois. He voted "present" on many bills rather than revealing his true position on the bills. Obama never published his transcripts from college. Would you hire a person for an important job without those transcripts? In the case of Obama, it is not a question of "experience", it is one of if he was competent to be President. You have to ask why, after going to Harvard Law School, why he did not ever take the bar exam so that he could practice law. Officially, Obama was never a "lawyer". Exactly what was he? His wife got him the job of community organizer for the Black community in Chicago with her connections with Valarie Jarret.
How about Clinton? It took her two times before she could pass the bar exam. Exactly what kind of lawyer does that make her? She married a guy who became President. What if she married some one else who never became President? Would that make her less qualified? She got the job of Senator from New York because she married a prior Democratic President and ran in a state dominated by Jews, Blacks and Democrats. If she had been a Republican with those same qualifications, would she have been elected? The answer is "No". How did she get the job of Secretary of State? Was it based on experience?
It appears that if a totally unqualified person can just get that "first" job that from that point on they can claim to have "experience" and thus get a bigger and bigger job in a similar area. What I have found is that you have to first be "competent" and that alone is adequate preparation for most jobs. Look at our public school system where the worst teachers stay in teaching the longest. On the basis of "experience", you would expect that the teachers who have been in their jobs the longest would be the "best" ones, but that is not the case. It is like the person who was never good enough to get promoted and thus stays in their same jobs. Are they the best? We could do the same for football player. Is the oldest quarterback the best quarterback?
In my book, experience is much over rated. We need to look more at the basic competency of the person. We don't need more political types who can speak "PC" out of both sides of their mouths.
PS--In the case of Trump, he had to prove himself every day to keep his job to very competent people who sat directly across the table from him and playing with their own money. . Clinton, on the other hand, only had to prove herself to over 50% of the voters of New York and most were not playing with their own money. Once she had the job, it would be almost impossible to ever fire her. Holding public office is a lot less demanding than keeping a private "non-union" job!
Look at Obama's prior experience. He went to law school but never passed the required bar exam. How does graduating from law school give a person the experience to be President? Would it have been better if he had graduated from the top business school in the USA? Obama was elected to the Illinois state congress and then to the US Senate from a Democratically dominated Illinois. He voted "present" on many bills rather than revealing his true position on the bills. Obama never published his transcripts from college. Would you hire a person for an important job without those transcripts? In the case of Obama, it is not a question of "experience", it is one of if he was competent to be President. You have to ask why, after going to Harvard Law School, why he did not ever take the bar exam so that he could practice law. Officially, Obama was never a "lawyer". Exactly what was he? His wife got him the job of community organizer for the Black community in Chicago with her connections with Valarie Jarret.
How about Clinton? It took her two times before she could pass the bar exam. Exactly what kind of lawyer does that make her? She married a guy who became President. What if she married some one else who never became President? Would that make her less qualified? She got the job of Senator from New York because she married a prior Democratic President and ran in a state dominated by Jews, Blacks and Democrats. If she had been a Republican with those same qualifications, would she have been elected? The answer is "No". How did she get the job of Secretary of State? Was it based on experience?
It appears that if a totally unqualified person can just get that "first" job that from that point on they can claim to have "experience" and thus get a bigger and bigger job in a similar area. What I have found is that you have to first be "competent" and that alone is adequate preparation for most jobs. Look at our public school system where the worst teachers stay in teaching the longest. On the basis of "experience", you would expect that the teachers who have been in their jobs the longest would be the "best" ones, but that is not the case. It is like the person who was never good enough to get promoted and thus stays in their same jobs. Are they the best? We could do the same for football player. Is the oldest quarterback the best quarterback?
In my book, experience is much over rated. We need to look more at the basic competency of the person. We don't need more political types who can speak "PC" out of both sides of their mouths.
PS--In the case of Trump, he had to prove himself every day to keep his job to very competent people who sat directly across the table from him and playing with their own money. . Clinton, on the other hand, only had to prove herself to over 50% of the voters of New York and most were not playing with their own money. Once she had the job, it would be almost impossible to ever fire her. Holding public office is a lot less demanding than keeping a private "non-union" job!
