The question of experience hovers over this campaign and it should.

Congress is a great place to gain experience where hundreds of other Representatives or Senators dilute the opinions and judgement of an individual. The excesses of a McCarthy is reigned in, eventually.

But the president is much less constrained. He selects a cabinet with immense power. Our economy and our foreign affairs are very complicated. There is no substitute for experience and judgement; and lets face it, judgement contains some element of experience.

Big changes in tax rates, government programs such as health care and big shifts in foreign policy executed without experience and understanding can be be detrimental no matter how ‘brilliant’ the proponent.

Nothing should should be off the table when examining our candidates.

… but I did not have the ability.

It was a great title to a comedy book by Ron White, but it clearly applies to Sharon Stone.

Claiming the Chinese earthquake was karma for their actions in Tibet has now gotten her movies banned in China and Christian Dior products banned until they fired her.

Do we really need to make a political statement at the time of such a tregedy?

I have written a few postings on Obama’s idea of negotiating with rogue states without preconditions. Obama’s historical references are weak and if fully examined contradict his point. It is yet another case where one tries to substitute intelligence for experience and insight.

Charles Krauthammer adds his analyis.

May 23, 2008 12:00 AM
Gaffes Rule
The Obama Doctrine is to treat with America’s enemies.
By Charles Krauthammer

Excerpts

There are always contacts through back channels or intermediaries. Iran, for example, has engaged in five years of talks with our closest European allies and the International Atomic Energy Agency, to say nothing of the hundreds of official U.S. statements outlining exactly what we would give them in return for suspending uranium enrichment.

Obama pretends that while he is for such “engagement,” the cowboy Republicans oppose it. Another absurdity. No one is debating the need for contacts. The debate is over the stupidity of elevating rogue states and their tyrants, easing their isolation, and increasing their leverage by granting them unconditional meetings with the president of the world’s superpower.

As every seasoned diplomat knows, the danger of a summit is that it creates enormous pressure for results. And results require mutual concessions. That is why conditions and concessions are worked out in advance, not on the scene.

Internet blogs bring infinite opinions and some depth to the political process for those who seek it. It also brings endless YouTube clips of every gaffe from every candidate. While the abscence of ‘professional journalistic’ standards is also a liability, it seems that the quality of opinion still rises to the top.

What little I view on the TV and sometimes hear on radio seems to appeal more to rage than intellect. This is true of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, but even more to Keith Olbermann, Bill Maher, Arriana Huffington amongst others.

Fox, CNN and MSNBC replay and analyze every gaffe from Ferraro and Hillary for days. They focus on racism and sexism as if actual political stances are meaningless. I hear very little about actual positions and when they do it is with minimal depth or intent to truly understand.

Rage and dogma suppress thinking and understanding, and the media is more inclined to feed rage rather than promote understanding.

I honestly believe Americans in the red states and the blue states are ready for a black president, a woman president, a Jewish president, a hispanic president, even a Muslim president. Their history, their relationships, their character, their experience, and their principles and positions are what counts.

HKO