We may not agree on how to measure judgment, but we at least should stick to facts
I’m fed up too. There is a misperception, exemplified by Steve Young’s letter to the editor (6/17/08), that Senator Barack Obama’s prior experience in government and judgement are inadequate. Inadequate by what standard? If we measure experience by the number of years served as state governor, state legislator, United States Legislator or Vice President, then Senator Obama’s 12 years of service in two of these capacities is more experience than such notable Presidents as Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and Ronald Reagan had at the time of their election not to mention such lesser Presidents as Grover Cleveland and William Taft. In fact, measured this way Senator Obama, if elected, would rank 19th out of 44 presidents in prior experience according to the St. Petersburg times (http://www.sptimes.com/2007/01/17/Worldandnation/Presidential_experien.shtml).
And if Senator Obama’s judgement is measured by his prior and continuing opposition to the train wreck that is the Iraq War, then I am satisfied.
I understand that there may not be universal agreement on how to measure prior experience and judgement, but I think we have a duty to at least attempt to base our opinions on facts.
Ivan Collier Manchester





Ivan Collier:
“I understand that there may not be universal agreement on how to measure prior experience and judgement, but I think we have a duty to at least attempt to base our opinions on facts.”
Experience can be measured in at least two ways. Obama’s 12 years could have been in progressively challenging executive functions preparing for supreme leadership or it could be in 10 years of the same Chicago political machine bag-man, day after day without any change of duties or responsibilities and two years of polishing his smile for loopy consumption. Base your opinions on that.