July 7, 2004
A POTENTIAL CHIEF EXECUTIVE WITH NO EXECUTIVE EXPERIENCE?:
Republicans Move Fast to Make Experience of Edwards an Issue (CARL HULSE and DAVID E. SANGER, July 7, 2004, NY Times)
At President Bush's first campaign stop in North Carolina on Wednesday morning, he was asked how Vice President Dick Cheney stacked up against the new Democratic vice-presidential candidate, who, the president was told, is already being described as "charming, engaging, a nimble campaigner, a populist and even sexy."Mr. Bush was ready with a one-liner: "Dick Cheney can be president."
With that sharp retort, Mr. Bush showed how aggressively Republicans were moving to expose what party leaders view as Senator John Edwards's greatest vulnerability: his lack of experience.
Indeed, here's a sobering thought: had Senator Edwards been President Bush's vice-presidential pick, he'd have been the least qualified member of his cabinet. Posted by Orrin Judd at July 7, 2004 11:57 PM
Chances are good he'd at least be in the middle of the pack of Kerry's (potential) cabinet.
Posted by: jsmith at July 8, 2004 12:15 AMHad Edwards been Bush's choice we would have been inundated by now with 48 hours of side-by-side news clips and analysis columns comparing this Bush's VP selection with his father's choice of Dan Quayle in 1988 (and the comparisons wouldn't be kind to the North Carolina senator).
Posted by: John at July 8, 2004 1:11 AMGo Read the transcript of John-boy's appearance on Charlie Rose the night of 9/11 that is posted on The Corner. It is proof that he shouldn't be running a Cub-Scout pack.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at July 8, 2004 1:55 AMLess qualified than Mineta?
Posted by: James Haney at July 8, 2004 2:41 AMWell how many years did Nixon have when he was picked as Ike's VP?
Posted by: M Ali Choudhury at July 8, 2004 4:52 AMGraduated third in his class at Duke Law School
Served ably in the South Pacific, rising to the rank of lieutenant commander
U.S. Representative from California 12th District, 1947-50
U.S. Senator from California 1950-53
Posted by: Chris B at July 8, 2004 7:46 AMIf the media (and the GOP) is doing it's job Edwards will be "Quayled" in short order. If not it will be more evidence of the media pumping for the Dems.
Posted by: AWW at July 8, 2004 8:39 AMAli:
The comparison is apt--Nixon, Harding, JFK, LBJ were some of our our worst presidents of the 20th Century.
Posted by: oj at July 8, 2004 8:55 AMMineta had been a cabinet secretary.
Posted by: oj at July 8, 2004 9:10 AMAs I was running the numbers on Mr. Edwards, I discovered something amusing: I am more qualified for the job than he is.
Posted by: Timothy at July 8, 2004 12:16 PMHarding is very underrated.
The guy was easily better than Clinton.
Posted by: M Ali Choudhury at July 8, 2004 12:24 PMAWW: You need more evidence? You are a hard man.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at July 8, 2004 12:50 PMMineta and Paige. And that Treasury secretary, what's his name?
Posted by: Harry Eagar at July 9, 2004 3:29 AMAll had more executive experience than the Trial Lawyer. There's a reason our legislators have been almost uniformly rotten presidents (Lincoln being the main exception).
Posted by: oj at July 9, 2004 8:51 AM