regardless of your political views.. MU

[ChicosBailBonds]

This isn't a shot at Walker or his political party, but do career politicians make anybody else nervous?

Hell yes it does.  It goes for both sides.  This is why I cringe so much at the current group in power....not a one of them has had to meet a payroll in their life.  Academics are fine, but why is it that through US history so many of the "intellectual elites" have been utter failures at the top job?  Not all of them, but a lot of them.  They seem to lack real world experience...to your point 2002.  We have all learned a hell of a lot more in the real world then anything we got through theory, class room training, etc.  The world is not a controlled environment, but too much of theory \ academia is.

[augoman]

well put, Chicos, I too get nervous w/ the plethora of lawyers-fresh-from-school turned politicians.  I don't know if the newly elected people will be able to actually do anything, but we may finally get the long promised'transparency'.

on a sadder note, we can also lay claim to Gwen Moore, and Lee Holloway.

[mugrad99]

but why is it that through US history so many of the "intellectual elites" have been utter failures at the top job?  Not all of them, but a lot of them. 

Trying to remember the last "intellectual elite" we had as a president.

[NavinRJohnson]

Trying to remember the last "intellectual elite" we had as a president.

I am one who refuses to use teal, but is that a serious comment?

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

I don't know...  Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln would probably be labelled "career politicians" these days.  I mean, if someone is *good* at his job, why shouldn't they be allowed to make a career of it?

I live in Indiana, and even though I generally fall on the Democratic side of the spectrum, I will vote for Richard Lugar in every election.  He's almost 80, and has held elected office since he was in his early 30s.  But he is very, very good at his job.

Fair point, I can't lump them all into 1 category.

My gut just tells me that some of these guys might get into the political machine because they are wide eyed and have good intentions.

Then they learn all of the political tricks of the trade, learn how to get re-elected, how to move up, the right committees, etc., and really all we are left with is more of the same tactics and thought processes by those in power.

Its kind of like promoting from within a failing company. Certainly the person getting promoted could be smart, and could be great. But, from a macro perspective, promoting people from within a failing company can't be a good idea in the long run. This goes for both parties as I find them equally distasteful.

(just for clarification, my viewpoint is skewed by disliking politics and politicians in general, and I'm willing to admit that bias... so I might be absolutely wrong.)

I've always been fond of independent candidates who made their careers elsewhere first... but quality independents are hard to find and even harder to get elected.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

I am one who refuses to use teal, but is that a serious comment?

Clinton was/is a Rhodes Scholar.

[NavinRJohnson]

Clinton was/is a Rhodes Scholar.

Agreed, but...you don't really need to look very hard to find the guy that may be the biggest elitist to ever hold the office.

[mugrad99]

I am one who refuses to use teal, but is that a serious comment?

He should have rephrased the comment, maybe  "self proclaimed intellectual elite"

[Coleman]

The only true "intellectual" we've had as president was Wilson, who held a Ph.D. in History from Johns Hopkins and was President of Princeton before being elected. Other than that, its been mostly lawyers and wealthy landowners (with an actor and a couple oil men thrown in there). I'll grant that Wilsonian idealism wasn't the greatest success in foreign relations, but that was only one aspect of his presidency. I'd say his legacy is a pretty mixed bag.

[Coleman]

oops

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Agreed, but...you don't really need to look very hard to find the guy that may be the biggest elitist to ever hold the office.

You're right, but I didn't want to get republicans here all fired up by saying something about W.

[NavinRJohnson]

You're right, but I didn't want to get republicans here all fired up by saying something about W.

Pretty good.

[augoman]

while W takes a lot of crap, he actually earned great grades, both under and post grad.

perhaps 'self-styled-intellectuals' would have been the proper phrase.

the shame is some of the best intentioned, truly good men have been abysmal presidents.

[GGGG]

I've always been fond of independent candidates who made their careers elsewhere first... but quality independents are hard to find and even harder to get elected.

The problem is, being an independent *candidate* is much easier than being an independent *office holder.*  The independent in Congress really has no leverage to get anything done. The independent governor has no allies. 

On the one hand I understand what Chicos is saying about having the experience outside of government, but on the other hand, knowing how the system works and building a network is so important in getting things done in government.  Iconoclasts rarely last long unless they adapt.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Trying to remember the last "intellectual elite" we had as a president.

Jimmah Carter was one.  Woodrow Wilson another. 

Clinton was one...he was a disaster the first two years until the last GOP revolution made him tack to the middle, which was the smartest thing he ever did.  It saved his presidency...I'd call him a successful president.



Conversely, we've had people in the top spot that the intellectual elites love to crap on that did just fine.  Harry Truman (didn't have a college degree, was a "simple judge"), Ronald Reagan and his Eureka College degree, etc.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

The problem is, being an independent *candidate* is much easier than being an independent *office holder.*  The independent in Congress really has no leverage to get anything done. The independent governor has no allies. 

On the one hand I understand what Chicos is saying about having the experience outside of government, but on the other hand, knowing how the system works and building a network is so important in getting things done in government.  Iconoclasts rarely last long unless they adapt.

Agree 100%, and therein lies the problem for me.

Committees and politics are great for keeping things the same, but rarely lead to progressive ideas and any sort of change.

Usually, it's a lot of talk about change, with everybody getting fired up, and then ultimately going with the idea that rocks the boat the least. It's not the best idea, or even an idea that will work. It's just whatever the politics will allow.

Also, in our current environment, it's a big no-no to talk about long term goals. People used to talk in generational terms, now it's just in election terms. If Walker can't move the needle in more jobs or lower taxes in his first term, people with run him out of office too. He might do a great job, but he won't have long to prove it. Same thing is happening with the current President.

If a politician actually gave a detailed, long-term vision about where they want America to be in 2020 (and actually mean it), people would laugh and him/her.

[Ari Gold]

Career politicians can be good and bad. On one hand you have congress people like Henry waxman who called his po box his in district residency. On the other you have career politicians like jim sensenbrenner. From September to July he travels to the district every weekend (no votes permitting) to hold town hall meetings and attend events to talk constituents. Even feingold had listening sessions in every county. Though given the results, he wasn't listening. Politcians that come back to their district more than once every 2 or 6 years for the summer before the election cycle are the problem. The ones that become part of th dc culture are a problem. The fact is, some career politicians can be good.

What is a bad idea for solving this problem is term limits. Rather I wouldnt mind an upper age cap on politicians. See strom Thurman or Robert byrd

[Ari Gold]

And of course congrats to Scott. (and ha! to badger Tom Barrett)

[mu_hilltopper]

This is funny.  Gene Moran weighs in from his home in Bangkok, Thailand.

[MUSig54]

The only true "intellectual" we've had as president was Wilson, who held a Ph.D. in History from Johns Hopkins and was President of Princeton before being elected.

No knock on Woodrow, but MDs and JDs are usually intellectual as well. They are all basically the same level of degree (Medical, Philosophy, and Juris Doctor). Granted doctors and lawyers usually take different routes than staying in academia other than teaching positions , which, depending on your definition of an intellectual may be the crux of your argument. But I would say that a majority of our presidents have been intellectuals.

Except for Millard Fillmore. Screw that guy.

[mu-rara]

The problem is, being an independent *candidate* is much easier than being an independent *office holder.*  The independent in Congress really has no leverage to get anything done. The independent governor has no allies. 

On the one hand I understand what Chicos is saying about having the experience outside of government, but on the other hand, knowing how the system works and building a network is so important in getting things done in government.  Iconoclasts rarely last long unless they adapt.

There is the rub.  Government rarely gets anything done.  Too many entrenched positions and too much institutional memory.  If we want gov't to function, we need term limits.

[Coleman]

No knock on Woodrow, but MDs and JDs are usually intellectual as well. They are all basically the same level of degree (Medical, Philosophy, and Juris Doctor). Granted doctors and lawyers usually take different routes than staying in academia other than teaching positions , which, depending on your definition of an intellectual may be the crux of your argument. But I would say that a majority of our presidents have been intellectuals.

Except for Millard Fillmore. Screw that guy.

Yeah this is probably semantics, but I don't consider lawyers or doctors intellectuals. I consider them working professionals and those degrees are professional degrees. That is in no way meant as a dig, just that the degrees are generally more practical in nature. I'm a history grad student right now and I feel like the atmosphere is way different than what someone probably gets at law school or med school. Our seminars are basically discussion of readings where we pick apart minute details in eachothers' interpretations and theoretical constructions of world systems and economics, etc. Coupled with this is the intense emphasis on original research and the expectation to get published quickly and often. I consider this the realm of the intellectual. Lawyers and doctors are being preparing for actual jobs and specific procedure.  The vast majority of MDs and JDs do not remain in academia (although some certainly do), whereas most Ph.Ds do.

I don't consider Clinton an intellectual anymore than I do any other lawyer. Yes, he was a Rhodes Scholar but he never even finished his graduate degree at Oxford. Jimmy Carter wasn't even close...he just had a bachelors degree from the Naval Academy...

Most of our presidents did not come from academia. I guess that's what I'm trying to say.  It takes more than just being intelligent and thoughtful (as most lawyers and doctors are) to be an intellectual. And yes, I know this came off as elitist. But Ph.Ds are a lot of work  

[Ari Gold]

I don't consider Clinton an intellectual anymore than I do any other lawyer. Yes, he was a Rhodes Scholar but he never even finished his graduate degree at Oxford. Jimmy Carter wasn't even close...he just had a bachelors degree from the Naval Academy...

Pretty sure his degree was in Nuclear Physics. he was a engineering officer on one of the first nuclear submarines

[GGGG]

There is the rub.  Government rarely gets anything done.  Too many entrenched positions and too much institutional memory.  If we want gov't to function, we need term limits.

I used to agree with this, but I no longer do.  I'm afraid that term-limits would only give special interests and bureaucracies more power. 

[Coleman]

Pretty sure his degree was in Nuclear Physics. he was a engineering officer on one of the first nuclear submarines

Ahhh did you even read my whole post? I'm not saying he wasn't smart. But a bachelors degree in nuclear physics doesn't make you an intellectual...