What Exactly Are the Qualifications for Being President?

What Exactly Are the Qualifications for Being President? This story on the Huffington Post caught my attention this recently: Barbara Walters asks Oprah if Sarah Palin is qualified to be president and Oprah declines to answer.

Walters takes this as a “no” from Oprah. The Oprah has spoken.

I’m not exactly sure that Oprah is the person to ask regarding anyone’s qualifications to be president. She broke out of her apolitical shell to endorse Barack Obama, a man with very few qualifications. The one thing he is supposed to be is something really special … “the One” as Oprah called him. That may or may not be true, but does being “special” qualify one to be president?

He was awarded a law degree from Harvard. I respect that accomplishment. Not many people do that. What is the percentage of Americans who earn a law degree from an Ivy League school? I’d ballpark it around 0.0001%. Does that make somebody qualified to be president? It doesn’t disqualify a person, but it certainly doesn’t automatically confer upon someone the status of Grade A presidential timber. However, he’s in there, operating as president … because the American people elected him.

I applauded the election of Barack Obama as a historic moment in America’s history. As much as I was and am opposed to his worldview and policy positions, there was a part of me that was genuinely happy to see a black American get elected to the highest political position in the land and most prestigious executive position in the world. It meant a lot to many members of my family and my friends. For these reasons, I still like the fact that the man took office. I would be equally as titillated if Sarah Palin or even Hillary Clinton became president. In the America of identity politics–a natural, if unfortunate, outgrowth of America’s history–I have grown up learning to root for the little guy and women who operate in historically male fields. Heck, I even respect Barbara Walters and Oprah Winfrey for what they have accomplished. Who wouldn’t? It’s a little distressing that the same sentiment isn’t extended to all women who excel in America, especially somebody as accomplished as Sarah Palin.

Yes, I’m a product of the Sesame Street/identity politics generation through and through.

However, the general feeling on the street right now seems to be fiscal restraint and individual liberty. That’s libertarianism, and libertarianism doesn’t necessarily support the idea of applauding women merely because they are women or anyone merely due to their ethnicity.

The abandoning of identity politics will have to be the future mindset of America or we are moving down the wrong path. It’s not easy for the older academics who actually lived through the civil rights movement, or those educated by them, to accept that identity politics have outlived their usefulness. Diligence is now needed to maintain the juridical victories of the movement toward greater equality for all Americans, but running up the score by stealing bases and running deep posts when the game is well in hand is bound to ruffle feathers among those people who respect and support you. The victim card is now played much too often, belittling real instances of discrimination. The time has come to jettison our fixation on victimhood.

The libertarian philosophy currently has the ability to cut across identity politics in a more consistent way than no other party in America can. This is largely illuminated by the party’s utter irrelevance in national elections. The Libertarian candidate in the 2008 presidential race, Bob Barr, garnered less than one half of 1% of the popular vote. Ralph Nader got more votes. To be a libertarian often means you are operating on a pure political principle. Identity politics do not even enter the equation. Government spends too much and is generally in the way. It can be helpful in the short term, but damaging in the long term. Reduce the size of the behemoth and let us live our lives, please.

Thus is the libertarian mantra. We’re all equal under the law. Case closed.

I’ll go one step further: most people who are not very politically aware in this country, those who only pay attention a little bit here and there and who identify themselves as “liberal” really, in fact, are often times more aligned with libertarian philosophy than American liberalism. When told they are really libertarians, self-professed liberals will often nitpick on the irrelevance of labels, thereby missing an important distinction. Most people will not consider voting for a candidate who literally has no chance of winning. People want to win. If they are apathetic, they merely stay home.

The larger point here is that it is up to the American voters to decide who they want to be president based upon an educated, reasoned assessment of circumstances. Of course, anyone is welcome to speak as they wish, but I find the question posed to Winfrey by Walters to be absurd in the first place. The only person qualified to opine on who is qualified to be president would be a former or current president or perhaps a veep or Chief of Staff… and even then you just don’t know until the person gets in there.

Walters asking Winfrey the question is indicative of a troubling phenomenon, which is the exalted status we give to celebrities and their opinions. I’d gladly take a trip to Australia on Winfrey’s dime, but I couldn’t care less who she thinks would make a good president. I’m sure she’d reciprocate the sentiment. I’d respect Winfrey more had she replied, “I don’t want Palin to be president.”

The appropriate question for Walters to ask Winfrey would have been: “Can Sarah Palin be an effective president?” The Oprah, if honest, would have had to respond, “I don’t know.” That line of questioning is something the Palinphobes want to and will avoid.

Winfrey apparently believed Obama was qualified, yet I don’t know who could make a convincing case that Palin is less qualified now than Obama was then. I’d argue the exact opposite, based on the criteria that we outsiders employ. I could not predict how Palin would operate once in the office. In my estimation, Palin’s chances of success are just as high as anybody else’s. Any woman who juggles 5 kids and becomes governor of a state had got to have something special going on.

Predicting presidential success is about as sure a proposition as hitting 10 roulette numbers in a row, cashing in your chips, saying “How does this place stay in business?” and then retiring to the Caribbean. Jimmy Carter was considered sharp as a tack and Reagan was called a dolt. Look how that turned out.

Some would reject wholly that the president needs to be “special.” There can be “special” presidents, yes, but that status is only earned after actually achieving something special in office, not beforehand based upon trendy sentiment. Palin is considered “special” also, but this does not qualify her to be president. However, Palin is “special” is a way different than Obama: she is not part of the American political elite. Palin the outsider understands that in America, politicians should be servants of the people, not “special”, like kings and queens, or in present-day America, vapid celebrities better known for their brand than their accomplishments.

Obama can light up a room with his smile and rhetoric. So can Palin. Palin will dust a caribou from 150 yards. Obama boasts a J.D. from Harvard Law. Palin has a Bachelor’s degree and successfully juggles 5 kids and a busy lifestyle. Obama is in the most demanding job on earth. Inspiration, adventure, education, and practical knowledge are very essential things for human beings. These accomplishments all qualify for our attention.

The media’s general disdain for the organic Palin and fawning over the academic Obama has really created quite a backlash. We pedestrian Americans with everyday educations and experience start suspecting they don’t feel too highly of us. The thing about Palin is that she is college educated and she does all those primitive activities scorned by the elite. Palin represents an ideal that all Americans, not just women, should aspire to: self-sufficiency based partly on education but mostly on plain old pragmatism. They are both worthy.

For the benefit of America, the presidency of the early 21st century America should be dominated by people who most express the general ideals of American libertarianism and promote content of their character over identity politics, no matter with which of the two major parties they are aligned. The person right now who best fits that description and is poised to ride that wave is Sarah Palin.