"Executive" Experience and GOP Authoritarianism

[alcibiades_mystery]

As we all now know, the GOP line is - paradoxically given McCain's own Senatorial career - that Sarah Palin has more "executive experience" than Obama OR Joe Biden. It's worthwhile pursuing this claim for what it reveals about the republican mind. We know that for the last eight years, the Bush administration has proceeded as if the US Congress were an ancillary part of government, subservient and secondary to the primacy of the Executive. The real underlying assumption here is, of course, a theory of sovereignty derived from a (poor) reading of Hobbes: the State must be united under a strong Leader Figure: even the diversity of Congress (which is to say, democracy itself) leads to chaos and social weakness. This is the Bush Doctrine writ large: he fancies himself the Decider on all matters relevant to the State. His underlings can defy the Congress at will under the mantle of "Executive Privilege." It is, put simply, a theory of monarchy dressed up in "republican" (small 'R') clothing.

It is then, no mistake that "Executive" becomes the primary modifier for the term "experience" in the Republican mind. Even a small town mayor behaves more like an absolute monarch than does any member of Congress, including a Senator with 36 years of DEMOCRATIC, policy experience. The laughable claim that Palin is even more experienced than Joe Biden - a patent absurdity on its face - can only be understood in the context of the GOP's fetish for the authoritarian personality and autocratic rule. It can only be understood as a desire for absolute monarchical rights vested in the Executive - from war powers, to lettres de cachet (Guantanamo, etc.), arbitrary action free from any review or oversight by any body whatsoever. It is the Republican ideology at its purest, and we must reject it soundly. Anytime they say "executive experience," we must respond in two ways:

1) Focus on national policy experience rather than "executive" experience: the question is who has more knowledge to deal with the nation's issues, not who has more experience prancing about like a petty dictator. Palin's firing scandals and various weird behavior as both mayor and governor shows that she abuses her executive position. Haven't we had enough of that?

2) Tie the term "executive" to Bush's corrupt use of "Executive Privilege" and its autocratic root: Executive experience, eh? Does that mean she'll stock her government with political cronies and claim "executive privilege" anytime one of them breaks the law? Because that's what Bush did with his "executive" experience.

3) More executive experience? Yeah, so does this guy:


Executive experience does not equal sound policy judgment. We've all had terrible bosses who could claim to have more "executive" experience than a sitting Congressperson. That doesn't mean we want them running the country. Bush had "executive experience" too, and made "Executive privilege" a shield for all manner of corruption. So who would you rather have? Bush or Obama? If the answer is Obama, then "executive experience" is obviously not the most important thing.

[alcibiades_mystery]

1. Kick on news that Palin is claiming executive privilege just now

I guess I called it.

:-)

[applegrove]

2. Very true that freepers like authority figures. And very true that Palin

has 30 years less experience than Joe biden. Obama has varied experience as a legislator, teacher, editor, community organizer and executive of his two year multi-million dollar campaign. Palin has small town experience and that is all. She's a gimmick.