Has anyone noticed that what seems to unite the first politicians to declare their candidacy for the presidency is a total lack of experience in foreign policy. Indeed, such inexperience seems almost to be a qualification for the contemporary presidency which, since 1976 has been occupied for all but four years by a person with no foreign policy experience.

I also seem to remember the early debates between Bush and Al Gore featuring George Bush complaining that we were too involved internationally, and that our intervention in the Balkans was one example of a policy that he would not support.  Bush seemed destined at the time to become a "domestic affairs President", and he had the full support of his party in that effort.  But of course, 9/11 changed all that.  But does that mean that we need a president who has some sort of foreign policy credentials?

Do people still think that Ronald Reagan was terrible on foreign policy, despite having no experience in that arena prior to becoming President?  Perhaps we should ask Mikhail Gorbachev.  Then again, we also have an incoming head of the House Intelligence Committee who doesn't know who makes up al Qaeda.  But back to the requirements for being President.

I suppose one problem I have with requiring a President to have foreign policy experience, as suggested by Graber, is that nobody every specifies what type of experience would be applicable.  Would time spent on a foreign relations committee in Congress apply?  Ambassadorships?  Because frankly, I don't find either of those options to be palatable.  Senators and Congressmen, in my opinion, make terrible presidents.  You need executive experience to be a good President, and people who served in Congress think to much like a lawmaker, and a politician, to be a good President.  Ambassadors simply don't have enough experience period, to be a good President, especially if that's all they've ever done, which applies to the vast majority of people in the Ambassador pool.

More importantly, this type of requirement all but rules out one of the best pools of potential Presidents... Governors.  I think that the accomplishments of a large number of former Governor Presidents more than shows that someone who is a good executive, and has to mediate disputes between organizations, and legislatures can also help to mediate disputes between countries.