I'm not sure I agree with this. There are many things I have never personally experienced, but still have knowledge of. Just because a heart surgeon never had a heart attack does not mean the surgeon does not have a pretty solid understanding of what it's like to have a heart attack.
Moreover, what would be the solution? Only poor people, or people who were born poor can be President?
The main problem with Ivens, and with most liberals, is that they take it for granted that their philosophy is correct, and therefore never support any of their factual contentions, i.e., that this policy is hurting people, or that policy is hurting the environment.
I have never seen a column wherein Molly actually makes an intellegent point. All she ever does is make personal attacks. But, in her mind, she is making highly intelligent arguments. That is what is truly sad. The fact that we have an entire portion of america (liberals) who are unable to actually think through issues and come up with reasons to support and be against something. People like Ivens are bad for democracy because instead of having rational debates of the merits of a policy, they argue that their opponents are stupid and evil. Therefore, policy is not arrived at after it has been developed through rigorous debate and modification.
But there is a distinct difference. A heart surgeon might know how to fix a heart attack, but unless he personally had one, he wouldn't know what one feels like. Someone might know everything there is to know about 18th century sailing vessels, but until he climbs to the royal main in 25ft swells, he really hasn't experienced it.
Being born rich is something that totally effects one's view of life. (BTW, I hold nothing against people born rich. It's better to accept it than feel guilty and be a liberal a la Howard Dean). GW never had to eat hot dogs and PB&J sandwiches for two weeks straight when starting his business. He's never had to forgo an article of clothing or new toy because there wasn't enough money in the budget. He's never had to work two jobs to send his kids to private school.
President Bush has never experienced monetary want so he has a hard time relating to it. In that regard, she's right. But in this instance it's pretty stupid because while Ivan's (correctly) points out that Bush might not have a great idea what it's like to be a construction worker, he did push through a tax cut, something Ms. Ivans would no doubt criticize until the cows came home.
I'm not familiar enough with Ivan's writing to comment intelligently, but this DOES seem like the typical Bush Bashing piece.
I'm lukewarm on the President. I really like his stance in international affairs and almost seems Reaganesque in that regard, but it seems like the GOP has abandoned the concept of limited government with. I'll vote for him again as long as he does not reauthorize the AW ban.