Tucker Carlson, attempting to make a case for the retention of Jim Johnson as an official Obama Veep-Vetter, revealed a perplexing gap in his knowledge of Presidential history. See, Carlson was glad to see Obama put Johnson to use because, "Barack Obama has the thinnest resume of any modern presidential candidate with a shot of actually winning."
It seems odd (puzzling even...this is not the Tucker Carlson we knew!) that Carlson is not aware of the career of Ronald Reagan, who served as the President of the United States from 1981-1989, despite having only eight years of government experience - three fewer than Obama - on his "resume." Similarly, 20th century Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson had a "shot at winning," and did, indeed, win the Presidency, despite having thinner resumes than Obama (Wilson, for example, served a single two-year term as the Governor of New Jersey prior to becoming President).
Of course, for a fitting argument against thin resumes one need only make a visit to the White House, whose current resident has compounded the inadequacies of his thin legislative record with a confounding tendency to accrue competence at a disproportionate rate to his gains in experience. Meanwhile, we have John McCain, whose own quarter-century of experience has somehow failed to inform him of the need to arrest or reverse the current downward trajectory of our national handbasket.
CARLSON: I'm the only person in America who feels this way. I want people like Jim Johnson around Barack Obama. Barack Obama has the thinnest resume of any modern Presidential candidate with a shot at actually winning. Very talented. not much experience. You want people who know how the government actually works - who know how Washington works.