But that comes from having incredibly little political experience.
Exactly. Guaranteed she's just been memorizing a bunch of facts for the past week...I do say that I was surprised she came off so strongly at all, at any point during the debate. I was prepared to hear more "In what respect, Charlie?" talk.
But she seems to be less familiar with most of the topics. But that comes from having incredibly little political experience.
What do you mean unfamiliar? Seriously? Of course she is familiar. prove to me she is not.
And she definitely does have political experience, she ash more than Obama. She is the fricking governor of the biggest sate, and that state is currently very key to the global warming situation. She has to make lots of decisions, and handle lots of thing. She most definitely does have experience. You liberals are so arrogant.
THe largest state, in terms of geographical area. Which is not necessarily insignificant but by no means would be the same as, say, governing the state with the largest population (California),or the state with the highest pop. Density (New Jersey). The phrase "largest state" as it has been bandied about in regards to Palin, is absolutely meaningless.
Besides all of that, I find Obama's history of working in community renovations efforts more important and potentially valuable than Palin's gubernatorial experience.
Also, the complete lack of ability to name a single Supreme Court case other than Roe V. Wade (per her recent interviews) in the entire history of the United States is appalling. Like many Americans, I can't name many by name (a sad statement on our current educational system). But Brown V. Board of Education is one that every school child knows.
Uh, not sure where the attempt to insult is coming from. I've told people that Obama doesn't have a lot of experience either. I'm not going to say he does when it's honestly not true just because I like him. That's hypocrisy.
And she definitely does have political experience, she ash more than Obama. She is the fricking governor of the biggest sate,
Alaska is at number 47 for population. Granted it's the biggest state but it has less people then my state of NH which is tiny. Not sure why the size of the state has anything to do with political experience. Especially when your other job is mayor of somewhere, Alaska.
and that state is currently very key to the global warming situation.
Republicans don't believe in Global warming. Sarah Palin actually talked about that in the debate. Either way how would Alaska be "key" to global warming?
She has to make lots of decisions, and handle lots of thing. She most definitely does have experience.
How so? I'm asking since all I know is that she hasn't done much politically. She answers questions in a way that makes it seem she knows nothing. And she honestly believes she has foreign policy experience because Alaska is close to Russia and they use our airspace! Obama was least a senator. The resume of mayor then governor does not equal massive political experience.
I agree with Kris about the experience thing...We (democrats) can't really argue that Obama has more experience than Palin, considering that they both have been in office for about the same amount of time.
However, Obama actually has a political background (Degree from Harvard, taught constitutional law for 12 years). While Palin, however, was a sportscaster, with a bachelors in journalism.
Also, I think Obama's work as a community organizer is more meaningful. He didn't have to help all those people in Chicago; he could have taken a high-paying job in a law firm and retired early. But, no, he put himself out there to help the people.
Also, I think Obama's work as a community organizer is more meaningful. He didn't have to help all those people in Chicago; he could have taken a high-paying job in a law firm and retired early. But, no, he put himself out there to help the people.
Word. Not to mention the traveling he did with his mom as a kid. Screw "foreign policy" experience; he's actually been there.
Palin actually said something in one of her freak show media spots that was both profoundly ironic (given that she's criticized Obama for having less experience than herself) and, I hate to say it, but somewhat representative of my take on the "experience" criticisms at large. I don't have the specific wording handy but it basically amounted to maybe what Washington needs is actually a little less experience. THe intended meaning at the time was obvious; the old Washington insider type of critique. It's a sentiment that, taken at face value, I can't say I entirely disagree with.
I think experiences in general in life are important (thus my appreciation of Obama's background and for that Matter much of McCain's though I disagree with him on just about everything). But "Political Experience" and "Executive Experience," not necessarily so much, depending on the candidate in question. The second one is just another of this year's catch phrases anyway, much like Maverick, it's meaningless.
Lol, to be a Maverick, I guess you have to be involved in corporate scandals and hold your own committee members up against the wall while yelling at them. Am I correct?
To be a president I do believe some experience is needed. Do we want someone who knows how to talk to foreign dignitaries or someone who is picking it up as they go along. That's probably not the best example, I admit, but people work their way up to promotions for a reason.
We don't pick the kid from the mailroom to be president of the company just because he claims being able to see the owners car out the window gives him experience in leadership.
I don't think lack of experience should disqualify someone for a job. But lack of experience is not something to tout as a plus for your campaign.
