I think it's interesting that Sarah Palin is being criticized for some sort of perceived lack of experience. I would argue that she has more experience and is more qualified to be Commander in Chief than Obama.

Palin is the Chief Executive of an entire state. Obama never was chief executive of anything.

Palin is commander of the Alaska National Guard. Obama has no similar experience.

Palin is chair of the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission. Obama has no similar experience.

Palin is chair of the National Governors Association (NGA) Natural Resources Committee. Obama has no similar experience.

In fact, in the last 18 months while Palin was working on solutions to the energy problem Obama has been running for office.

Can anybody argue with a straight face that Obama's experience is substantially greater than Palin's?

I consider it to basically be a wash. Obama might have a very slight advantage since his experience was at a national level, but by contrast, he has no experience whatsoever in the executive branch while Palin does, both as governor and as Ethics Chair for the state Oil and Gas Commission (and the Dems are stupidly attacking her on this last point; she FOUGHT Big Oil on this ; more evidence that they're just flailing wildly to find something to criticize with this candidate).


But the big, BIG difference. Palin is not at the top of the ticket. Obama is. His lack of experience (and they both have one, no doubt) is more of an immediate issue and accentuated by that fact.


[edit on 29-8-2008 by vor78]

Mate with the current idea of solving the Oil crisis in US (Iraq) another rep. who are willing to sacrifice life and mother earth is not needed.. sry epic fail there..

Best Regards

Loke.

Can anyone argue that Palin's experience is greater than Biden's? I can.

Good move for Mclame, shinny apple for all the intellectuals...

Anyway, Obama has about seven years experience as a Illinois State Senator and been in the US Senate for about three years. So that's about ten years of government experience compared to Palin's three to four years of experience overall in Alaska. If you count her City Council career that's about eight years of experience, which is still less than Obamas.

So much for McCain preaching experience, now his running mate has even less experience than Obama.

[edit on 29-8-2008 by davion]

I don't believe she actually has any military experience. (someone please correct me if I am wrong) The possition comes as part of being the Governor of Alaska.

If you look at the numbers, the population of Alaska is about 20% of Chicago. And that's just one city in Illinois. Does that count?

reply to post by CeltAngel

---

True, but that sounds like you're discounting it. That's like saying that the President of the United States has no military experience despite being Commander-in-Chief. Granted, the responsibilities of the latter are much larger, but her role with the Alaska National Guard should not be immediately dismissed as just something that comes with the position.

When you're grasping for anything, yes.

reply to post by intrepid

---

On the flip side, Joe Biden hails from a state with about 30% of the population of Chicago. Both Alaska and Delaware have populations under 1 million.

Ahh, not at all! I'm sorry I came off that way. I read the original post more as a literal "she was in the military, he was not". I see your point and understand what the OP meant now

Except he has more overall government experience.

Lets do a campaign comparison, shall we?


John McCain: Elected to house of Representatives in 1982. He became a US senator in 1986 2008-1982 = 26 years experience

Sarah Palin : Elected Mayor of a small town (population: 5,470) In the year 1996. She remained mayor until she was elected Governor in 2006. 2008-1996 = 12 years experience.


The republican team has a combined total of 38 years of experience






Joe Biden : Became a senator in 1973. 2008 - 1973 = 35 years experience


Barack Obama : Became an Illinois Senator in 1997. 2008-1997 = 11 years experience.


The democratic team has a combined total of 46 years of experience

The different is 12 years between the two.



The Republican team offers 22 years of senatorial experience
The Democratic team offers 46 years of senatorial experience

The democrats offer more than twice the amount of senatorial experience

Now that the math is out there, and we use the GOP grading scale (that senate experience counts)


Which party has the most experience?

The choice is Clear


Obama/Biden 2008

[edit on 8/29/2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]

Running a state 20% of the size of Chicago is still more than the ZERO number of people that Obama has governed.

And what does Chicago have to do with this? Obama has never even run a small township, let alone an entire city. If Obama were the mayor of Chicago it might be a fair comparison, but he's not.

The difference between the executive branch and legislative branch is no small difference. Obama continually talks, like he did last night, about how HE will pay for all the programs he wants. Sorry, he will not pay for anything. We will. Somebody with the executive experience of being responsible for the entire state budget might not be so flippant about who is paying for what.

And besides, it's not Palin running against Obama. It's McCain, who has 30 years of experience vs. Obama's thin resume.

eeny, meeny, miny, moe i'll go with palin...yeah sure

reply to post by jamie83

---

Perhaps you can explain something for me, since i dont really understand flip flopping very well


First, Obama wasnt experienced enough as a senator. He didnt understand how to run things globablly because McCain had more experience


Now that biden has more experience than mccain


why is it that 2 yeras as an Alaskan governor (who by the way is under investigation ) make her more qualified than Obama?


Don't you realize that everyone see's you moving the goal post?

Whats next?

Obama doesnt have big enough hands to run the white house?
What if he has to push the button? Will his fingers be long enough?




Perhaps you can provide proof to back this claim/ Because everything i know of mccain says he doesnt have 30 years....

why is it that you have to lie to make mccain look better?

[edit on 8/29/2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]

reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin

---

I knew you would bring that up, since the Obama media has launched in to its attacks on his behalf. The problem is, you're all leaving out that its an investigation just to go through the motions.

She's "under investigation" because she fired the head of the Alaska State Troopers (as she can do, even the "watchdog" investigating her says that's kosher) because he wouldn't play ball on budget matters. Then some state trooper who threatened her sister, tazed a 10 year old and also threatened to kill her father filed a complaint saying that the head of the troopers was fired because he wouldn't fire this crazed, hosed up trooper.

Even the watchdog is like "It's cool, we just have to 'investigate' since this is retarded."

still waiting on that crazy little thing called proof

it takes proof to make an intelligent statement ... it takes an intelligent statement to become a credible talking head.

I just want to see the source from whence comes the numbers and statistics you use to create your argument.

Knowledge is power.

Help me become as smart as you....

Yes, that is still VERY true. McCain is far more experienced at many things than Obama.




Palin has experience being the Chief Executive of an entire state. Obama has zero experience managing anything. It's like comparing a consultant (Obama) with a CEO of a company.






You must have overlooked McCain's 28 years of experience in the Navy before he entered politics. See, unlike Obama, McCain had an entire career's worth of experience before he even decided to run for office. Obama's career IS running for office.




Andy, there are no lies here. If McCain never even ran for the Senate, his 28 years in the Navy would still dwarf Obama's experience as a community organizer, state senator, and U.S. senator.

The truth is Palin and Obama have comparable resumes, and I would argue that Palin's experience is more suited for Commander in Chief than Obama's.

This is about Palin vs. Obama in terms of experience. Do you have anything to add regarding Obama's resume that I've missed?