posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 10:11 AM
Originally posted by kosmicjack
First, We disagree on the way the GOP has characterized Obama's leadership roles responsibilites AKA "executive experience" Secondly, we disagree
on how the GOP characterizes Palin's experience and third, we disagree that "executive experience" is the end-all-be-all to governing. I think
it's elitist to assume that prior management experience is the only measure of capabilty. It's a good indicator, yes, but to say otherwise would
lead to a world run by MBA's.
I never believed that the GOP's characterization was the issue, rather the ACTUAL experience of the candidate's overall. Believe me when I say I am
no GOP supporter - I am a die-hard Libertarian first! But you must agree, on it's face, Palin DOES have more experience governing from an executive
level - period. I cannot fathom how one could debate such a fact. Whether or not that translates into future performance remains to be seen.
My personal opinion is that we should be electing persons with NO political experience. In fact, I go so far as to say that term limits should be
enacted on ALL government service - from politicans down through civil service. Only the military should be exempt with the exception of top
commanders - who for obvious reasons should also have term limits placed upon them.
The primary problem with politics today is that these cretins become entrenched and then the graft begins. Take money out of politics and enforce
term limits and the problem will begin to resolve itself. This whole "Free Speech" nonsense is bullocks. Free speech allows people to express
their opinions publicly without recourse, however, buying elections hardly qualifies!
But I digress... On it's face, Palin certainly has more of the "Qualifications" requisite (By media standards) for an Executive position in the
Federal government - about that there is clearly no question.