She was a city councilmember and mayor, of a town whose population is about the size of two Long Beach high schools. Also, being a two year governor of a state, that has fewer residents than most major American cities, hardly prepares you to serve as Vice President of the United States of America.

Juan: A VP need not have extensive national-level executive experience to effectively fill that seat.

As a candidate for President, on the other hand, Obama fails miserably in the area of national-level executive experience or, really, ANY executive experience for that matter. In fact, having served as a City Mayor and a State Governor, Ms. Palin actually has more executive level government experience than does Obama. That would be sort of funny were it not so sad!

Here’s a quote you might find of interest: “When is the last time we elected a president based on one year of service in the Senate before he started running?” Do you know who said that, Juan? Bill Clinton said it less than a year ago, the same Bill Clinton who, himself, ascended to the White House having previously been “just a Governor”. Bill and Hillary and many other Democrat party movers and shakers were all hyper-critical of Obama’s lack of executive level experience throughout the battle for the party nomination, and rightly so. But now they’re all scrambling to try to un-ring those bells in the interest of party unity. There’s really no way they can successfully do so but it’s extremely amusing to watch them try.

Here’s some additional information on point as reported in the Wall Street Journal:

As of July 2007, Obama, the Chairman of the "Senate Subcommittee on European and NATO Affairs", mind you, had never been to Afghanistan (a NATO mission) and had never even bothered to hold a single hearing of his sub-committee.

The sum total of Obama’s foreign affairs experience has been gained during a single week long tour of 7 nations. A tour he didn’t bother taking until he became the presumptive Democrat nominee.

You might argue a lot of things concerning the Republican ticket, Juan, but I’m thinking that the “experience” argument is a minefield you and any other critics would be well advised to avoid at all costs.

Sarah Palin is a slam-dunk victory for the Republican ticket. The Republicans are once again practicing their winning 20-year itch strategy: Choose a running mate that allows the president to upstage his running mate. Twenty years ago, George H.W. Bush chose the incompetent Dan Quayle to battle long-time veteran Lloyd Bentsen. Twenty years prior to that Nixon chose the ineffective Spiro Agnew to battle against a whale of a Senator, Edmund Muskie of Maine. Now neophyte Sarah Palin will debate long-time Senator Joe Biden, a former chair of both the Senate Foreign Affairs and Judiciary Committee. Hey, I'm a liberal Democrat! Who am I to argue with the Republicans' strategy of nothing succeeding like incompetence?

Frankenfeld: Tell me, in what race and in what party did the Presidential nominee ever NOT upstage his running mate?

I find it interesting that, in each past example, you site a Republican ticket that defeated the Democrat offering of the time. You cite both past examples as evidence of 'incompetence' yet, strangely enough, they somehow proved sufficiently competent to defeat the Democrats and win their respective elections.

Nor will you likely sell us on the idea that Ms. Palin is, to any degree, a 'neophyte'. She's neither a 'new convert' nor a 'novice'.

She's been in politics and government at the local, state AND interstate levels for some twenty years now. As previously mentioned, she has more executive level government experience as a V.P. candidate than does the Democrats offering for President.

Palin has a proven track record of protecting the environment, overhauling public education and safeguarding and improving public health.

By those standards Palin sounds like a liberal's dream come true except that while accomplishing the above she has also responsibly developed natural resources and enhanced fiscal responsibility.

The Republican and Democrat campaigns are going to be very fun to watch as McCain/Palin stay the public policy course they have each been following their entire political careers and Obama/Biden do their best to re-invent themselves so as to become more palatable to anyone who might listen.

I think the Democrats’ two biggest challenges are going to be: 1. Constructing experience and leadership for Obama where none actually exists and, 2. Attacking yet another strong female public figure without further angering the predominantly liberal feminists who are already not pleased at the way they feel Hillary was mistreated during the primaries.

Dick Cheney is the exception of a running mate upstaging the presidential
candidate.

Otherwise, my point was to argue that Palin is a slam-dunk for Republican
victory. What worked in 1968 and 1988 will work again in 2008. McCain's
choice of Palin is a masterstroke. He consolidates the right-wing
evangelical base of the Republican Party that prior to Palin was elusive to
McCain. Look at how Mike Huckabee, Dr. James Dobson, Pat Buchanan, and
Richard Viguerie are effusive over Palin; prior to that they didn't trust
McCain.

Palin as running mate makes evangelical turnout key for McCain's victory,
particularly the swing states of OH, VA, and CO--states that were key in the
George W. Bush/Karl Rove strategy of 2004.

Hey, I'm a liberal Democrat, but I'm always happy to state the facts. I
have no axe to grind.

Dougenfeld

Dougenfeld: I dispute your contention that Cheney upstaged GWB.

While Cheney was vastly more experienced as an advisor and manager on the national stage, GWB, as a Governor (just like Carter, Reagan and Clinton before him) had more Chief Executive-level governmental (public policy making) experience.

This is precisely the sort of experience that *both* Obama and McCain also unfortunately lack. Thus we are left to compare apples-to-apples where these two senators are concerned. I believe that the experience McCain *does* possess will compare favorably against that which Obama does *not* any day of the week and twice on Sundays.

I guess it's a good thing that affiliating with, and befriending, an admitted and unapologetic domestic terrorist (i.e. William Ayers) isn't a qualification for the Presidency, otherwise Obama would then most certainly be the better qualified!

john mccain is running for president?