Yeah, About that 'Experience' thing...
by Kevin McCullough
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Only a fool would question Sarah Palin's experience as a basis for her readiness to be Vice-President, especially as compared to Barack Obama's experience as a basis for his readiness to be President.
Never has such a scurrilous set of accusations been less founded. Those who argue them, such as the Obama campaign, because they know the truth to be irrefutable, end up rendering themselves silly. The truth is that Sarah Palin is more qualified to be President than Biden or Obama. But let's examine the facts for what they tell us.
What kind of Chief Executive experience does Barack Obama have? Not counting his not-for-profit work alongside convicted terrorist William Ayers - none! Yes it is true that when working with the Annenberg Challenge in Chicago that he and Ayers were co-heads of the project. So that's the full extent of his executive experience. A few paltry months, in the non-profit world, working with the convicted terrorist he once claimed he barely even knew. (Darn those University of Chicago papers...)
So what about Palin? Well... She has administrated a household, the PTA, the City Council, and got so good at it others encouraged her to run a city, and then a state. That's more executive experience than Obama, Hillary, and Biden combined. In doing so she had to deal with issues that dealt with the security, welfare, and economic impact of those under her administration. She's commanded the Alaskan National Guard. She has had to deal with international issues relating to the stewardship of territory with two nations that bordered her state - Canada and Russia. She had to tell Congress "thanks but no thanks" on federal monies that she felt would hurt the average American tax-payer even though it could have meant long term revenue for her state (bridge to nowhere.) She bopped the oil companies on the nose when she felt they were soaking the American gasoline consumer - and her oil rich state reaped the windfall - she returned those monies to the people of Alaska in the form of an individual tax-refund of $1200 per person this summer. She hammered her fellow state republicans when they behaved poorly (i.e. U.S. Senator Ted Stevens). And she could only have done any of it - because of her willingness to take on the corrupt old school, good-old-boy partisans in her state that worked against her.
What did Obama do that came close to any of this? The Chicago Democratic machine is as crooked a group as can be found and Obama's not only never opposed them. He's spooned with them (ahem, politically speaking.) He's never had to deal with foreign powers because he's never had to make a decision that put people who depended upon him in the path of a decision with a foreign power. It was like pulling wisdom teeth on the guy just to get him to go put on a flak jacket and visit the troops, much less think of commanding them. When you consider that Obama has voted to increase taxes more than eighty times, you recognize that he would not have the good sense to return the people's money to the people who earned it. (And he says he's for the working man...)
And what about those issues that are important to women and children? Sure Obama has voted to mandate abortion's legality - regardless of it's health effects on women. He's voted to deny parents permission to know or to give consent for their minors to obtain abortions. He's even voted to prevent the requirement of the doctor to inform the woman of the medical impact such a procedure would have on her person, mind, and emotions.
Equally wretched Obama has embraced a practice and fought to keep it embodied in law that would allow hospitals to test for Down's syndrome and strongly advocate /pressure the parents to abort the child regardless of the reliability of the tests used to determine the case.
But most horrifying of all Barack Obama is the only U.S. Senator to have voted to deny food, water, and other life saving medical care to Down's syndrome children who have been born.
It must be a particularly passionate issue with Ms. Palin, given that the doctors told her that her son Trig would be born with Down's and strongly encouraged her to abort as well. Trig is the same son she now describes as "perfect in every way."
Obama lacks discernment about simple things like: who is a living person and has constitutional rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And for all of his legislative "experience" (a full 143 days in Washington before running for President) he lacks even the instincts on when to answer the question honestly.
Could Sarah Palin be called upon to be President in the unthinkable eventuality that John McCain was not able to complete his term? Yes...
But does her resume, her character, her "eye-popping" integrity, and ruthlessness for what is right in some way say that she would be unprepared for such?
Hardly.
And if it does then the criticism of the "experience" factor of the Democratic ticket - is more than warranted.
After all Sarah Palin has no executive experience that matches Obama's few months serving alongside a convicted terrorist, who bombed the capital, and said he wished he had done more.
I mean - is that really the change (or experience) we need?
<link>
Is that really the type of "change" you want for America? "Fools" at the voting booths just might get it!
