Seems to me, that you are completely wrong here.
And the one I was making. Even still, I believe she has far more experience than he has today or in another 3 years.
See I believe she will still have more experience than he will, because all he is doing is going around on photo ops.
Then you're just foolishly being hyper partisan and are acting irrationally and without logic, so again, I'm correct. You can complain, whine, and moan all you want about Photo Ops and your opinion. Facts don't change.
Now I could point out opinion wise, that Palin spent a good portion of her Governorship which would be her only true "experience" that is directly tied to the job flying around CAMPAIGNING...aka photo ops...but I'm not going to bother.
The
fact of the matter is that Obama by 2012 will have four years of FEDERAL EXECUTIVE experience compared to Palins 2 years of STATE EXECUTIVE experience. That's a fact. There's no question about it. Unless you're saying during those 4 years Obama is literally not doing a single, solitary, minute of his duties as a President...which is an idiotic and frankly laughably just bald faced lie...this is an undistpuable fact. So the one legitimate argument one could make prior to the election was that Sarah Palin's EXECUTIVE experience equalled or trumped Obama's LEGISLATIVE experience because it was experience actually pertaining directly to the role of the President. However, that same argument can no, in any concievable way, be made after he's had 4 years in an executive position himself.
You blindly and ignorantly denying reality doesn't change reality, and the reality is that Obama by the time of the 2012 election will have both more experience Legislatively, Executively, and in regards to Foreign Issues than Sarah Palin will have had. This is not a debatable thing like it was in 2008, its not something left up to opinion, its pure and simple fact.
Now, you could make a debate that his experience doesn't mean anything, but that'd be idiotic if you pushed the notion (which I'm going to guess you did) that he shouldn't have been elected because experience mattered. You could make a debate about the fact that his experience hasn't taught him anything and he makes bad calls, that could be a potentially legitimate debate. You could make a debate about the fact that he wasn't GOOD at what he has experience doing, that again could be a judgement call to make. What you can't do is say he doesn't have the experience because, as I said before, him being in office and doing the duties of the President....and I'm PRETTY SURE that bills have been signed, legislation pushed for, and executive orders and demands put forth so it wasn't all photo ops...IS EXPERIENCE.
There's a lot of legitimate things you can debate about Obama and his presidency and how poor it may be. One thing that is just frankly not debatable because its
fact is that President Obama come 2012 will unquestionably have more experience at the position of President than Sarah Palin.
