The executive experience argument is not even plausible. Let's look at reality. If someone ran a lemonade stand they have “Executive experience.” Palin’s scant experience as Governor of Alaska is light years from the rigors and demands of the Presidency. If you hold the nonsensical notion that only executive experience of limited nature is what counts and triumphs over Senate experience (read real experience), then you would have dismissed Lincoln, Kennedy and Nixon as being “unqualified.” Any high office experience counts. And, Palin’s is very limited by any reasonable measure.
President Lincoln served one term (two years) in the United States House of Representatives. He was never elected to the U.S. Senate, Mr. Douglas was. Therefore, Governor Palin has more elective office AND executive experience than Lincoln did in 1860, and she is NOT running for the top spot. Neither Kennedy or Nixon had any real executive experience prior to being elected president or (in Nixon’s case) vice president, unless you’re counting the crew of PT109.
You can't be serious.
If you hold the nonsensical notion that only executive experience of limited nature is what counts...
Only? I didn't say only. You did.
That strawman won't hunt.
“Actually he does, when he was Editor in Chief of the Harvard Law Review”
BWAHAHAHA! I’ve fallen down laughing and I can’t get up.
What a Lib-tard response.
That’s executive experience?
ROFL!!!
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt before that.
LOL! You can't be serious. I'd love to see that in a campaign ad.
"Barack Obama. He was Editor-in-Chief of the Harvard Law Review. Enough said."
That's your lemonade stand.