I have a bad case of whiplash just from watching the Republican electorate shifting from "America will be incinerated in a hellfire of terrorist attacks if we elect the inexperienced Barack Obama president," to "Sarah Palin is going to be the greatest vice-president in the history of the world and is absolutely qualified to be a heartbeat away from the presidency." The words "experience," "qualified," "ready," and "prepared," are getting thrown around quite a bit right now, somewhat interchangeably. I think it's worth considering what these words mean and how they're being employed...
At the heart of the Republican argument against Barack Obama - pre-Palin - was the assertion that his youth and short resume as an elected-office holder made him a "risky" candidate. Bear in mind that if he had been a Senator for 20 years they would have branded him as a Washington insider, as they're doing to Joe Biden, despite John McCain's long tenure in the House and Senate. Complementing that argument is the implication that John McCain's military resume - especially his POW experience - is the only qualification he needs. This is supposed to immunize him from any and all questions about his character or his readiness to be Commander-in-Chief.
Post-Palin, the argument has transmogrified into a question of executive experience, which Sarah Palin has, but Barack Obama does not. Oh...and by they way...neither does John McCain. But he was a POW. So, to recap: Sarah Palin has exactly 19 months of executive experience...running the state of Alaska...the 47th most populous state in the union. Some others who have similar experience: Jesse Ventura, the pro-wrestled turned Governor of Minnesota; Arnold Schwarzenneger, the horrifically bad actor turned not-much-better Governor of Kahleefornya.
Personally, I don't really care how much "experience" she has in governing, snowmachining, fishing, or eating Moose Stew. When we talk about whether someone is prepared to be the President of the United States, what we're really talking about is what kind of a mind they bring to the table. Sometimes this kind of ability is demonstrated by their prior achievements, but other times it is simply undeniable upon watching and listening to them in action.
In all fields - science, music, literature, art - some of the greatest accomplishments come from out of the blue, often from the young. In 1997, Tiger Woods beat a roster of older, more experienced players. Einstein published the Annus Mirabilis Papers in 1905, at the age of 26. Mozart composed his first piano concert at the same age. Ability, ambition, and circumstance merged with history to give us something completely new, something completely superior, something completely unexpected.
Barack Obama is the Democratic nominee for president because he has demonstrated, to huge numbers of Americans, that he is one of these phenomena. His talents, combined with his age, race, and biography, have convinced us that he is the right candidate at the right time. Question his policies all you want - that's politics - but to question his readiness is to doubt the considered judgment of millions of Americans. I am quite sure that John McCain is ready to be president. I just think that he will exacerbate the rapid decline of our nation by continuing the disastrous economic and foreign policies of the current one.
Sarah Palin, on the other hand, has been annointed, not elevated to her position. The American people did not cast votes for this nasally little neophyte. She was thrust upon them, ready or not. Her readiness to succeed the elderly John McCain is now an open question that needs far more than two months to analyze. For this reason, the press must stop cooing about her "winningess," as Tom Brokaw described it about 217 times on Meet The Press yesterday, and start asking her questions. America deserves an opportunity to quiz Ms. Palin, as she has never been called upon to demonstrate knowledge beyond the severely provincial matters of Alaska.
