Replies

Abraham Lincoln was a Congresscritter, and not even an incumbent one when he was elected. We can argue about his poliicies, but not about whether he was a strong leader.

You are simply letting the Establishment dictate who is qualified. GHW Bush was never elected to anything but a House seat until he got on Reagan's coattails. He held a series of appointed posts, that's all. He was the quintessential Establishment Pubbie, and we all paid the price. He was a weak poltician and a poor campaigner, as was his son.

What is needed is 1) honesty 2) conservative principles as a matter of deeply held conviction, not political opportunism, and 3) an uncompromising, combative spirit. Bachmann, Palin, and Cain have all those qualities. " The rest is up to us. "Executive experience " simply guarantees a survivalist hack--a Romney, Perry, or the like.

Carter, Clinton, Bush, Rockefeller, Bloomberg--these guys all had "gubernatorial executive experience." A lot of good that did us. It's a myth that 0bama is a failure because he lacked experience. He is a disaster because he is a communist committed to destroying America.

Abraham Lincoln was elected 150 years ago. Before the telephone, the automobile, flight, or the light bulb that Bachmann is fighting to save. That example may be a bit dated.

Carter, Clinton, Bush, Rockefeller, Bloomberg--these guys all had "gubernatorial executive experience." A lot of good that did us.

I'm not saying it did us any good. I'm saying that America is a country of 300+ million people, with a 225+ year history of holding elections. Our voting patterns and preferences are very consistent, and trying to run against them as though they're meaningless is to ignore a very significant ground truth.

It's a myth that 0bama is a failure because he lacked experience. He is a disaster because he is a communist committed to destroying America.

It's not exactly a myth. True, he would have failed at any time if he were actually tested. It was simply his lack of experience that let otherwise rational people imagine that he had a stellar career ahead of him. If he had a long, measurable career, say, as a governor, it clearly would have been one of failure. Experience and a record of past actions is an indicator of future performance.

Americans generally understand that principle and strictly demand it, which is why Obama is a very significant departure from our usual voting patterns. It's hoping for lightning to strike twice to think that they'll make that same deviation from the norm again.