[freedom_forge]

I said she wasn't ready, now, for this job.

No. You said she wasn't qualified.

Now you want to modify that by admitting she is more qualified than some but not others. So, I suggest you state clearly what experience, what size state, what size corporation what age what universities whatever you regard as sufficiently over the line to permit someone to run for VP.

Then all future candidates can consult your list of requirements and save themselves the trouble of running a futile campaign.

I'm pretty sure your list will disqualify anyone who hasn't been a political hack for years, thereby eliminating for consideration any normal person. I also suspect the Founding Fathers would have had an issue with that.

And for the record, I would vote for any lover of liberty over any collectivist no matter what the disparity in experience. I don't need an experienced tyrant in office.

[DesertRhino]

AMEN,,, experience is FAR less important than core natie intelligence, principles and honesty.

All the rest falls into place.

[Melas]

Then all future candidates can consult your list of requirements and save themselves the trouble of running a futile campaign

All future candidates do indeed have to meet her requirements to get her vote, as they have to meet yours to get your vote. This is what the primary process is all about. This nonsense we've been reading lately about annointing Sarah Palin four years out is downright unamerican. If she's to be the nominee, and she may well be, she has to earn just like every nominee before her.