I was referring to more years of experience, but other than that, I have defended her without budging an inch. I like CHurchill. “We shall never give up! Never! Never! Never!”
Obama's ONLY executive experience was from 1995-1999 when he chaired the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, a program to help the Chicago Schools, evidently emplaced there by the police-murder-suspect, unrepentant terrorist, and modern US teaching bigwig Bill Ayers. Under four years. Net out of that position was they he and Ayers ran trough over 150 million in grants that an audit showed resulted in zero difference in outcome compared with non-participating schools. Amazing experience, eh?
Obama also held elected offices, but he did not get those by elections, rather he won by having his opponents stricken off the ballot by legal maneuvers, and when he had them he evidently was a non-performer, preferring to fund-raise and hob-nob rather than investigate, educate and legislate.
Sarah also has arguably more executive experience than Hillary. Hillary's positions at the executive level read more like plums given her on account of her husband being state attorney general, then governor, then President. They all seem more like advisory board postings than any real executive command. I count zero years of real executive experience, wherein one is responsible and held accountable for balancing the competing interests and forces of a major company, city, county, state, or government bureaucracy, while carrying out the necessaries of the day-to-day and the initiatives dictated by the legislature or contingencies.
That is probably why Hillary is a total fail as Secretary of State. Her stupefyingly dumb "Who painted this?" about Mexico's iconic State Treasure The Lady of Lady of Guadalupe and her insane shout-out to Kim Jong-Il on a late night TV show.
Sarah Palin's experience is real. Thirteen years of real executive experience as mayor, board chairman, lt. governor and governor.
“The Lady of Lady” — sorry for the yodel.