[The second in a multi-part series.]
Funniest blog comment of a political nature that I've read all day (and I've read many):
I want her to prove that she can be POTUS if the Old Man kicks the bucket. (Which given that he's 72 and already had one bout with melanoma, he just might.) I think foreign policy is 100% more important than what kind of mother she is. I'm not voting for the country's best mother. I'm voting for the leader of my country.
That being said, I'm not voting for McCain and Miss Congeniality. I will be voting for Obama.
Okay, okay. Let's slow that down and take a look at it.
The commenter's concern is that Palin, governor of an entire state for almost two years, doesn't have enough experience--particularly foreign policy experience--on the off-chance a 72-year-old cancer survivor and military veteran up's and dies suddenly. They believe foreign policy is 100% more important than the candidate's personal life--so they're voting for Obama, a <1-term senator who, over the last two years, has been campaigning for president more than he's been acting as the elected representative of the people of Illinois.
*head-desk, head-desk, head-desk*
Look folks, I'm not arguing that Palin has more foreign-policy experience than Obama; my contention is that she has virtually the same amount--that is, virtually as little experience as he does. And she's not the one at the top of the ticket.
Com-box is open below; feel free to let slip the dogs of war-like rhetoric.