The democrats are hypocrites yet again?!? Whose really inexperienced???

Question

They attack McCain for picking, by their words, someone "inexperienced" for VP yet their own presidential candidate has NO experience!

I'd rather someone learn under an experienced leader like John McCain than have an old washington insider telling the president what to do.

Sorry guys, Obama is a great speech giver and that's it. He's hollow.

All the democrats had to do was nominate a moderate, well spoken guy and they would have had an easy victory. Instead they pick a radical socialist. STAAAAAUUUUUUPPPPIIIIIIDDDDDDDD!!!

Now I ask you, which party is truly out of touch?

Answer 1

The criticism isn't that McCain picked someone inexperienced to be his VP, it's that he did so after the GOP in general, and the McCain campaign in particular, has made such a big deal about Obama's supposed lack of experience. THAT is hypocrisy.

I find it interesting the you describe McCain as "experienced," but the equally (at least) experienced Biden you describe as "an old Washington insider."  To be fair, I would say that both are experienced AND old Washington insiders.  But I don't think being fair was your intention here.

Finally, I also find interesting your description of Obama as a "radical Socialist."  You either are not describing Obama, or you do not understand the principles of Socialism, to say nothing of "radical" Socialism.  Socialism, at its most basic, advocates the public ownership and adminstration of the means of production and distribution of goods and services.  I do not know of a single instance of Obama advocating such a course of action.  That he advocates a universal health care insurance system might qualify him as mildly socialistic, but he is by no stretch of the imagination, or of definitions, a socialist, per se.

I suspect that you are simply calling Obama something which you have heard someone else call him and which sounds "bad" to you.  Why mince words?  Why don't you just come right out and call him that worst of all epithets for an older generation -- a (gasp) Communist.  I've heard him called that, too.  Of course he's also been associated with a new catch-all bad name which is quickly replacing the old one, and that is "terrorist."  To be honest, though, I haven't actually heard anybody call Obama himself a terrorist, just a terrorist "sympathizer," which I suppose isn't quite as bad.

I guess we'll see who's "out of touch" come November.    

Answer 2

You are absolutely correct.  The Obama campaign will be facing a losing argument if they try to paint Sarah Palin as inexperienced.  Her being the bottom of the ticket has about 8 years more managerial experience than Obama, who is at the top of his ticket.  McCain has more foreign policy experience than Biden.  Sounds like the Republicans come out on top with this.

I also think picking Palen was smart because she is a strong conservative and will energize the conservative base.

I am an independent and I am actually excited about this pick.

Answer 3

cbjack writes "If Carter and Bush can run America, Sarah Palin can run America."

I don't see how this is supposed to inspire confidence in her.

McCain's criticism of Obama was mainly about his lack of foreign policy experience in particular. At least Obama made his foreign policy views widely known before coming into the Senate. He has slightly more foreign policy experience than Palin.

Answer 4

The leftists are really upset. McCain picked someone who the majority of the American people are going to love.

If Carter and Bush can run America, Sarah Palin can run America.

No presidential candidate has any experience until they run for a 2nd term. This is all just plain silly.

Answer 5

It was the Republicans that started it. They started attacking Barack Obama for being inexperenced. I don't recall the Democrats doing the same to George W. Bush in 2000 even though he really wasn't any more experienced than Obama. He had only been governor of Texas.