David Brooks of the NYT continues to be the only columnist I routinely read and trust. Today, he offers another illuminating column, this time providing an historical perspective on how important experience might be for elected national leaders:
Sarah Palin is incredibly inexperienced. The question, obviously, is how much this really should matter. Unfortunately for the Democrats, the argument is a hard one to make. Obama is perhaps one of the least qualified nominees for President in the country's history. And he, unlike Palin, is at the top of the ticket. The Palin pick should have rendered the debate about experience a non-issue in this campaign, ostensibly hurting Republicans by relinquishing one of their strongest criticisms of Obama. Astoundingly, it has instead somehow put the Democrats on the defensive. Again, shrewd politics from a McCain campaign that continues to defy the odds.
Comments