Digg - GOP in 2004: John Edwards Too Inexperienced To Be VP

358 Comments
Who Dugg It?

karmafarm, on 08/31/2008, -13/+83Not really a surprise- Rove et al are quite capable of telling the American people that black is white. Then if you try to point out their mistake, they'll call you racist...
- dinot, on 08/31/2008, -8/+52And it's a pity Americans still fall for it.
  - GawtMilk, on 09/01/2008, -3/+1First of all. Governing a state is more important than representing a state, all else equal - a six-year Governor of Florida would be more experienced than a six-year senator representing Florida at making executive decisions, which is what P/VP really is [the executive branch isn't the legislative branch].
    
    Looking at Palin: yeah, she's only been mayor / governor for a few years - but people make it look like Alaska isn't a "tough" state to govern - low economic activity and low population.
    
    For comparison purposes:
    
    Alaska
    650,000 sq miles
    680,000 people
    $55,000 median income [not including the vast amounts of oil money associated with the state]
    
    Delaware
    2,500 sq miles
    850,000 people
    $54,000 median income
    
    But moreover, the article in and of itself is *****. It says "Romney, Bush and the RNC" don't like Edwards, but they "all praise Palin". What? While most of them ***** their way through by saying that it's an "exciting step forward" or other rhetoric like that, there are a ton of conservatives that really dislike Palin - inexperienced, fiscal conservative, bad on social issues, etc. To say "all Republicans" like Palin is stupid.
- spookycheddar, on 08/31/2008, -14/+7Karl Rove took a dump at my party and didn't flush. He does ***** like that all the time, he's like responsible for most of the bad things in my life.
- dstz, on 08/31/2008, -4/+5And surprise, Rove doesn't like Palin.
- rotundo, on 09/01/2008, -0/+21The thing that is unfortunate is that liberals (that includes me) just don't get it. We don't understand why Palin is going to appeal to a huge voting segment. We can laugh all we want at the Republicans and they'll continue to win elections by appealing to the millions that we don't understand. They certainly get the last laugh.
  
  The disconnect is amazing. The people laughing at Palin probably have no friends or family that she'll connect with. I do, and I can assure you that while a risky choice that might backfire, Palin is in some ways a genius move. You just have to accept that she is going to appeal to people who make no sense to you, and that there are a lot of them.
  
  I wish Obama luck in November.
  - schoate09, on 09/01/2008, -3/+6Most people I know in my family are pissed that she doesn't take care of her kids...
  - lisaawesome, on 09/01/2008, -1/+3What I don't understand are her kid's names. Trig? Track? WTF?
- 11b1p, on 09/01/2008, -11/+5Sooo... inexperienced VP or inexperienced President.
  - Jdban, on 09/01/2008, -5/+6Exactly. I started laughing when I heard Obama's people complaining about how inexperienced she was... considering he's only been in office for one term, and he's running for president
  - uu2b, on 09/01/2008, -2/+6The difference is that we WANT Obama, WE chose him. The presidential candidate that you chose, decided to take a risk on the entire country by selecting her as VP. Given the chance to be elected to run, Palin would have gotten maybe 1% of VP voting.
  - nalen33, on 09/01/2008, -2/+3Uu2b, you realize you made no valid point that would make me want to vote for Obama over McCain. You simply stated your opinion, you didn't justify it. The fact still remains that he has no more experience than she does, yet he's the one running for President, not her.
  - JEWestbrookJR, on 09/01/2008, -2/+3And also...
    When your campaign is built on the grounds that "the other guy is inexperienced" it is a severe hypocrisy to choose a VP candidate who is even less experienced. My problem isn't that she is inexperienced, my problem is that John McCain won't shut up about how inexperienced Obama is and then he goes and chooses some one that according to his verbal opinion of Obama, is much much worse.
    
    I don't care that Obama is inexperienced. I would rather have an inexperienced President that wants to better the world than have his experience be a "war hero" that is trigger happy and wants to "bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" I would rather take my chances with a candidate who wants to take a route that is peaceful. You people that support all this global conflict really think that we are an unbeatable force. I find it ironic that you are always the ones telling us to "never forget" when you are obviously the ones that forgot what happens when we bully the world.
    
    McCain = WW3, nuclear holocaust, or the deletion of one or more of our major cities. I'll pick inexperience over that any day of the week.
  - solistus, on 09/01/2008, -2/+3I agree with JEWestbrookJR that experience isn't the most important thing. What counts isn't time in office so much as well-thought out policy plans. Obama's foreign policy plans show restraint and wisdom without being naive or overly idealistic; he'll talk with foreign leaders but he recognises the importance of stabilising Afghanistan. His domestic policy is equally impressive; he cuts most working and middle class families' taxes while still spending less than McCain. All this while putting significantly more resources behind a health care initiative, real plans to make Social Security solvent, etc.
    
    Palin's lack of experience is compounded by a professed lack of interest in national issues. She's on record saying that she doesn't really follow the war very closely and learns of Alaskan troop deployments by watching the news. She has no stated opinion on federal budget, federal taxes (aside from opposing the same windfall taxes on oil companies that she instituted at the state level in Alaska), energy policy (aside from supporting Obama's plan and then scrubbing all the announcements mentioning it after being tapped for the VP slot), presidential powers, any of Bush's illegal or otherwise 'controversial' programs... The only nationally significant issues she seems to care about are ANWR (on which she clashes with McCain's stated view) and a host of social wedge issues - abortion, gay rights, gun control. A month ago she admitted to not knowing what the VP even does. She is clearly not qualified to be a member of Congress, let alone the Vice President.
- homercles337, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1Hush you! Shut it!
- badastronaut, on 09/01/2008, -2/+2It's called politics. It came before and goes beyond "Rove". It also happens to go both ways. To give you an example, look at all the people here attacking Palins inexperience who support Obama.
  - dinot, on 09/01/2008, -1/+8Duh.. we're doing it to point out the hipocracy. MCCAIN started it by attacking Obama's experience. Now he picks someone with LESS experience???
    
    That's like me calling you a fag for kissing a guy on the lips while I go home to have butt sex with Elton John.
  - badastronaut, on 09/01/2008, -4/+0First of all, she has more experience by my count.
    
    Regardless, I don't see why you would point out the hypocrisy; not when it's hypocritical of yourselves in doing so.
    
    Plus, in this context, youre confusing what McCain said with what some of the GOP had said years ago.
  - Gerz1219, on 09/01/2008, -1/+5@badastronaut -- She has more experience by *your* count?! I suppose 2 + 2 = 5 by your count, because Palin has 6 years experience as part-time mayor of a rest stop (to be polite), and less than two years experience as governor of a state with less people than the South Bronx. This compares with Obama's 8 years of experience in the Illinois state senate, representing many more people than Palin did as mayor, and 4 years experience as a U.S. senator. How exactly do you add this up in a way favorable to Palin? Even taking all years of experience as entirely equal, when they clearly aren't, Palin has four years less experience than Obama. And that's not even counting the fact that Obama has been a major figure on the national scene for four years, giving countless interviews and speeches, meeting with foreign leaders, and managing the best organized national primary campaign in the history of American politics. The long-serving manager of a corner Starbucks may technically have more "executive" experience than Obama, but that doesn't make him any more qualified to lead the country.
  - dinot, on 09/02/2008, -0/+3Gerz1219: I'm TOTALLY stealing that Starbucks analogy :) It's perfect.
- Bamont, on 09/01/2008, -7/+5And?
  
  General Wesley Clark praised John Kerry's participation in Vietnam back when he ran for President - and then condemns McCain for being a POW and using it to get elected.
  
  Please, neither side is immune to this kind of *****, yet it's nice all people manage to Digg up is their narrow-minded views. So much for being better than those other "ignorant Americans".
  - Thesp0rk, on 09/01/2008, -1/+2except that mccain is using the fact that he was a POW in every situation he can, relevant or not
  - Terr01, on 09/01/2008, -1/+2Slight difference: Clark was pretty clear that it was an issue of command experience versus the far more general experience of fighting in war-time.
octopi, on 08/31/2008, -19/+7Whoops.
HarryRag, on 08/31/2008, -35/+18"And Republicans wonder why Americans continue to laugh at them..."

Huh? Maybe liberals are laughing, but Americans that can't think for themselves will eat this ***** up.
- geoffg, on 08/31/2008, -4/+11"Maybe liberals are laughing, but Americans that can't think for themselves will eat this ***** up."
  
  You really believe deep down that you're that much smarter then everyone else...how unbelievably sad.
  - akinapb, on 08/31/2008, -5/+3I'll bet that I'm smarter than you. I'm serious.
  - geoffg, on 08/31/2008, -1/+5I'll bet that I'm smarter than you. I'm serious.
    
    I'll say it again...You really believe deep down that you're that much smarter then everyone else...how unbelievably sad.
  - freddie4, on 09/01/2008, -0/+5geoffg obviously takes the cake for being smarter than everyone else.. i mean this guy can actually take one sentence and apply it to seemingly unrelated topics! genius!
  - akinapb, on 09/01/2008, -1/+3No, I do not think that I'm smarter than everyone else. I said I bet that I'm smarter than you. Your assumption that I meant "everyone" is blatantly idiotic seeing as I believe children are taught to differentiate between the pro-noun "you," with the noun "everyone." This reading comprehension mistake clearly warrants my belief that I am in fact, smarter than you are.
  - akhomestead, on 09/01/2008, -0/+0I don't think he was saying liberals where wrong, I think he was saying anyone that CAN'T THINK FOR THEMSELVES are going eat this up. He's saying if you believe the crap the GOP is spinning you can't think for yourself.
    
    But liberals need to be careful there's two sides to this coin. If they bitch about Palin's lack of experience after defending Obama's and Edwards lack of it, they're hypocrites too.
    
    Personally I don't think it matters since the guys behind the curtain tell whoever gets elected what to do anyway.
TheJimid, on 08/31/2008, -16/+171She was losing Miss Alaska while Edwards was in law school.
- mco5t9, on 08/31/2008, -23/+7Wow. I'm starting to think McCain is a genius for picking Palin. The Republicans won't have to do any work in this election; just let guys like you fall all over themselves alienating rural and lower class voters. How is being a trial lawyer a better qualification than running a small business, a town and an entire state?
  - xexx, on 08/31/2008, -5/+4How is it you pick single qualifications out of many to compare to Palins entire life?
  - akinapb, on 08/31/2008, -3/+4@xexx
    
    Because he isn't a logical rational person.
  - mco5t9, on 09/01/2008, -3/+6Excuse me. How could I forget his single, undistinguished term as a backbench senator from North Carolina.
  - gbjxc, on 09/01/2008, -1/+6As opposed to her highly distinguished term as mayor of Wasilla?
    
    ...She hasn't even had a term as Governor yet.
  - akhomestead, on 09/01/2008, -1/+3Uh, I'm I live in rural Alaska and I think McCain is a fricken idiot for picking Sarah. And I'm not voting for Obama either, I can't vote for anyone who has voted to fund the war and continue the Patriot Act.
  - solistus, on 09/01/2008, -1/+3Palin did a TERRIBLE job as mayor. She built a multimillion dollar stadium in a small town, neglected to buy the land it was being built on and then tried to eminent domain it after a developer snatched it up. After court and legal fees, that $125,000 lot cost the state around $1.6 million. Wasilla is STILL paying for this with higher city fees and lower funding for public services like the city library.
    
    She has been governor of Alaska for less than two years. During this time, the state's oil and natural gas-related revenue has skyrocketed and is now over 80% of the state's operating budget. The state also kept federl funding earmarked for the infamous Bridge to Nowhere. Palin opposed the bridge in the end... because Congress expected Alaska to help fund it. She kept the federal money after the bridge was scrapped. She gave all Alaskans $1,200 one year to offset energy costs and, to paraphrase, "because they could spend it better than the state." The next year, she made a series of budget cuts to existing programs in and around Anchorage (which, as a larger city, is predictably more liberal and thus less supportive of Palin), only to approve new funding for nearly identical programs in rural communities where she gets most of her support.
    
    It's not just that she's inexperienced. In Obama's 12 years as an elected official, he has developed nuanced views on national policy issues. His campaign has explained them in far greater detail than the McCain camp has explained theirs. Most of McCain's economic proposals don't add up and lack any meaningful specifics, whereas Obama has detailed plans for new spending as well as spending cuts, and despite his more generous tax cuts to the middle class, his proposal adds up to LESS deficit spending than McCain's, to the tune of $1 trillion. In Palin's 6 years as a mayor and less than 2 as a governor, she has shown nothing but incompetence on economic matters, a taste for political expediency that is quite disturbing and no stated policy views beyond state matters and a narrow and divisive group of social issues. She's clearly not qualified to be VP. Can any of her supporters say with any evidence and certainty what her foreign policy would look like in the case of crises in the Middle East, Russia or China? Or how she would handle a slumping economy and fiscal institution meltdowns?
    
    For those thinking she is a smart strategic choice, albeit clearly nothing more than a political gamble, wait a week or so. McCain's camp didn't rule out Lieberman until Sunday night, and they spent Monday going over the other front runners like Pawlenty. It wasn't until Tuesday that they started vetting Palin as a backup option and McCain made the decision on Thursday. Already, it seems like Troopergate is more significant than naysayers pretend, the dirt about her pathetic stint in Wasilla is hitting the net, Alaskan officials are expressing disbelief at the choice and I'm sure Obama campaigners are vetting her past like crazy. There's even the rumour about her child being her daughter's, although that sounds a little too ridiculous to be true... At any rate, it's very likely that more juicy problems for McCain/Palin will be hitting the national ads and surrogate talking point machine by the end of the Republican convention. Also, it's entirely up in the air how successful Palin will be as a national campaigner. Existing video footage of her speaking seems like she's great at appealing to her narrow base in Alaska, but we'll see if she can stay on message and be able to speak intelligently about national issues. This electoral season we've seen a Maverick-branded candidate and a Washington outsider/change candidate run extremely tight campaigns with daily messages pounded into the media airwaves by campaign officials, surrogates, targeted ads and the candidates themselves. If Republicans thought the prospects of a Biden slip-up were exciting... Let's just say, we Dems will be VERY eagerly awaiting the Biden-Palin debates.
- garryw, on 08/31/2008, -2/+39And what makes you think Edwards could have won Miss Alaska? Sure his hair budget is bigger, but you got to have a talent.
- v01c30fr3a50n, on 09/01/2008, -11/+2She was in the beauty pagent in order to earn money to pay for college. Obama's father went to Harvard and don't for a minute think that didn't help him because he had to go to community college first. How many people jump from community college to Columbia/Havard?
  - onestrawplz, on 09/01/2008, -1/+9occidental =/= community college
  - goducksgo, on 09/01/2008, -0/+7didn't obama's father leave him when he was little and live in kenya?
  - wonderchemist, on 09/01/2008, -0/+3Did Bush go to Harvard and Yale? I mean he must of been a genius!
  - MaskedSlacker, on 09/01/2008, -0/+3Uh, Obama's father was dead by the time Obama was in college. Man died at 46. In Kenya. Long after abandoning Obama.
PacoLugi, on 08/31/2008, -39/+24Why did Edwards have an affair while his wife was in the hospital?
- unreg, on 08/31/2008, -2/+15Cause his little head does all the thinking
- macweirdo42, on 08/31/2008, -11/+37Why did McCain cheat on his crippled first wife? Why did Clinton cheat on his? Honestly, could you have possible asked a less relevant question?
  - badastronaut, on 09/01/2008, -3/+0Isnt the article about Edwards though?
  - macweirdo42, on 09/01/2008, -1/+4No, not really... It's about Edwards in the same way that the Great Gatsby is about Nick. Oh sure, Nick's the narrator, he's the primary character, and the entire story is told through his eyes, but the actual story is about Gatsby, and his obsession with Daisy. Or even more, it's about Daisy, Tom, and their self-destructive behaviors which, while damaging everyone around them, seem to leave themselves unharmed. Sorry, got a little carried away with the metaphor there.
  - badastronaut, on 09/01/2008, -0/+0I agree. It's just that it's more relevant than your examples.
- smotpoker, on 08/31/2008, -6/+3Wasn't that *after* his bid for VP? Nice try though...
  - patpl22391, on 08/31/2008, -2/+8It was after his 2004 VP run and before his 2008 Pres run -- 2006, nice try though..
  - smotpoker, on 08/31/2008, -2/+3Ahh, the good ol' boy neocon spin!
    
    I doubt his wife was in the hospital since '06, though I haven't really researched her medical records and though he hired the lady in '06, I haven't seen or heard any evidence that is when the affair began.
    
    Anyway, this article is about '04. You cannot use info from 2+ years later as justification for your dictator's hypocrisy/doublestandards or compare the actions of a candidate to a party nominee you are collectively supporting.
    
    Do you people even understand the definition of "context" or it's role in logical debate?
  - bubbadigg, on 09/01/2008, -1/+1I volunteer to have an affair with Palin... you know, just to make it a level playing field.
  - smotpoker, on 09/01/2008, -0/+2@bubba
    
    Well, if you really wanna make it even you'd have to wait until after the Republicans loose this election but still do it before she runs for president next election... then it'd be comparable
- enclaved, on 08/31/2008, -0/+2BECAUSE HIS WIFE WASNT THERE
  
  Why did you answer your own question, duh...
- mickstephenson, on 08/31/2008, -1/+2I seriously thought this was about John Edwards the TV spiritualist, I actually did an unwarranted facepalm and sighed out "Americans". Thank ***** I was wrong.
  - smotpoker, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1Silly Brit! That's John *Edward*, not John Edwards! Some people... ;)
- enantiodromia, on 09/01/2008, -0/+3WEB 2.0 HTTP Error Code
  
  300 FAILED REDIRECTION
- docbob84, on 09/01/2008, -2/+2Who cares? I didn't care when Clinton got a blowjob under the oval office desk, and I don't care what Edwards is doing either. What bearing does it have on how they do their jobs? I wouldn't care if W and Laura did it in the Rose garden with their dog and cat; if he was doing his job right, he'd be fine in my book. People need to get over the taboo of sex, and at the same time they need to stop gossiping about people in positions of power. Are we the only country in the world who is hung up enough on sex that they'd try to impeach someone for lying about it? Maybe not, but I certainly hope so. Leave sex in the bedroom (or on the couch or dining room table or wherever), judge people on how well they do their job.
- mmilton, on 09/01/2008, -1/+3Because he believes in two Americas and wanted one family for each.
  
  Edwards is a slimeball. Glad this scandal appeared last month. It would have been terrible if Obama had picked him for VP then we find out.
- solistus, on 09/01/2008, -1/+2Not to interrupt the Edwards bash-fest, but the affair happened BEFORE his wife ended up in the hospital. He only *admitted* to it recently. It was still a rotten thing to do, but there's no need to embellish the story to make it sound worse than it already is. What he did was wrong, just like what McCain and Clinton and many other politicians have done, but it wasn't something so despicable as milking political sympathy from a dying wife while cheating on the side. In fact, come to think of it, it wasn't quite as bad as McCain's wife switcharoo.
scoottie, on 08/31/2008, -24/+17at least he wasnt running for president while being inexperienced.
- mco5t9, on 08/31/2008, -3/+5No. He was just running for president while hiding a mistress.
BHO4Prez, on 08/31/2008, -27/+17The Republicans have won the last two elections. Sorry Democrats but the only people who are doing the laughing are Republicans.
- rearlgrant, on 08/31/2008, -3/+7True
- someguy92, on 08/31/2008, -2/+14Why would anybody be laughing?
  Can anybody explain anything that the bush administration has done right in the last 8 years? This isn't funny, it's just sad.
  - uqdroma, on 08/31/2008, -5/+1Yes, they can. But it's kinda like selling a steak to a vegetarian.
  - solistus, on 09/01/2008, -0/+2uqdroma: national policy is not a matter of dietary preference. It's not "I like wars, you like peace, we have different tastes." It's lots of dead civilians and soldiers and wasted money with a fragile region destabilised versus, well, none of that. The fact that you view the policy direction of the world's sole remaining superpower as comparable to food preference is pretty disturbing.
    
    Go ahead, name one of these nice juicy 'steak' Bush policies. Actually, in the Bush economy, we're gonna have to go with ground chuck... It's not the 90's anymore, ya know?
  - edyang, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1Last time I remember, we haven't been attacked again since 9/11.
    
    Seven years and no attack, not for lack of trying. In the meantime, London, Spain, Bali, Jakarta, et al have had acts of terrorism. In the meantime, we've broken up countless plots to kill and main.
    
    So no, if you don't count that, Bush hasn't "done" anything.
  - rearlgrant, on 09/05/2008, -0/+1@edyang: Countless? Pix or it didn't happen.
Sfenton, on 08/31/2008, -40/+29Barack Obama has less experience than Sarah Palin.

Why is this a story to you liberals, it makes you look hypocritical for digging this article up.
- duckyinc, on 08/31/2008, -9/+7Hypocrisy is no problem, we do everyday.
- rearlgrant, on 08/31/2008, -12/+3Actually they both have exactly 12 years experience in government.
  - Sfenton, on 08/31/2008, -11/+15Governor > Senator
  - sugarazor, on 08/31/2008, -8/+4Maybe if she were governor of Illinois. But she's governor of a state that doesn't even come close to Chicago in terms of population.
  - MScrip, on 08/31/2008, -6/+10Federal Government > State Government
    
    Illinois 12.8 million population > Alaska 683,000 population
  - Sfenton, on 08/31/2008, -5/+10@sugarazor -
    
    Do you know that Alaska ranks 6 on GDP per state, guess where Illinois is?
    
    11th
  - someguy92, on 08/31/2008, -6/+82 years city council + 2 years mayor + 2 years governor < 7 years state senator + 2 years us senator
    
    Population of Alaska < Population of Illinois 13th district
    
    Bachelor of Science degree in communications-journalism from the University of Idaho < Juris Doctor (J.D.) magna cum laude from Harvard
  - yojiffyskippy, on 08/31/2008, -4/+2Which should disqualify both of them from holding any office. Every once in a while politicians should have to go out and get a real job.
  - sugarazor, on 08/31/2008, -3/+4"Do you know that Alaska ranks 6 on GDP per state, guess where Illinois is?"
    
    Oil. Game over.
  - temsi, on 08/31/2008, -4/+6Not all government experience is equal - otherwise the Pentagon janitor could probably count his 30 years in "government" and outweigh them both...
    
    Governor of 640,000 people for 20 months does not outweigh 12 years of legislative experience.
    Her time as Mayor of a town with fewer people than an average city block in Los Angeles doesn't really count as "experience", seeing as her duties as such consisted of being at town meetings and acting as a figure head for the town (read: opening the new Starbucks). She had no power, not even a vote (except as a tie breaker), and made no decisions as Mayor.
    
    As Governor, she has accomplished nothing - although that shouldn't really be counted against her, as she's barely started - she's been there about as long as Obama has been campaigning for President.
    
    She was for the Bridge to Nowhere until it became politically inconvenient.
    She is currently under investigation for ethics violations and abuse of power (didn't McCain vet this person at all?).
    
    Her lack of experience makes Obama seem like John Adams.
    
    Even Republicans are scratching their heads - even though many of the most visible ones are immediately exposing themselves as hypocrites having attacked Edwards in 2004, saying his 6 years in the US Senate didn't qualify him to be "a heartbeat away from the Presidency".
    Funny how the tune changes when the shoe is on the other foot.
    
    Damn hypocrites. Is it too much to ask for a little consistency in politics, for crying out loud?! That applies to all parties.
  - barandon0D9, on 08/31/2008, -2/+4City council of Wasilla, Alaska doesn't count for anything. My home town has a higher population by over 3,000, and I went to some city council meetings there when I was in high school. They were discussing complaints from residents about the noise of home construction, and two groups of people were arguing over who should become the next chief of the fire department. One of the council members was wearing a Hawaiian shirt/shorts and sandals for crying out loud. The idea that council members or mayors of small towns are qualified to be the Vice President of the United States is a joke.
  - bubbadigg, on 09/01/2008, -1/+0Legislative experience really doesn't count for anything but time in the legislature.... there is no responsibility for legislators to do anything... and they typically don't . Want proof that they don't do anything? Just look at Obama.
    
    Mayors and Governors have real responsibility... budgets, employees, national guard, civilian services, etc.
    That is why in the history of the U.S. previous Governors make better presidents than Legislators. (Well except for maybe Carter)
  - sugarazor, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1Except Carter? How about except Bush?
- NoUse, on 08/31/2008, -7/+14I'll just quote Andrew Sullivan rather than debate you:
  
  I’ve voted a straight Republican ticket every year of my life since 1975, when I first came of voting age, but I was stunned and horrified by McCain’s choice of Palin. I simply cannot even consider voting for McCain after this choice, which speaks loudly of his own selfishness and fundamental frivolousness.
  
  So I was shocked when I turned to the conservative blogs looking for others who shared my dismay and found a celebration going on. They really honestly believe that Palin’s "inexperience" and Obama’s "inexperience" are equivalent. I have had no luck at all in the past 24 hours trying to explain that Obama is quite obviously an impressive man (with whom I disagree on almost every major issue) with extraordinary qualities of organization, discipline and leadership. I see nothing in Palin’s record to suggest that she has any such qualities.
  
  He is a man who has spent his adult life thinking serious thoughts about serious issues and having serious conversations about them with other serious, well-informed people; while Palin quite as clearly has done none of those things. He was the president of the Harvard Law Review; she was the point guard on her high school basketball team.
  - patpl22391, on 08/31/2008, -7/+8That was a letter TO Andrew Sullivan.
    
    Personal note from me..I have a lot of conservative christian friends, we were all either lukewarm supporters of McCain, or supporters of Barack Obama. Now we are very excited about Sarah Palin being added to the ticket. She is truly a conservative with an image that goes far outside the unpopular Republican image. She doesn't take crap from people in her own party nor from big oil. I and many others are very happy about the pick.
  - Bone1205, on 08/31/2008, -1/+1nuff said...
  - uqdroma, on 08/31/2008, -4/+2"she was the point guard on her high school basketball team."
    
    Which makes her a team player. Obama is a selfish lawyer.
    
    T.E.A.M. is what most high school and college sports programs teach their athletes. It's where I learned it.
  - solistus, on 09/01/2008, -1/+1patpl2239: Do you and your friends not care about any national issues besides ANWR drilling, gay rights, abortion and gun control? Palin has not taken definite stances beyond a recently retracted statement of support for Obama's energy plan. She has no experience that is remotely comparable to Obama's. Obama has 12 years of elected office with more voters voting for him for each term than Palin's entire state. She has a seedy past that McCain's 2-day vetting process obviously didn't do a very good job evaluating and no national policy credentials. She repealed some of her immediate predecessor's oil company tax breaks, but has also fought very hard for their drilling and piping interests and has gone so far as opposing 3 different Arctic species' placement on the endangered species list at oil companies' requests.
    
    Luckily for the rest of us, you and your friends who actually _like_ her "abstinence only sex ed and creationism in science for schools, no civil union rights for gay couples, repeal Roe v. Wade" social policies tend not to live in battleground states, so the rest of us don't have to worry about your stealth dominionist darling becoming VP.
- whitey9, on 08/31/2008, -2/+8Barack Obama hasn't spent the last 6 months of his campaign ***** on the opposition for being inexperienced.
- SuperMoses, on 09/01/2008, -0/+2The criticism here isn't her inexperience, but the hypocrisy on the part of the GOP for criticizing John Edwards for being inexperienced while selecting the inexperienced Palin. Notice it is the GOP focusing on experience, not "liberals". When will you fundies work on you reading comprehension?
V0lk, on 08/31/2008, -18/+34www.ontheissues.org go there, and look at Palin's "record"...and then hold your stomach in laughter every time GOP brings up 'experience' in any context of either VP or President.
- mnpilot, on 08/31/2008, -7/+12Yeah, she pretty much Oil's bitch.....Just what we need.
  - TSK05, on 09/01/2008, -8/+5Christ you are an idiot. Oil's bitch. ***** moron. I don't even know where to start. Raised taxes on oil profits, check. Exposed the Republican Chair as being in cahoots with big oil forcing him to resign, check. Exposed the attorney general as being in cahoots with big oil forcing him to resign, check. Wrote, presented and signed into law (with only one guy opposing) a bill which hurt a bunch of oil companies, including BP, and negated a deal that the previous mayor gave them, check. Lowered the gas tax (the one that regular people pay), check. ***** idiots like yourself who don't know the facts saying stupid *****.
  - yournightmare, on 09/01/2008, -2/+3"***** idiots like yourself who don't know the facts saying stupid *****."
    
    --How does lowering the gas tax hurt the oil companies? They don't get money from that, the government does. So she raised taxes on oil profits, which every Alaskan gets a cut of, then lowers the gas tax to encourage buying more gas which makes up for the lost profits to the oil companies. She got rid of a couple political enemies, made Alaskan citizens happy, made the oil companies happy, and did it all in such a way that she managed to completely trick morons like you into thinking she's not oil's bitch.
- v01c30fr3a50n, on 09/01/2008, -13/+4Governor of Alaska for 1.5 years > US Senator of 1 year
  Mayor of small town > Illinois senator
  
  Palin is lacking in experience, but her experience is executive in nature. Obama is lacking in experience and his experience is not executive in nature. I'd lay off the experience argument if I were you. And yeah, she running for VP while Obama is running for President.
  - sonofalink, on 09/01/2008, -2/+11Governor of Alaska is > than being a US Senator? What do you govern in alaska, trees and bears? There isn't even 1 million people in Alaska.
    
    So you're saying if John McCain were to croak (the dude IS 72) you think a woman who was the governor of the state with the 3rd smallest population in the US can run the country? Really?
  - homercles337, on 09/01/2008, -0/+4Are you insane you stupid troll? I like you colorful use of numbers, nice.
  - deadfrog, on 09/01/2008, -0/+2Obama is finishing his third(3) year as Senator...
    
    Also, according to your logic, Palin has more executive experience as John McCain. Should she be at the top of the ticket?
- oldgal, on 09/01/2008, -0/+4I am waiting for someone to ask if she has a passport and when,where and why it has been used ...who knows, maybe it will say something in her favor. For a black person in this country to run a campaign that put him where he stood Friday night exhibits exceptional executive skill at a national level. If you have read Obama's books, it becomes obvious that he understands a multicultural world. Alaska has about the same population as San Francisco - given the diversity of problems and people and the relationships with Asian countries, I would say the mayor of San Francisco has more relevant experience than someone born and raised in Alaska (although I wouldn't want to see him as VP).
dannyboy3020, on 08/31/2008, -33/+86Digg doesn't like Palin. We get it. Who's mind are you trying to change?
- mogebier, on 08/31/2008, -24/+10The liberal diggers are just trying to console themselves because they only want to vote against something and not for Obama.
- oldgal, on 09/01/2008, -3/+3Actually it sounds like she is pretty cool. I am not, however, ready to accept that she is ready to be VP without a whole lot more information.
  - iizh, on 09/01/2008, -0/+3And I suppose this counts as information about Palin?
- obeythefist, on 09/01/2008, -0/+6It's not that anybody here has anything against her. It's the newsworthiness of a presidential campaign making such a choice. Add that to the fact that there is so little known about her by the general public that every little tidbit is big news. And the tidbits, as they have been appearing, are overwhelmingly not in her favor.
- highstriker, on 09/01/2008, -0/+3It's not all about changing minds. Granted there have been a *LOT* of articles about her lately, but it's about getting information, and being able to share that information with others.
  I find some of it useful- such as this, so that I can debate my family who are pretty staunch Republicans.
- Truth3, on 09/01/2008, -6/+0This article is so dumb. The poster is laughing at Republicans but he fails to see the funniest thing: the VP might be inexperienced, but she has MORE experience than the PRESIDENTIAL candidate (Obama) of the Democrats.
  
  "And Republicans wonder why Americans continue to laugh at them"...
  ^^ Yah, because an overwhelming majority of American are Democrats? Wake up, the internet is Democrat. Leave your basement and actually meet some real humans.
  
  If you are going to digg me down, at least be man enough to respond as an Adult.
  - fuzzmeister, on 09/01/2008, -0/+2Please, tell me how she has more experience than Obama. She may have more "executive" experience, but so does my high school principal, does that make him qualified to be President? It's the substance of the issues that counts.
  - solistus, on 09/01/2008, -0/+4OK, I'll respond. Obama has so much more relevant experience than Palin it's not even funny. Let's compare, shall we?
    
    Obama: 2 fairly successful terms as a state Senator in which he got important policies through due to bipartisan support. He was involved in major state campaign finance reform, revamping welfare policies including an increase in child support funding and tax credits for welfare recipients who work, a bill requiring that police interrogations be taped to prevent abuse, etc. He then went on to a Senate term, during which he has a record I will gladly defend against McCain's if you'd like to pull out any specifics. His campaign policy platform shows that he has a nuanced understanding on many different issues; whether you agree with him or not, it's hard to argue with the fact that he has quite detailed policy views. He also has an impressive educational background, including a magna cume laude JD from Harvard Law.
    
    Palin: She started her elected career in 1996 as mayor of the small town of Wasilla. Her most lasting accomplishment was to saddle the city with debt it's still paying off to this day by rashly choosing to build a $6 million sports stadium in a town of well under 10,000. She also badly botched the land deal, allowing a private developer to buy the plot development had already begun on and then spending $1.6 million in a legal battle to eminent domain it. She left Wasilla in 2002 (the stadium debacle still largely unresolved) to make an unsuccessful bid for Lt. Governor. She got an appointment by Governor Murkowski in 2003 and resigned the following year as the Murkowski administration became increasingly unpopular, then ran on an internal reform platform to unseat Murkowski in the primaries and take the Governorship in 2006. She enjoyed almost 90% approval early on due to firing a lot of unpopular Murkowski appointees, and she has had record oil and gas fees pouring into the state budget due to rising prices which have about doubled the state's budget. She gave $1,200 to every Alaskan in 2006, then made a bunch of budget cuts on existing programs in Anchorage to reduce spending while approving NEW funding for similar programs in rural areas where she gets most of her political support. She has publicly stated that she doesn't pay much attention to Iraq and doesn't know what the VP even does.
    
    OK, now it's your turn to spout another talking point.
  - okcomputre, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1Ah ha ha!!! Solistus SO burned you! Hey Truth3...do you want some ointment for that burn?
- Atario, on 09/01/2008, -1/+2The point isn't that she isn't liked. It's that she's not qualified, and, even more so, McCain made this awful decision.
VinnieDaMac, on 08/31/2008, -8/+9Well, what are they suppose to say? "Our VP is inexperienced, but vote for McCain anyway"?
- MadOgre, on 08/31/2008, -20/+9She has more experience than Obama... But vote for Obama anyway?
  - patpl22391, on 08/31/2008, -12/+4They put Barack Obama on the TOP of the ticket, truly laughable.
  - xexx, on 08/31/2008, -3/+18lol, no she doesn't you fool
    
    Obama was an Illinois State Senator for 8 years 1996-2004. Chairman, Health and Human Services Committee.
    
    Obama was a Constitutional Law Professor at the U of Chicago Law School 1993-2004
    
    Obama was a Civil Rights Attorney - 1992-2004
    
    Obama is a United States Senator 2004-present
    Member, Senate Foreign Relations Committee
    Chairman, Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on European Affairs
    Member, Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
    Member, Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
    Member, Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs
    
    Obama Education:
    
    Columbia University
    B.A. Political Science with specialization in international relations
    Thesis topic: Soviet nuclear disarmament
    
    Graduate
    Harvard Law School
    J.D. Magna cum laude 1988-1991
    President, Harvard Law Review
  - bubbadigg, on 09/01/2008, -3/+1Have you looked at how F'd up Illinois is ? not a good place for business, not a good place to be poor, corruption in government... Yea, Obama was a state senator for a long time here... should tell you something. (yes I live in Illinois, and I am a minority.. that is why I won't vote for Obama)
    
    In addition... why would anyone vote for somebody with a political science degree ???? This just says the guy is a career politician... do you really think he understands the American people? Political
    science majors are trained to fool the American people.
  - IrvineKinneas50, on 09/01/2008, -0/+3Where are people getting the idea that Palin has more experience than Obama? Pulling it out of their ass? It takes five second on Wiki to find the answer.
garryw, on 08/31/2008, -17/+4Mitt Romney will be the next GOP president. Palin is a embarassment to the office of VP. She cannot stare down Putin, although I'm sure he would her.
- MadOgre, on 08/31/2008, -0/+5I bet she can... Hell hath no fury, don't you know. Putin isn't used to women who are not scared of him.
  - jmisavage, on 08/31/2008, -1/+4For some reason I don't think a former KGB operative like Putin is scared of anybody.
  - uqdroma, on 08/31/2008, -0/+0German Chancellor didn't have a problem. Speaking of German politics. Funny how the first female Chancellor of a socialistic country came from the conservative wing in Germany. Although their conservatism may still be to the left of ours...
    
    I know...apples and oranges. lol
  - 4321234, on 08/31/2008, -0/+3Speaking of Putin, when the hell is he going to pull back into that 6 mile wide buffer zone (inside Georgia's border) that Condi appeased..I mean negotiated?
- Haecceity, on 08/31/2008, -0/+5I'm sure Putin would stare down her blouse...
- patpl22391, on 08/31/2008, -1/+3Garryw, I, before supporting McCain, was an avid supporter of Mitt Romney. I voted for him in the Republican primary here in Arizona. I think Romney would have been a bad VP pick for McCain.. Let's talk about bringing Romney back in 4-8 years.
  - uqdroma, on 09/01/2008, -2/+1lol, Speaking of not voting McCain in the primary, I voted for Rudy in FL. But my second choice was McCain. That should also speak to not being right wing, but still Republican. It has been my experience that most decently educated people are conservative with a streak of liberalism. Here in FL anyway. That's why alot of FL Hillary supporters will go McCain. Go ahead and count our 27 votes for McCain. He's not leading in the polls enough to make that prediction now. It's only my opinion, albeit a logical one. Not to mention FL Democrats were screwed, by their own party rules, out of their vote. Backdoor politics at it's best. Repubs punished FL too though, just not as heavily. Plus it never mattered because McCain locked it up before it became an issue.
    
    Picture: Smoke filled rooms with a few FL Dems making rules like that. Repubs too. At least Repubs give all the delegates to the winner of the state. Make no mistake, Obama learned quite fast how to piece an electoral map together. We shall see how it'll match with McCain's map experience over the next 2 months.
  - solistus, on 09/01/2008, -0/+2uqdroma: your anecdotal evidence is empirically denied. There is a very strong correlation between higher level of formal education and Democratic Party affiliation. I'm not flaming Republicans, just stating what census data clearly show.
    
    Florida is a tossup right now. I expect it to go Republican, assuming McCain's numbers don't take too much of a beating due to Palin or the upcoming debates. That said, Obama is virtually guaranteed to win most of the Kerry states and has turned several large Bush states into tossups. Of all the tough calls left on the electoral map, Obama needs to win only a couple (if he holds all Kerry states he needs only one big state to flip; otherwise he needs to replace lost EVs as well from any Kerry stats that flip). It seems like McCain needs one hell of an October Surprise to pull out a win.
- illinoise89, on 08/31/2008, -1/+3Putin's one bad *****. I wouldn't leave Sarah Palin in a room alone with him.
mattmollysdad, on 08/31/2008, -35/+20and u think that Obama is qualified to be President? Why?
- garryw, on 08/31/2008, -15/+9Hey wise guy, voting "present" takes balls. His not only ready, he's "the One"
  - colonels1020, on 08/31/2008, -3/+6Has he consulted The Oracle yet?
- bclinton, on 08/31/2008, -16/+4You asked a question he cant answer. He just knows its cool to be an Obamatard.
  
  Like wow dude. I'm an Obamatard. Oh ya - make Marijuana legal too - ya dude I like almost forgot that dude.......
  
  LOL
  
  Damn I'm funny....
  - xexx, on 08/31/2008, -5/+3and you think McCain is qualified... why? He graduated in the lowest 1% of his class, and only graduated because his father and grandfather were admirals. The only reason he got in the senate was because he got shot down and tortured, launching himself into fame. McCain and Palin have the education of yard gnomes.
  - bclinton, on 09/01/2008, -0/+2Sorry - I forgtot Obama is one up on them. He went to a Muslim school as a young lad. That makes his more qualified...........to run AlQaeda.....
- mogebier, on 08/31/2008, -10/+9I haven't heard anyone on Digg say a reason to vote FOR Obama. Just lame reason's to vote AGAINST McCain.
  - whitey9, on 08/31/2008, -2/+1I know, the front page is flooded with articles listing reasons to vote for McCain.
    
    Is this your first time experiencing a presidential race?
  - babalukas, on 08/31/2008, -4/+1Lame reasons? McCain IS Bush. That's the only reason needed right there.
  - xexx, on 08/31/2008, -3/+1McCain wants to kill net neutrality and therefore kill free speech on the internet when your ISPs don't like it.
- iofthestorm, on 08/31/2008, -3/+3Look at xexx's comment about 200 pixels above yours.
- redchina, on 09/01/2008, -2/+1He did drugs.
  - docbob84, on 09/01/2008, -0/+0So did W. So did Clinton (I laughed my ass off at "I didn't inhale", yeah right). I'd bet so did Bush the First. And Reagan had to have been on some good ***** to do the things he did. As with the sex I ask, who cares? Do you really want a president who's never smoked anything, never drank anything, a virgin at 50-60 and never tried anything? I'd rather have someone who's done it all than someone who's too chicken to try or too obsessed with getting elected to admit it.
akchrs, on 08/31/2008, -27/+19Every attempt at pointing out a perceived inexperience in Palin is just hurting Obama, who has no experience at leading. So please feel free to attempt to point it out. Thanks.
- Haecceity, on 08/31/2008, -3/+812 years in elected office...
  - akchrs, on 08/31/2008, -4/+4.....voting present.
  - v01c30fr3a50n, on 09/01/2008, -2/+2Palin also has 12 years of experience in elected office. So how is Obama more experience than Palin?
  - Haecceity, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1How is Obama more experienced?
    
    Palin was mayor of a town with a population of just over 5,000 people. Previous to that she had served as a council member of the same, teeny-weeny town. In terms of becoming VP that doesn't even register.
    
    Do you see difference between that and serving on a state senate and the US Senate for 12 years?
    
    She's been governor of a state with a population of something over 600,000 for about 18 months. That counts for something, but she has no experience of national politics. She has no experience of foreign affairs.
- yojiffyskippy, on 08/31/2008, -2/+9Very true, the experience argument has become Obama-v-Palin. That can't be good for Obama.
- Peekman, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1how can there even be an argument????
  
  Palin has been in the national spotlight for what... 3 days??...... and during those 3 days she's had to compete with a ginormous hurricane and the fact that most Americans are too busy barbequin' and drinkin' beers to care about how many times she lost Miss Alaska before she entered public office...
- SuperMoses, on 09/01/2008, -0/+2The attempt here was to show Republican hypocrisy, not Palin's inexperienced, but I guess Republican apologists are incapable of reading.
randyzaia, on 08/31/2008, -14/+9"And Republicans wonder why Americans continue to laugh at them..."

Uh, when was the last time a Democrat won an absolute majority in a presidential election?
- rearlgrant, on 08/31/2008, -6/+1Well, the last time a Republican did was 2004.
- benman587, on 08/31/2008, -7/+62000
  - randyzaia, on 08/31/2008, -4/+3try again
  - akinapb, on 08/31/2008, -2/+1Yea, only a couple million votes.
  - docbob84, on 09/01/2008, -0/+5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_preside ...
    
    Gore "won" the election 50.99 million to 50.46 million. It was close akinapb, but all elections in the US are. Even Bush's "mandate" in 2004 was only won by 3 million votes.
    
    Also on the list of Democrats winning the popular election: 1996 (47,4M to 39.2M), and 1992 (44.9 to 39.1). Republicans have won two elections in the last five, according to the populous.
  - samyoungguitar, on 09/01/2008, -0/+2HA!! I like how docbob84 got buried for bringing a substantive fact to the thread. You republicans just want to believe your own little "creations" instead of being held accountable to fact. In summation, you're pussies that can't man up and admit when they're wrong. docbob84 dugg.
  - kefkaantakrist, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1samy, I think the point randy was making is that even Bill Clinton did not win a majority of the popular vote - only a plurality.
- randyzaia, on 08/31/2008, -4/+4You mean, the last election?
- kefkaantakrist, on 09/01/2008, -0/+3You've got a true but sad point. Jimmy Carter is the answer. Bill Clinton won with, and Gore lost with, a plurality of the popular vote, not a majority. As a left leaning independent, I find that very sad.
  
  That said, if Nader had not run in '00 and Gore had gained just 60% of Nader's votes he would have gotten a true majority... in '96 if Perot had not run, Clinton would have needed to absorb just 10% of his votes to get the majority...and in '92 he would have needed to absorb 37% of Perot's votes to gain a majority.
  
  Then again, if not for spoiler candidates the winner would have a majority every time, right?
Carv, on 08/31/2008, -10/+81The GOP was against inexperienced VPs before they were for them.
- MadOgre, on 08/31/2008, -12/+3Dugg for the Kerry jab.
  - DavidGX, on 08/31/2008, -0/+4Buried for not getting it.
- akamurph, on 09/01/2008, -8/+1nice logo dueche
randyzaia, on 08/31/2008, -35/+37News flash: the Democratic Congress has a lower approval rating than Bush.
- sugarazor, on 08/31/2008, -5/+22What was the Republican Congress' approval rating?
  
  Oh I'm sorry, we don't have that statistic because it's not a good talking point for the right-wing media.
  - randyzaia, on 08/31/2008, -16/+10Higher than the current Democratic Congress' rating.
  - akinapb, on 08/31/2008, -3/+9Yea, I'm sure American rewarded them with extra terms... oh wait.
  - uqdroma, on 09/01/2008, -3/+3At the end of their regime 109th was roughly 35% based on a few different polling sources.
    
    http://mediamatters.org/items/200706040003
    
    Notice the present congress hit a RECORD LOW of 14%
    
    Funny thing is most experts say they will gain seats. If repubs lost all theirs at 35% What makes these "experts" think dems won't lose theirs at 14%? Pretty weird and biased media if you ask me.
  - lndmn01, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1About 37% in 2005. Current approval rating are about 17%
  - weswood, on 09/01/2008, -0/+23This "Democratic Congress" is 49% Republican.
  - sulthernao, on 09/01/2008, -0/+3Republicans in congress have a lower approval rating then Democrats in congress. Congress as a whole has ALWAYS had lower approval ratings than the Presidents (makes sense that you wouldn't care about an institution where you only could have voted for 3 out 538 people).
  - solistus, on 09/01/2008, -0/+5Congress always has low approval ratings for a few reasons:
    
    -Different regions have different demographics. Most members of Congress are trying to please a different demographic than exists in most of the country, whereas a President is presumably trying to appeal to the nation overall.
    -Congress gets blamed for partisan gridlock, whereas the President - even if he contributes to that gridlock just as much - is not seen as obstructionist because he's firmly on one side instead of being divided 51/49.
    -People like individuals better than institutions. If you asked about approval of the 'Executive' as a whole, it would probably be lower.
    
    Case in point: while Congress' approval ratings are at record lows, only a few of the incumbents up for re-election in November (and NONE of the incumbent Democrats) are likely to lose. As a rule of thumb, people approve of THEIR representatives in Congress and dislike Congress overall, and dislike of Congress is often a more reliable statistic than Presidential approval for general satisfaction with federal policies (for the above reason and because Presidential approval gets affected much more by the charisma of one person - the Prez - whereas Congressional approval is mostly a matter of policy).
- whitey9, on 08/31/2008, -0/+12How is this relevant to a story about upcoming vice presidential candidates?
- Suzilla, on 09/01/2008, -1/+4News flash: the legace of 12 years of Republican malfeasance.
- Boomkin, on 09/01/2008, -1/+7Well, duh. The liberals and moderates are pissed at congress because they bend over at the neocons every opportunity they get. And the conservatives hate congress because it's "controlled by Democrats."
  - Peekman, on 09/01/2008, -1/+3so many labels...... can't people just be.... people?...
    
    black, white, liberal, conservative, democrat, republican, man, woman.... blah blah blah blah
- obeythefist, on 09/01/2008, -1/+2Very fitting icon.
- IrvineKinneas50, on 09/01/2008, -0/+5a) completely irrelevant
  b) comparing apples to oranges - historically, congress ALWAYS has a lower approval rating than Bush. This is nothing new and acting like it means anything significant is disingenuous.
LarryLacuna, on 08/31/2008, -12/+28When I heard about Palin getting the VP spot I thought for sure the inexperienced thing would be played down as much as possible. I feel stupid that I'm surprised Republicans are actually arguing Palin is MORE experienced then Obama - I should have seen it coming.

Stupidity has no limit pertaining to what people will not just believe but put their entire existence behind.
- akchrs, on 08/31/2008, -18/+5She is more experienced than Obama. The only experience he has is voting "present". We just had statewide elections last Tuesday and "present" wasn't even on our ballot, but then Alaska is a Republican state.
  - illinoise89, on 08/31/2008, -6/+9Quit talking out of your ass. As a conservative, I'm sure you could find valid points to attack Obama, but instead you try to seriously say that Palin is more experienced than Obama. Are you ***** kidding me?
  - akchrs, on 09/01/2008, -8/+4No, I'm not kidding. Has Obama ever been a leader of a state, appointed an administration? The last 2 presidents, a democrat and a republican, were ex governors.
  - CourtesyFlush, on 09/01/2008, -2/+2Neither Obama nor Edwards....
    
    - have ever vetoed anything, let alone vetoed their way to historic budget cuts.
    
    - have ever appointed anyone, let alone appoint members of OTHER parties to positions of importance.
    
    - have ever been commander in chief of any military force.
    
    - have ever forced through ethics reform, let alone burn crooked members of their own party.
    
    - have ever taxed the ***** out of big oil, and have yet to return surplus tax revenues back to the people who elected them.
    
    Sarah Palin as already done all those things.
    
    Now bury this as if it will change anything.
  - deadfrog, on 09/01/2008, -0/+2akchrs - John McCain has no executive experience either. Does that mean that the Republican ticket should be reversed?
    
    I understand you want to look at McCain's pick kindly - but executive experience of a state, particularly of a state like Alaska which is very different from the rest of the Union, does not mean that that experience is transferable.
    
    If executive experience is tantamount, why isn't she the top the ticket?
IslandDog, on 08/31/2008, -33/+20LOL. She is more experienced than Obama. Keep it up democrats!
- Haecceity, on 08/31/2008, -5/+12Obama: 12 years in elected office at state and national level.
  Palin: mayor of a town of just over 5,000 people, then 18 months as governor of a state with fewer than a million people. Oh, I forgot she was also a beauty queen. Guess that counts for something.
  - nalen33, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1I'm still trying to figure out why everyone keeps comparing Obama to Palin. Palin is the VP candidate, Obama is the Presidential candidate. They both have little experience, and the more that Obama supporters bring this up, the more they expose Obama to criticism while McCain supporters sit back and point and laugh at the hypocrisy.
- cadmiumpaint, on 08/31/2008, -0/+5FAIL. she's more experienced than McCain if you use that idiotic logic.
mvest20, on 08/31/2008, -38/+37How in the world can you attack Palin when Obama was an actual Senator for a lesser amount of time than she was Governor? The hypocrisy of both parties is extremely evident with this thread, but the fact that the liberals are so fired up to attack Palin makes them look pretty bad.
- jmisavage, on 08/31/2008, -5/+26Dude get your facts right first. Obama was a US Senator in Jan 2005 and Palin became governor in Dec of 2006.
  - redchina, on 09/01/2008, -4/+5Obama began his campaign for president in 2007.
  - mvest20, on 09/01/2008, -10/+6Yes you're right, but Palin is just now becoming a presidential contender whereas Obama was only in his Senate seat for 143 days before becoming an official candidate (launching his exploratory committee.) Therefore, she has more experience since Obama has spent almost all his time campaigning since his election, even when it wasn't official.
  - jmisavage, on 09/01/2008, -2/+19Obama still had time to cast 348 votes in this session of congress. Which is more than McCain's 231 votes.
- colincornaby, on 08/31/2008, -3/+13"How in the world can you attack Palin when Obama was an actual Senator for a lesser amount of time than she was Governor? "
  
  I don't know who told you that but it's false. Palin has only been a governor for a year. She was elected about the same time Obama announced his run for Presidency.
  - Peekman, on 09/01/2008, -1/+4wtf she's only been governor a year and she has already had time to get herself into a scandal?
- xexx, on 08/31/2008, -4/+16You do realize Obama has been in the state senate/senate for 12 years, right?
  - mvest20, on 09/01/2008, -7/+4Yes, but if you are telling me that a state senator is qualified in any type of foreign or technically even national affairs you're crazy. All that means is that he fits into a bureaucracy and knows how to manipulate a system.
  - sulthernao, on 09/01/2008, -1/+4He was approved of by the people, Palin was approved of by one person. That is the difference.
  - bmullins, on 09/01/2008, -0/+2mvest20... If you are telling us that a short time governor of Alaska is qualified in any type of foreign affairs, you too are crazy.
- xclapcorex, on 09/01/2008, -4/+16Palin Was Elected into Office in December 4th 2006, Obama was Elected into office in January 4th 2005. I don't know how you count time, That means Obama was in the Senate for almost 2 years before Palin was Governor.
  
  By Picking Palin McCain is Stating that If He weren't Running for president he would want Her to be running. This shows his judgement. He feels that a 2 year Governor with a communications Degree from Idaho State is more qualified to be president than any other republicans with law degrees from Ivy league schools, experience in national government, or traveled abroad more than twice.
  
  It also shows McCain's lack in faith in the electorate, especially women, and their ability to understand candidates. He believes that embittered Hillary supports will vote for him solely because he had the "courage" to pick a woman for the VP spot. It's one thing to pick a woman, it's another to pick one that is qualified.
  
  Based on her resume (albeit short) she is one of the most unqualified republicans for the job period. Republicans should be frustrated with this poor pick. The only really concrete reason why someone would logically (and i say that loosely) decide to Vote for McCain because he picked her is because she has a vagina.
  
  That's right, the only reason why people will vote for her is because she has a vagina.
- IrvineKinneas50, on 09/01/2008, -1/+5How can you attack Obama when you CAN'T DO BASIC MATH.
  
  Christ, where are people getting the idea that Palin's been governor longer than Obama's been a senator? Is it that hard to look at Wikipedia and then subtract one number from the other?
- samyoungguitar, on 09/01/2008, -1/+2Dude.. you're dumb.
- rewardjr, on 09/01/2008, -2/+0This sure is a Democratic web site. To be in Presidential Politics for a Democrat, you have to have experience in Sexual affairs. Then everyone can feel sympathetic toward your spouse and vote for you.
se7endaytheory7, on 08/31/2008, -11/+6http://www.zshare.net/image/17978348797e3997/
- kingp, on 09/01/2008, -0/+2Spoiler: SPAM
TunaFishGangsta, on 08/31/2008, -7/+40" And Republicans wonder why Americans continue to laugh at them..."

Did you forget that American's elected George W. Bush twice? I think that, if anything, the republicans are ones laughing.
- joel8x, on 09/01/2008, -1/+3You beat me to the punch. Some people on Digg need to look out at the mainstream world and realize that the Digger mentality is in the minority.
- CrazyZ, on 09/01/2008, -2/+4How many democrats held the oval office in the last forty years? Nuff said.
  - nalen33, on 09/01/2008, -0/+32. What do I win?!?
- otakushark, on 09/01/2008, -1/+4Actually, Americans voted for Gore in 2000 by a margin of 543,895.
  - TunaFishGangsta, on 09/01/2008, -1/+1Yet, they _elected_ Bush.
  - otakushark, on 09/07/2008, -0/+1A flaw in the system elected Bush. Potentially voter fraud in Florida as well.
TwoSlick, on 08/31/2008, -4/+7Every party slings mud at every other party, and if you are naive enough to think that Republicans are the only ones who do it, then you only have yourself to blame for your own ignorance.
- akinapb, on 08/31/2008, -0/+1What does this have to do with anything. Seriously, you are arguing the semantics of whether political criticism is acceptable or not. This is not what this article or discussion is about. Holy crap. This article is about the hypocrisy of such "mud-slinging" and the Dems are flinging that same "mud" back at Palin, and the Mcsame supporters pretending the "mud" didn't exist at all. Freaken children.
MadOgre, on 08/31/2008, -13/+19So what? The dems didn't care then... why are they worried about experience now? Obviously they don't, they nominated Barack.
- akinapb, on 09/01/2008, -2/+6Go inform yourself and go watch General Wesley Clark blasting McCain on his "experience." Getting tortured 5 years does not mean he will be a good president, especially when he agrees on using torture. Being in Congress for 20+ years does not mean he will be a good president, especially when has his share of scandals and corruption charges.
  
  Now back on topic, quit pulling ***** out of your ass, your subjective opinion on their "experience" hold no merit in any intelligence discussion because it is blatantly wrong given there is really no criterion in basing "experience" since none of them were on any presidential cabinet level position. Cut the crap, "experience" is a failed arbitrary argument.
  - flip2trip, on 09/01/2008, -3/+1Wes Clark is Bat$hi+ crazy.
- Gutterpunk, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1Not that I am in agreement with you, but dugg because you called him Barrack and didn't resort to the same talk point that we keep seeing since yesterday!
geoffg, on 08/31/2008, -10/+27I heard Palin eats babies and drives a Hummer!
- secrity, on 08/31/2008, -3/+13It looks like she lied about having a baby. I wouldn't be surprised if she drove a Hummer.
  - dstz, on 09/01/2008, -4/+7"It looks like she lied about having a baby"
    
    No, she didn't. And you're all a bunch of bigots that could make Rove blush.
    
    various pics of S. Plain pregnant this year:
    http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/2008/08/30/dail ...
    http://rightwingnews.com/mt331/2008/08/the_daily_k ...
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lee-stranahan/why-da ...
    
    And OH WOW BRISTOL HAD A 3 YEARS LONG PREGNANCY ....
    http://www.adn.com/photos/v-gallery/story/509850.h ...
    
    I hope that all the salacious hate, that rise from unchecked conviction about the inferiority of the less urban family ideals, you all directed toward that 16 yo girl will cost all of you some big karma in your future life.
  - kingp, on 09/01/2008, -0/+3@dstz
    
    That family pic was originally said to have been taken in December of 2007, and then the original website changed the date to 2006, so something isn't right either way.
  - Peekman, on 09/01/2008, -1/+4Ya man... on various sites that picture has different dates......
    
    besides which... when did 2006-2008 become 3 years???
    
    maybe in your future life you can learn to do math?
- Spoomeister, on 08/31/2008, -4/+2I heard Palin makes babies and gives a hummer!
peestandingup, on 08/31/2008, -12/+9"And Republicans wonder why Americans continue to laugh at them"

Only the smart ones ;-)
lajaw, on 08/31/2008, -26/+16Being a lawyer ought to disqualify a person for running for president. Talk about scum.
Being a senator lends no executive experience to the person. Being governor does. All this talk about having enough experience is a moot point except concerning Obama. He himself said that he did not have enough experience for any office other than the senate. Please see this vid:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BnLozS-TnM
He said himself that he lacked the experience for a higher office.
- sugarazor, on 08/31/2008, -3/+8So John McCain is unqualified to be president? He has no executive experience.
- whitey9, on 08/31/2008, -6/+16John Adams
  John Quincy Adams
  Chester A. Arthur
  James Buchanan
  Grover Cleveland
  William Jefferson Clinton
  Calvin Coolidge
  Millard Filmore
  Gerald R. Ford
  James A. Garfield
  Benjamin Harrison
  Rutherford B. Hayes
  Andrew Jackson
  Abraham Lincoln
  William McKinley
  James Monroe
  Richard M. Nixon
  Franklin Pierce
  James K. Polk
  Franklin Delano Roosevelt
  William Howard Taft
  John Tyler
  Martin Van Buren
  Woodrow Wilson
  
  All lawyers. Your idiotic level of political discourse is ***** embarrassing.
  - lajaw, on 08/31/2008, -10/+2I rest my case................
  - illinoise89, on 08/31/2008, -2/+4So Lincoln and FDR weren't good enough for you? What kind of point are you trying to make here?
  - lajaw, on 08/31/2008, -8/+2Lincoln brought us the Civil War and suspended habeas corpus. FDR ushered in the era of BIG government and the welfare state. Yes, they were not good enough for me and the Constitution.
  - bubbadigg, on 09/01/2008, -1/+1Most of the good presidents that were lawyers, were lawyers before ambulance chasers existed.
    
    Now there are more lawyer scum than ever existed, and the worst go into politics.
- MScrip, on 08/31/2008, -0/+1The United States Presidency is not a person... it's an office.
  
  The current figures for the Executive Office of the President are about 1,800 full-time equivalent employees. These employees work in the East Wing and the West Wing of the White House and in the Executive Office Building, an extension of the White House.
  
  See US Government: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Us_government
- pintomp3, on 08/31/2008, -2/+3"Being a senator lends no executive experience to the person. Being governor does." bush was a governor, and he has done a bang up job of running the country.
  - lajaw, on 08/31/2008, -5/+1You are right, I'm wrong. I forgot about Clinton and Carter.
- akinapb, on 09/01/2008, -2/+2hahahahhahahahahahhahahaha
  
  whitey9 pwned you!
omegared, on 08/31/2008, -8/+16she has foreign policy experience, Alaska is near Russia.......
- secrity, on 08/31/2008, -1/+6Alaska shares a long border with Canada too.
- PacoLugi, on 08/31/2008, -10/+2At least she is correct, unlike the short-bus guy who thinks the U.S. has 57 states.
  - xexx, on 08/31/2008, -0/+7Obvious misspeak was obvious, he had been to 47 states.
- TheR3dMenace, on 08/31/2008, -0/+4I think the we need a better way to convey sarcasm
- pushmouse, on 08/31/2008, -0/+4and Santa's Workshop.
- v01c30fr3a50n, on 09/01/2008, -1/+1Don't forget she went to Iraq last year to visit the Alaskan National Guard as governor of Alaska.
rearlgrant, on 08/31/2008, -7/+19Republicans: Put ideologues/idiots in government to prove to people you can't trust government.
- akchrs, on 08/31/2008, -7/+3Democrats: Argue within your party and lose elections
massak, on 08/31/2008, -24/+12RETARDED DIGGERS STRIKE AGAIN...at not referencing reliable sources, but merely "yes-men" bloggers.....come on, huffpo was bad enough....
LemonChicken, on 08/31/2008, -4/+14It goes both ways. Democrats and Republicans both lie to support their motives. This isn't really news.
deadbaby, on 08/31/2008, -1/+10It's sad the American people fall for this stuff so easily. We can blame the parties & candidates all we want but the truth is they wouldn't be doing it if people didn't fall for the same stupid rhetoric over and over again.
Xihix, on 08/31/2008, -2/+3So what? This is a very typical situation in politics and is nothing new. Before, you used to criticize something for doing something, and then later on, you're doing it yourself. Bring something new to the table.
bigstupid, on 08/31/2008, -4/+10The blatant dislike of one party is foolish... dislike both. It makes more sense and we could potentially solve more problems by stopping this 'red pill blue pill' bs.
- Peekman, on 09/01/2008, -0/+3I agree... blind loyalty to one party or the other is foolish...
  
  it should be about the 'issues of the day' and whoever you believe can solve the current problems the best...
xtremehoops23, on 08/31/2008, -21/+16Interesting comparison between Obama and Palin.
http://www.redstate.com/diaries/redstate/2008/aug/ ...
- akchrs, on 08/31/2008, -10/+5Thanks!!
- RealHyperX, on 08/31/2008, -10/+5you will get dugg down. the messiah crowd hates the truth
  - Boomkin, on 09/01/2008, -0/+7The truth, from Redstate.com?
    
    Thanks for a laugh.
- mogebier, on 08/31/2008, -6/+6That was interesting.
- Boomkin, on 09/01/2008, -0/+12Whoa, that's quite a selective list of half-truths.
  
  This one's awesome ("Most Courageous Moment in Public Service"):
  "Gave an anti-Iraq war speech to a crowd of anti-Iraq war demonstrators in Hyde Park in 2002"
  
  Never-mind that this was the McCarthyesque era right after 9/11 when criticizing the Government at all was nearly political suicide.
- Gerticus, on 09/01/2008, -0/+7Completely unbiased, I'm sure.
jsdratm, on 08/31/2008, -6/+16All the people who think she has more experience or is a better candidate than Obama are lying to themselves. Oh she has less than two years as governor, but its "executive experience" and somehow that is more valuable... right... Obama was born poor and busted his ass to get top grades at Harvard and become a state senator and federal senator for 12 years.
- v01c30fr3a50n, on 09/01/2008, -5/+4Obama wasn't born poor. He's from privilege. He's father attended Harvard and his mother was an anthropologist. He lived in Hawaii, Indonesia and Kansas as a kid. Executive experience is more important than legislative if you want to be president ( Executive Branch ). Just like having having experience in medicine is more important than experience in law if you want to be a doctor.
- nalen33, on 09/01/2008, -0/+4When did Obama start running against Palin and not McCain?
viridari, on 08/31/2008, -21/+16I'm an independent, not voting for McCain, but I still have to call ***** on this.

Palin has more executive experience than McCain, Obama, Biden, and Edwards combined. This is an executive position she's running for.

I'd say her experience as governor makes her much more qualified to run this country in case of something happening to McCain than Obama's brief stay in the senate. His voting record shows he hasn't spent much time there, anyway, apparently using the Senate as a stepping stone from nothing to the White House.
- whitey9, on 08/31/2008, -2/+7George W. Bush was governor of Texas for 6 years.
- JoeMondo, on 08/31/2008, -4/+8Honestly, mayor of a speck of a town isn't much exec experience. She has minimal education, and zero foreign policy experience, and zero national experience.
  
  But the more interesting issue isn't anyone's lack of experience per se. It's that McCain made such an issue of Obama's youth and (in)experience, but then selected someone younger with as little or less.
  
  Where's McCain going to go now on his inexperience line? He's neutralized his own argument.
- illinoise89, on 08/31/2008, -1/+6She has no experience at the national level. At all. She has virtually no position on anything having to do with things going on outside of our borders. She has not taken a stand on anything besides domestic social conservative issues. Ask yourself honestly if she would be a better commander in chief that Barack Obama.
  - nalen33, on 09/01/2008, -1/+2Holy mother of god, she's not running against Obama, McCain is! For *****'s sake make a logical argument! This really is getting ridiculous.
  - mmilton, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1I'm an Obama fan... but your logic is faulty. I suppose you think that the Clintons came from a no-nothing state. And what about Biden's state? Deleware's population is about the same as Alaska. Please let's move on to real issues.
- blitz718, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1Abe Lincoln.
johnnyfistfight, on 08/31/2008, -16/+12Republican presidents 28 of the past 40 years. Republicans are laughing at the total incompetents of the democrats ability to win the presidency. We'll be laughing for the next 8 years too.
- pintomp3, on 08/31/2008, -3/+6republicans are good at campaigning, but suck at governing.
  - bossm4n, on 09/01/2008, -7/+2You perfectly summed up Obama in one sentence. He's a professional campaigner.
- Peekman, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1'28 presidents of the past 40 years'........... what does that even mean???...
sugarazor, on 08/31/2008, -7/+35It's impossible to try to argue with a Republican since as soon as you come up with an answer, they simply change the question. Logic and reasoning have no place in a discussion with them because they can make the discussion about anything they want and they think if they repeat something enough, it'll come true. Examples:

The attorney scandal - "Every other president relieves the previous attorneys." - yes, at the beginning of their term, Bush released them mid-term for political reasons.

"Dick Cheney isn't a part of the Executive Branch."

"You're doin' a heckuva job, Brownie!"

"Mission Accomplished"

"The surge is working!"

"Offshore drilling will lower gas prices!"

"Those silly Democrats think inflating your tires will improve gas mileage!"

"Global Warming needs more study"

"The Jury is out on Evolution"

"History will look back kindly on George W. Bush"

"They hate us for our freedom!"

"Sarah Palin has more experience than Barack Obama!"

They're a complete joke of a party and have driven this country further into the ground for the last 30 years and they get worse with every administration. They can't govern, all they can do is trash their opponents and run a permanent campaign.
- KDX200rider, on 08/31/2008, -14/+6Sorry friend, you have your parties mixed up. Everything you accuse the Republicans of, the Loony left and the Dems are guilty of and more.
  - sugarazor, on 08/31/2008, -3/+9Sorry friend, you have your parties mixed up. Everything you accuse the Democrats of, the retarded right and the Reps are guilty of and more.
  - akinapb, on 09/01/2008, -0/+5Seriously, it is this type of ignorance which fuels the idiocy of this nation. It wasn't loony left that got us into a War that had nothing to do with Osama Bin Laden, it wasn't under Democratic watch that 9/11 happened. You are a moron. Clear and simple.
  - freddie4, on 09/01/2008, -0/+5haha it would be nice if you backed it up with something instead of just talking out your ass
  - edyang, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1@akinapb: that's right, it was under Democratic watch that the WTC was bombed, that the USS Cole was attacked, and that Bin Laden was allowed to go on him merry way building up his organization.
- KDX200rider, on 08/31/2008, -14/+5Mission accomplished ...was actually accomplished. Do you even know what the mission was? I'll bet you don't.
  The surge is working...I am surprised you even mentioned this when even the most liberal nitwit has had to admit is has helped.
  Offshore drilling... will eventually lower prices....Since when does adding supply increase the price, of course it won't today, but it will eventually.
  Global Warming....You been listening to Al Gore too much.
  The do hate us for our freedom...or more specifically what our freedom allows us to do.
  
  I guess that should do it, now I know this won't sway you, your a liberal Democrat, you won't listen to reason or fact. You will listen to Al Gore, Dan Rather, and Michael Moore.
  - sugarazor, on 09/01/2008, -1/+9If the mission was accomplished, why are we still there?
    
    "The surge is working" is a prime example of Republicans changing the question. The question is "Why did we go to Iraq?" Republican response: "THE SURGE IS WORKING!"
    
    Eventually... ten years from now, when we should be investing in alternative fuels or using our own reserves that could power this country for sixty years.
    
    I listen to Al Gore too much? Then explain to me why the polar ice caps are melting at such an alarming rate? Why are parts of the arctic that have never melted before, are completely gone right now?
    
    They don't "hate us for our freedom," they hate us because we have stationed military bases all over the globe and tend to trample the world, much like we did in Iraq. "Hate our freedom" is the most childish, asinine ***** since McCain said he was going to "defeat evil."
    
    And not a Democrat, never watched An Inconvenient Truth, don't watch Dan Rather and generally can't stand Michael Moore. But thanks for playing anyway, junior.
  - OrigamiRonin, on 09/01/2008, -1/+4Parrot republican talking point about the war,
    parrot republican talking point about the surge,
    parrot republican talking point about offshore drilling,
    parrot republican talking point about global warming,
    parrot republican talking point about why our enemies are fighting us,
    finish up by accusing the other person of not listening to reason or fact.
    
    Simply brilliant. You made SugarRazor's point for him. The only way it would have been better is if you added something along the lines of "think for yourself" or "stop drinking the kool-aid."
- bigstupid, on 08/31/2008, -1/+1Both parties are guilty of this by-and-large. People need to be a little more honest here.
KDX200rider, on 08/31/2008, -13/+7America is laughing at the Dems try accuse Palin of being inexperienced, while running against BHussienO. How much executive experience does he have? None I believe.
- Mattwdj, on 08/31/2008, -1/+6Bush had 6 years of EXECUTIVE experience looked how that turned out.
- SuperMoses, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1Thanks for showing Obama's middle name, because it is so relevant. America is laughing at idiots like you that vote based on someone's middle name. America is also laughing at you for missing the point of the article. It wasn't to "accuse Palin of being inexperienced", but to show how the GOP are hypocrites by criticizing Edwards for being inexperienced when he was more experienced than Palin.
consciousNOT, on 08/31/2008, -11/+6Only a few impotent diggers are laughing, not all of America. Get it straight subby.
Timborako, on 08/31/2008, -7/+7you could cut the hypocrisy with a knife
voodoochild461, on 08/31/2008, -9/+3buried for 2004
fluffyturtle, on 08/31/2008, -4/+10"And Republicans wonder why Americans continue to laugh at them..."

You mean: And Republicans wonder why Digg continue to laugh at them...

America is asleep and McSame fully intends to keep it that way.
se7endaytheory7, on 08/31/2008, -11/+5Sarah Palin is the name attributed to a woman who hijacked a Boeing 727 aircraft in the United States on November 24, 1971, received US$200,000 in ransom, and parachuted from the plane vanishing without a trace.
- Peekman, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1I thought that was that guy on Prison Break????
TinternAbbot, on 08/31/2008, -2/+4That's because these statements, whether coming from a Republican or a Democrat, are meaningless. There as no such thing as being "experienced enough" for the Presidency. Only former presidents (and not all of them) are "experienced."
hsunav,

GOP in 2004: John Edwards Too Inexperienced To Be VP

submitted by

What is Digg?

Top in US Elections 2008

Our Presidents’ First 100 Days in Office [Infographic]thumb

GOP in 2004: John Edwards Too Inexperienced To Be VP

submitted by

What is Digg?

Top in US Elections 2008

Our Presidents’ First 100 Days in Office [Infographic]thumb

Related by Keyword

Obama wins praise from former rival John Edwards

Derby Shock Man Utd In Cup Semi Final

BioShock Could Have up to 5 Sequels thumb