Obama VS Palin: their experience contrasted

From Neal Boortz today:

THE EXPERIENCE DEBATE

Barack Obama has served the ball back into the Republican's court by stating that he had more experience than Sarah Palin in dealing with natural disasters. Obama sites his litany of post-Katrina ideas that consist of nothing more than government handouts and proposals for bigger government. Obama said, "My understanding is that Gov. Palin's town, Wassilla, has I think 50 employees. We've got 2500 in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe 12 million dollars a year – we have a budget of about three times that just for the month." Just a quick note, what Obama fails to realize is that Sarah Palin is now a governor ... she operates a $9 billion budget, and manages $13 billion in revenue. She also runs a government that employs 25,000 people.

The McCain campaign has already responded, calling his response "laughable."

By the way ... I hear more and more Obama-bots telling us about all the "experience" he has running a major presidential campaign. Excuse me, but he isn't "running" the campaign. He hired people to do that. He won't be able to hire someone to be president for him.

(bold emphasis mine) Surely Obama knows she's a governor. But he can't touch her experience or accomplishments as such, so he ignores it. Imagine if anyone talked about Obama only in terms of what he did prior to being a Senator? Nobody would buy it. Why does he think he can do it with Palin, and get away with it? Does he really think we're that dumb?

Most candidates for President or Veep are either Senators or Governors. I generally prefer Governors. A Senator you have to judge by his voting record, and any legislation he has sponsored or supported. A Governor you can judge by how they, well, governed. By what they said and did in that capacity, and what they accomplished, and how they did it.

This race has had a lot of Senators. I'm glad we have at least one Governor, and that she's on our ticket.