Would Sarah Palin be Qualified to be President?

she is as qualified as Obama only she has never befriended terrorist

I don't agree with the author at all. Sarah Palin has no national experience whatsoever. We've had 8 years of a "butt-kicker," and look what it's gotten us. And the author has mischaracterized Obama's policy completely. She's throwing around negative buzz-words left and right, without really looking at what policies he's putting forth. I read an article which quoted one man whom she said was her "mentor." As soon as he was no longer able to help her up the political ladder, she turned her back on him. It's apparently been a pattern of hers, according to several people in Alaska. And the "reformer" who ousted at least one politician because he campaigned on government time was guilty of the exact same thing while she was mayor. She pressured the town council to waive zoning violations so she could sell her house. She promised if they did, she would correct the violations later, but she never did. And this "reformer" wanted a bridge to nowhere until it got too hot politically, then she refused to build it, but kept the money. She still supports a similar multi-million dollar bridge to her hometown of less than 9,000 people, even though it would only shave a few minutes off their commute time, and roads in Alaska are a mess. Coincidentally, she and her friends own the land it would go over. To me, that's not being a maverick, either--it really is politics as usual.

I don't agree with the author at all. Sarah Palin has no national experience whatsoever. We've had 8 years of a "butt-kicker," and look what it's gotten us. And the author has mischaracterized Obama's policy completely. She's throwing around negative buzz-words left and right, without really looking at what policies he's putting forth. I read an article which quoted one man whom she said was her "mentor." As soon as he was no longer able to help her up the political ladder, she turned her back on him. It's apparently been a pattern of hers, according to several people in Alaska. And the "reformer" who ousted at least one politician because he campaigned on government time was guilty of the exact same thing while she was mayor. She pressured the town council to waive zoning violations so she could sell her house. She promised if they did, she would correct the violations later, but she never did. And this "reformer" wanted a bridge to nowhere until it got too hot politically, then she refused to build it, but kept the money. She still supports a similar multi-million dollar bridge to her hometown of less than 9,000 people, even though it would only shave a few minutes off their commute time, and roads in Alaska are a mess. Coincidentally, she and her friends own the land it would go over. To me, that's not being a maverick, either--it really is politics as usual.

No. BUT I would vote for her even if it was Palin/McCain instead of McCain Palin. Only a STUPID DUMBO IDIOT would vote a terrorist sympathizer that will not even acknowledge the national anthem into office. Yall Obamites beat all I ever seen. Yall go ahead and call me stupid too. At least I'm not voting an America hater into office. Yall are a bunch of Jackasses. lol

PS. My point is my answer is NO. BUT she has more executive experience than Obama, Biden, and McCain Combined, so I think she would be a better prez than the ones running. I love her she'll get the hang of it.

It seems pretty much unanimous so far.

But it depends on what your idea of a president is. GW Bush is a figurehead president. He was picked by a 'cabal' of party and corporate powerful to push their agenda. It wasn't necessary for him to have any of his own ideas, just to read what they put in front of him. He was no more than a spokesmodel.

In fact Bush was the perfect man for this because he did have no actual ideas or agenda of his own. Not an idea in his head, actually. Without a stack of 3x5 cards he doesn't even know what his opinions are! This is why he can't do unscripted interviews.

That's the job John McCain wants to do. If you were paying attention earlier this year you will remember that ALL the Republican candidates had all the same opinions and positions on all the same issues. They were all competing for this spokesman job, to represent the same agenda. It wouldn't have mattered which one of them got nominated.

And Sarah Palin can do that job as well as anyone. People who don't understand the issues and don't want to get bogged down with facts want someone who's fresh and perky and seems friendly. Palin is perfect for that.

If you ask me, though, a president should be competent, should understand the issues, and should be working for the American People, not the party powerful and selected well-connected lobbyists.

She is absolutely not qualified to be the Vice President or President. Haven't you seen her interviews? Sure, she does great with speeches, and memorized lines during the debate -- even at the debate she refused to answer some of the questions because she did not know the answer. I have read a couple of blogs that said information about Troopergate and Palin's involvement in that will be released on Friday, 8/10. Hopefully that will shed more light on her character......Anyone, Republican or Democrat, who would encourage a crowd when they were yelling "kill him" (in reference to Obama) is a dangerous person. By the way, this is being investigated by the Secret Service. I hope they sock it to her. By the way, her nickname in Alaska is Moose-aleenie -- 'nuff said.

Yes. And she is even more qualified than Obama. Check their records and don't be blinded by your anger to Bush. She just happens to be on the republican ticket. A good president doesn't have to be a darling of the press like Obama, nor does she have to flood the voters with vague plans and empty promises as Obama is doing. Only lame and whiners will be tricked by this antics.

I read it and I don't really, honestly agree. Granted, she seems to be a good person, family oriented, etc., however, she doesn't seem to have lots of political experience, and, when "tested" (interviewed, without a script), she seems to fail.

The article mentions that Obama wants to take away liberties and tax us to death, and, although the former may be true, I am not in the $250K/yr tax bracket, so the latter shouldn't affect me. McCain and Palin, however, would like to overturn Roe V. Wade- this was a JUDICIAL decision... not an executive one. Although neither can legally overturn it, they want to appoint justices to go around the decision. They should have no say in this.

Overall, the article is clearly written by someone that hangs a little to the right (and they admit it), and maybe can't be taken at face value.

You people never cease to amaze me. You think Obama is qualified and Palin is not.

Just goes to show that you don't know what is required of a President.

And you'll be doing the voting? Well the ones of you who are old enough.

Most of you don't know how to use a spell checker, so how are ya gonna figure out a voting machine?

As she meets all the Constitutional requirements to be President, she is qualified.

to quote this from your link:

"Experience, in my book, has a certain level of importance, but it does not have as high of a level as a good heart, sound character and a determination to stand for truth and justice (or to do a job properly). If I were to hire someone in my business, I would consider experience, but I'd look for the other factors first."

It sounds like the author of that is incapable of running a business. Anybody who can write such drivel is not worth reading.

And to your question: how can I take somebody serious who hires school buddies on the strength of liking cows...sounds right like that's an example of looking for a "good heart" instead of qualification.