Experience? Whose got what.

I was watching the news today and it struck me again , Obama supporters, who are whining about governor Palen's so called lack of experience and only a "heartbeat away" of being president if something should happen to senator McCain, are supporting a man with no real resume to be a chief executive. When I heard it for the second or third time from different individuals throughout one morning I started to laugh. Why, you might ask. The republicans are accused of placing an unqualified person a heartbeat away from the presidency and if you look at the facts, the democrats are trying to place an unqualified person in the White House. Not a heartbeat away but actually in the White House as president. Can anyone explain to me what Senator Obama's qualifications are for being president other than the fact that he's good looking, he's young, and he can make speeches very well as long as he has a teleprompter. Oh yes, I forgot, he was a "community organizer" whatever that is. The qualifications that I've heard so far are one, he was a community organizer, two, he held a senate seat in the state of Illinois for a very short time and three he is the junior senator from the state of Illinois has been in office for less than two years. So which of these three things that he is an qualifies him to be president? No one has shown me where Senator Obama since he has been in the US Senate has initiated any type of legislation. Yes he did push some things through in the Illinois Senate, but no one has been able to show me so far any legislation that Senator Obama has authored that has reached across party lines. Nor has he worked hand in hand with republicans and independents to form any type of coalition or bi-partisan group to work and any type of legislation. If you want to look at his leadership in the senate, he is the chairman of a senate committee that has never met since he became the chairman. Obama has demonstrated no leadership in any of his endeavors. As a "community organizer he associated with Reverend Wright and William Ayers around, following their lead and their advice and how to advance politically. So in total Senator Obama has been a legislator for approximately 10 years and has the most liberal voting record in the United States Senate and has never reached a crossed party lines for any reason. Prior to that as stated before, he was a "community organizer". He has no years of executive experience. Now let's look at Sarah Palen's experience. In 1992 She was elected as a member of the town council (legislative experience) and again in 1996. As a council member she worked to do what was best for the people of her city. She then ran for and was elected mayor (executive experience) in 1996 and was very successful again doing what was right rather than what was expedient or politically correct to do. She took the lead in reducing wasteful spending. She was elected a second time by a wider margin and continued her work on reforms. Term limits stopped her from running for a third term as mayor. Between the time she left her job a mayor ,she took on a corrupt members of her own party and they were forced to retire after an investigation found they were guilty. In 1996 Sarah then took on the incumbent governor beat him in the primary and she went on to win a race for governor in her home state of Alaska. While in office over the last two years she has continually cut wasteful spending, reached across party lines to again do what was right for the people of Alaska rather than what was politically correct for her party. Her popularity with the voters has ranged from 82-93%. Sarah Palen has ten years of executive experience between her time as a Mayor and her time as governor of Alaska. She has experience of being a legislator by being a member of her town council. While she may not have a lot of stamps on her passport it simply means she hasn't been touring Europe and Asia on the taxpayers tab like many members of congress. She's stayed at work doing her job governing a city and a state. Submitting and managing budgets. Working as commander in chief of the Alaska National Guard. There is a lot more that I've left out. You can find it by simply looking it up on the Internet like I did. So all in all if you compare the two candidates to the one who wants to be president from the democratic party has no executive experience, no experience in reaching across the aisle to work with members of the other parties to get things done, he has no experience in writing legislation, he has no experience in fighting corruption, and he has done nothing during his time in either Illinois or in the US Senate to introduce change to anything. Yet the democratic party believes that he is qualified to be president. Sarah Palen on the other hand who is running for the office of vice-president as the second person on a ticket with a very experienced a leader at the top, has experience as a chief executive for both the city and the state fighting for change and making changes. She has experience as a legislator being a member of her town council introducing change. She has experience in reaching across the aisles to gain the support of members of the other parties to do what is right for the people. She has cut spending in her state. And she has taken on big government corruption and she won. You tell me which one of these two is qualified to be president of the United States, the democrat who wants to be president with no executive experience and no bi-partisan legislation bearing his name, or the republican with 10 years of executive experience, legislative experience, has been an agent for change throughout her political and public career who wants to be vice president and a heartbeat away from being the president?