On the subject of experience...

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

The political experience of selected American Presidents:

George Washington - Virgina House of Burgesses; Continental Congress
Abraham Lincoln - Illinois General Assembly; U.S. House of Representatives (one term)
U.S. Grant - None
Teddy Roosevelt - New York Assembly; New York Governor; Vice President
Woodrow Wilson - New Jersey Governor
Franklin Roosevelt - New York State Senator; New York Governor
Dwight Eisenhower - None
John Kennedy - U.S House of Representatives; Sentator Massachusetts
Richard Nixon - U.S. House of Representatives; California Senator; Vice President
Gerald Ford - U.S. House of Representatives; Vice President
Jimmy Carter -- Georgia State Sentate; Georgia Governor
Ronald Reagan -- California Governor
George H.W. Bush -- U.S. House of Representatives; Vice President
Bill Clinton -- Arkansas Attorney General; Arkansas Governor
George W. Bush -- Texas Governor

The point here (and I do have one) is that there is no such thing as "experience" when it comes to being the leader of the free world. Some Presidents with lengthy resumes (Nixon) were train wrecks and other Presidents with comparatively short resumes (Eisenhower) acquitted themselves reasonably well. Some Presidents with short resumes were diasters (Grant) and others with more impressive credentials did quite well (Roosevelt & Roosevelt).

All of this "Candidate X Doesn't Have Enough Experience" talk is pointless. Look at the character of the candidate. Do Hillary, Obama and Edwards have the right priorities? I think the answer is a resounding "yes" on for all three. Obama has experience as a community organizer. Hillary has experience pursuing an agenda even when she didn't actually have legislative power. Edwards has the experience of making a case and presenting in a complelling manner. They have different life experiences, and one is not necessarily superior to another.

My $0.02