Is Sarah Palin qualified to be President of the United States?

[Alcon]

She's under-qualified (this isn't a binary), but there are other judgments than experience, which shouldn't be held up as a litmus test.  Otherwise Obama would be dead in the water.

[Alcon]

She's just as qualified as Obama is to be President.

And therein you have the McCain counter.

That does open him up to some weakness, though.  The Democrats can argue that he never believed the "superiority of experience" argument, and just used it for political gain; there, they avoid this being about Palin, and shift it over to McCain.  It's probably their best recourse in an otherwise bad situation.

But it's just as much of an Obama counter as it is a McCain one.

[Alcon]

Interestingly, her husband's a Yupik Eskimo.

Must be of mixed blood.  Not so many blue-eyed Yup'iks:

[Alcon]

Palin supports teaching creationism in schools. Bitch is crazier than she looks.

She does? 

Sigh...yeah.

http://scienceblogs.com/afarensis/2006/10/27/intelligent_design_and_the_ala/

I don't think the position is quite as heinous as others do, but it's wholly ignorant of the scientific process.  At least she said "healthy debate is so important."  I believe that's genuine, it's just that teaching ID theories doesn't really involve much scientific debate whatsoever.

[Alcon]

Palin supports evolution being taught in the schools too—oh no!  Let's try to keep people as uninformed as possible about stuff we don't agree with!

Teaching ID in a science class usually makes a joke of the scientific method.  If there is credence to the idea of ID in a scientific context, by all means, let's consider it.  But if it is only given attention because:

1. It falls into a potential blind spot of science; and,

2. A lot of people in this country believe it,

Then it has no rational place being taught in a science classroom.  I'm all for a "limitations of science" and "science can be misapplied" in the classroom, but "some people believe..." is just not a form of science.  It's a creepy hybrid of capitulation to culture, and trying to shoehorn religion for the sake of political correct "equality of discourse."  (IMHO.)

[Alcon]

She said that creationism doesn't have to be part of the curriculum, just that it should be discussed and debated if it comes up. Palin stopped well short of saying that creationism should get equal status with evolution in the classroom as an equally respectable theory.

I don't think there is any "there," here, and I am pretty militant on this issue.

There's a "there," here, just not much of one.

To Palin's credit (quote-endquote), I don't think this is something she's thought about deeply.  But I think her saying "teach both...I am a proponent of teaching both" contradicts "it doesn't have to be part of the curriculum."  In other words, I doubt she cares very much either way.  She's mostly saying whatever the first thing that comes to her, is.

Exhibit B:  She's wishy-washy on the idea of creationism ("I'm not going to pretend I know how all this acme to be.")  I think that, combined with the obvious self-contradiction, shows how dispassionate she'd likely be about the issue.

I mean, I don't love it, but this isn't a big deal.

[Alcon]

I like when the secularists get really pissed off about the oh so very important issue of whether or not to teach evolution! The best part? She supports teaching both and they still get pissy.

Well, you decided to scarecrow my point instead of addressing it, so I guess I don't have to respond to this.

(Using verbage like saying disagreement is "getting pissy," or "whining," etc., is really un-charming.)

[Alcon]

And what's your point? Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't you one of those that brush off abortion as a mostly "unimportant issue" but see evolution vs. creationism as a top priority?

I don't brush off abortion as an unimportant issue.  It's probably philosophically the most important issue today.

I don't think creationism vs. evolutionism is a huge, massive deal.  It's just one of the few issues where I think one argument just doesn't make much sense.  That doesn't mean I feel super-passionately about it.  I don't.

Good thing I'm not trying to charm you. 

Of course, you let your exotic accent and classic good looks do that for you

[Alcon]

For President? Probably not. But she is running for Vice President has been pointed out on this thread.

That said, given my nonscientific sample of people I interacted with today, including a good bit of Hillary supporters, the inexperience thing is not a talking point. Millions of Americans came up with it on their own individually today, despite a terrible Obama response. That is a bad sign.

nonscientific sample = millions of Americans?

I'm not getting the connection.

Millions of America: "Did you see that Sherry Paylin lady yesterday?"/"Nah."