Any objective person must agree with you that Sarah Palin’s lack of experience renders her unqualified to be president of the United States. Many of us, unfortunately, are not seeking a person who is uncommonly brilliant, uncommonly experienced, and uncommonly versed in the vast number of disciplines and skills necessary to assume leadership of the largest, most advanced, and most complex military, culture, and economy on the face of the Earth. Rather, we want someone common, someone who entertains us with great speeches.

The difference in this election between the inexperienced Palin and the even more inexperienced Obama is that Palin is not running for president. The student of American history knows that Palin’s résumé is not atypical among vice-presidential nominees.

But one has to wonder, with amazement, at the incalculable hubris that possessed Barack Obama when he started his run for president after only a year or so in the U.S. Senate and six years in a state legislature, where he voted merely “present” 130 times.

And while every big media reporter seems to be desperately searching for the smoking gun that will bring Sarah Palin down, Obama’s candidacy elicited no comparably hostile reaction.

When the inexperienced, unknown, but liberal Congresswoman Geraldine Ferraro was nominated for vice president, The New York Times asked, “Why shouldn’t a little-known woman have the same opportunity to grow?” When the very liberal Nancy Pelosi was elevated to Speaker of the House, no one questioned whether it was fair to her children, even though Pelosi, like Palin, is a mother of five, and Pelosi would be next in line, right behind Palin, as successor to the presidency.

Any objective person must agree that Obama is also not qualified to be president of the United States. Unfortunately, too few of us are objective.