Hi Tamar,

>Okay, I just read the article you mentioned. I don't see it waying that military service shouldn't count, simply that like all other experience, you have to evaluate it and see whether it provide valuable lessons that would make the person a better president.
>
>That makes perfect sense to me. McCain's fortitude in his captivity is clearly a plus. OTOH, the fact that he missed 5 years of what was going on in the US and the world (through no fault of his own) and may, therefore, not understand certain people, ideas or movements, is a negative. Getting shot down is a neutral--doesn't make him any more or less of a leader.
>
>But we need to apply the same judgment to candidate's other experiences. Serving in Congress, as we know, doesn't in and of itself, qualify one to be President. It's what you do there that matters. Ditto for experiences outside of government.

Jesus Christ, Tamar, what exactly do you see as presidential qualifications?? McCain lost 5 years of exposure to hippydom and, somehow, that puts him out of touch and not able to understand?? Understand WHOM? Revanchist hippies from 1972??

So, you've not only discounted his service, but also his courage, and also his time in Congress which includes several key committees.

Meanwhile, Mr. Hope and Change, with practically ZERO experience in any area needed for a leader captures your imagination.

And you don't see a problem with that?