So says presidential historians who have researched and tracked all the presidencies and if prior qualifications to office and effectiveness in office have a causal relationship. Washington was the least experienced amongst his fellow founding fathers-in the political arena. Lincoln is rated as having the least of any going into office yet he outperformed both POTUS's before and after him. Yet those two men were highly ranked in prior qualifications. There are many more examples, but the point is there is no way to tell how good or bad a POTUS will be by his/her qualifications going into office. McCain now says of his VP choice that she has the "life experiences" that qualify her for the position. That has to work both ways and to a degree I agree. Character, volunteerism, love of country and Constitution (laws of the land), an attitude of service to others all count.

"But I have never understood how getting shot down and captured qualifies you to be president of the United States."

It doesn't - neither does being a community organizer and first term senator with no record.

I did read her column but I have been saying the same thing for a while now. What is your point? It does not change the truth of the situation no matter what spin or who says it. It is what it is.

McCain's service deserves our respect and gratitude.

But I have never understood how getting shot down and captured qualifies you to be president of the United States.

McCain's wealth and lifestyle have caused him to be out-of-touch with the lives of everyday Americans. That he stayed at the Hanoi Hilton 30 years ago is irrelevant to that issue.

McCain owns so many homes he can't remember them all. Voters trying to pay a mortgage on one home should consider that when they go to the polls.

Barack Obama gives his answers. If you consider the word "change" to be a valid answer to any question.

I assume by opponent you mean the second coming. Well, to be honest, he hasn't even made himself available for questions much less answer one. Sooner or later it should become evident that the chosen one will be the first presidential candidate to go the entire distance without answering a single candid question.

You obviously read Maureen Dowd today. Didn't she say the same thing?

Everyone knows of McCain's pow experience and I still find references to it all over the place. And McCain himself and his supporters are using that as a "get out of jail free" card to excuse him from being accountable for anything or for answering tough questions-the kind his opponent gets. Honor his service, yes, but not to the degree that it makes him exempt from the political process. The Dems all stated clearly they honor his service (something not bestowed by the Repubs to Kerry) so that is that. This is about current issues and the presidency and being a pow is not a qualifier for being POTUS.

When the Rev. Kirbyjon Caldwell, a close Bush ally, publicly questioned McCain’s marital infidelities, the McCain campaign responded by highlighting McCain’s background as a prisoner of war.

When Dems attacked McCain’s healthcare plan in May, McCain responded by noting his background as a prisoner of war.

Asked by a local reporter about the first thing that comes to his mind when he thinks of Pittsburgh, McCain responded by talking about his background as a prisoner of war.

Accused of possibly having heard the questions in advance of Rick Warren’s recent candidate forum, the McCain campaign responded by highlighting McCain’s background as a prisoner of war.