A better metric than "experience" is "would this person make a trustworthy president," or even "would this person make a plausible president." With Obama the answer to those questions is yes; with Sarah Palin, not so much.

I have no idea what you are talking about, care to elaborate?  I know enough about Obama to know that I, as a Republican, will dislike the decisions he makes, I'm not sure how trust enters into that equation.  Palin has a reputation as a bi-partisan reformer.  If you aren't bothered by her lack of experience, are you bothered by that reputation?

Another way to put it: are you comfortable with Sarah Palin's hand on the nuclear button? Do you really believe Sarah Palin has the judgment and leadership skills to do the most powerful and important job in the country? Is there any evidence of that?

You could claim to be concerned about these questions even if Palin was two years into her second term as governor.  What are the magical circumstances that would make you trust that she was not a secret nuclear war monger?  As to the rest of your concerns, her record as a budget reformer is pretty much enough for me.

And why am I supposed to trust the judgment of Biden, who wanted to partition Iraq in 2006, or Obama, whose solution to the civil war in 2007 was to withdraw our troops.

We can play these games back and forth but I doubt you can draw some distinction that will convince me that people should clearly prefer Obama and Biden. 

That's right -- Palin could have 30 years of experience and I'd still be afraid to put her in power. Just like John McCain's extensive experience, and Dick Cheney's and Donald Rumsfeld's, was no guarantor of widsom or good judgment. That's why, as I said in the first place, "experience" is a bad metric.

What are the "magical circumstances"? Maybe a proven track record of good choices on key issues (like Obama's support for troop withdrawals or Biden's partitioning plan, both of which would have been positive steps toward a peaceful settlement, as opposed to Bush and McCain's brilliant "KILL EVERYONE" plan). Maybe a demonstration of thoughtfulness and intellectual curiosity, two characteristics which define ..Barack Obama but for which John McCain and Sarah Palin are not exactly known. Maybe just a demonstration of sanity -- and here I'm thinking specifically of Gov. Palin, who supports creationism in schools, and wants to ban abortion even in cases where the mother's life is threatened. See what I mean?

...I also doubt either of us will be persuaded here. But you're a fun sparring partner, Anonymous...

so Markus, what I gather you are saying is that Sarah Palin represents everything that goes against progress in our nation because, despite her gender which is a non-issue, her positions on key issues like people's rights and separation of church and state are completely void of American principles?  Oh, and represents the continuation of GWB's "Shoot first, damn anyone who asks questions later" policy?

A reputation that extends to maybe half of one percent of people in this country is not much of a reputation.

McCain picked a person who has zero experience, is under investigation in her home state, and guarantees only three electoral votes.  Her state has barely more people than a congressional district.  John McCain just went from trying to prove Obama doesn't have what it takes to be president to making people ask "WHO? FROM WHERE?"  To think that Obama is not any longer the person in this race who has spent the least amount of time in state or federal government, that Barack Obama no longer has a name that more people can't pronounce in this election (pal-in or pale-in?), to think that Obama no longer is the youngest candidate in this race...all the qualification questions have just shifted from Obama to Gov. Palin, and this is because John McCain has his age and his health creating a very likely scenario that the VP would have to step in.

And on top of that, she is so far right on abortion, I think the Catholic Church is even further left than she is.  She is for outlawing abortion in all circumstances including if continuing the pregnancy would injure or kill the mother.  I don't think that even pro-life women are willing to give up their right to an abortion if the pregnancy is going to cause their own death.  Do you?

You guys are welcome to make your rallying cry "Your VP is even more inexperienced than our President".  I think people know which ordering makes more sense.

Abortion is a separate issue - you may be right that she has an over-extreme position there.  I'm not much of an abortion partisan.