In an all-too-predictable slam at Sarah Palin (this is the New York Times, did you expect them to be happy about her?), the Times’ editorial board trots out the “too inexperienced” line:

It is well past time for Sarah Palin, Republican running mate, governor of Alaska and self-proclaimed reformer, to fill in for the voting public the gaping blanks about her record and qualifications to be vice president. …

Voters have a right to hear Ms. Palin explain in detail her qualifications to be standby president with no national or foreign policy experience. More is required of any serious candidate for such a high office than one interview with questions put by one selected source.

Fair enough.

But if the Times is going to level that line of attack at Palin, I’m sure they’ll level it at Barack Obama as well.  Right?

I mean, what pertinent foreign policy experience does Obama (who is actually running for President and not just the VP slot) have that Palin doesn’t?  The one year he was in the Senate and not campaigning for President?  A speech in Germany?  Give me a break.

Barack Obama has one of the thinnest resumes of any American who has ever run for President on a major party ticket, and yet it wasn’t until Palin entered the race that the liberal media started worrying about experience.

Does Sarah Palin have enough experience to be Vice President?  I think she does, but then I’ve been following Sarah’s career a lot longer than most people and so I understand the impulse to want to know more before making a decision.  But it seems only fair to me that if we’re going to demand that level of accountability from Palin we should ask it from Obama as well.

Fair is fair.