Colin Powell endorsed Barack Obama recently. He stated that one of the reasons he decided to break with his own Republican party and support Obama for President was that he questioned John McCain's judgment in choosing Sarah Palin as Vice-President. Colin Powell stated that she is just not ready to be President. Later, I watched Guiliani comment on Powell's decision by arguing that if inexperience was what made Powell choose Obama, then Powell should consider Obama's lack of experience as well.

There appears to be a misunderstanding of what our leaders mean when they say that Sarah Palin is not "ready to be President". Ready and experienced have two different meanings, similar but different. She has held relevant positions in government, arguably, one could call this "experience". But what I am hearing from people on the street to leaders in high position within the US government is that Sarah Palin is not "ready" to be President. George Bush had "experience" in government. But he was obviously not "ready" to become President of the United States. He does not have the intellectual capacity or the emotional maturity to be delegated such power without abusing it and endangering the lives of millions.

Sarah Palin is not intelligent enough to lead the United States of America. She lacks the wisdom and philosophical resources that we hope our leaders can provide for us in times of crisis. Who can say with a straight face that they would engage Sarah Palin in conversation with the intention of garnering guidance or wisdom? This not asking too much of a leader of the world's most powerful nation and it should be a prerequisite at the very least.

Would you leave your teenage son alone with George Bush, a six-pack and the car keys? Now is not the time for electing leaders who we can have a beer with or feel that we can relate to. Now is the time for wise, intelligent leaders that are ready to lead.

Whether Sarah Palin was not strong enough to discourage racist and terroristic rhetoric being directed at Presidential elect Barack Obama at the rallies she held or she was silent in encouragement of these activities remains a mystery. Either way, she cannot be a heartbeat away from the Presidency, she is simply not ready. If she wanted to prove that she is strong enough to be a so-called maverick and disagree with her own people, those inappropriate rallies were the ideal time to be brave and do the right thing.

Strong is being able to admit when you don't know. In her interviews with Katie Couric, Sarah Palin babbled meaninglessly through questions that she obviously didn't have the answer to. Electing a person to such a high office that doesn't have the ability to admit what they do not know is of great concern. How can you learn when you won't admit what you don't know?

Strong is being able to see a parody of yourself and genuinely find humor in it, even when it amplifies your weakness. If you cannot laugh at yourself, your ego is not strong enough to endure what a leader of the United States will have to endure and remain graceful through.

Strong is being able to control your emotions and act impartially and responsibly when entrusted by your constituency with political power. When The Alaska Senate Judiciary Committee made a determination that she had abused her authority as governor by firing Walt Monegan, who refused to fire her brother-in-law because she didn't like him after he divorced her sister, she became the embodiment of the most prevalent stereotypes about women in power. Long before this election, I remember hearing statements like, "I'd be afraid of a woman President because women can't control their emotions." She made a caricature of women in positions of power. That cowardly action has the ability to set women back years in one fell swoop. It certainly makes it that much more difficult to argue that women in power can separate their personal feelings from their professional responsibilities.

Strong is not a facade, it is a state of being. Sarah Palin recognizes her strengths as being able to disagree with a party she is a member of. She often points to her shooting and killing animals as another example of her strength. She has yet to indicate strength in diplomacy or having the ability to work well with others. We have seen no indication that she is capable of this or she has opted to not reveal this aspect of herself.

Considering the current global security crisis we are facing in America today, we cannot risk having such a disagreeable person a heartbeat away from the Presidency. Diplomacy, emotional maturity, and exercising good judgment may be the very qualities that stave off the next terrorist attack on the US. Sarah Palin appears to be incapable of these crucial qualities.

Strong is being able to respect a diverse group of people without needing to directly identify with every individual. It is becoming increasingly apparent that Sarah Palin can only be an effective leader to those with whom she feels is like "one of us". Well, then what about the rest? Based on this logic and what we have witnessed in her prejudicial viewpoints of a great segment of America, she is incapable of being an impartial leader in any major city in America. A consistent component in the makeup of every major city in the US is diversity. If Sarah Palin can only respect a certain segment of America, then she can only lead that specific group. What happens to the rest of us?

Experience has a learning curve. If you are very experienced, yet are unable to learn from these experiences then your experience is essentially worthless. If you are young and inexperienced yet have the ability to not only learn quickly but adapt to changing circumstances in a wise and prudent way, then your inexperience very quickly becomes valuable experience. John McCain is experienced but his judgment is frighteningly flawed at best, downright dangerous at worst. Barack Obama is so intelligent and capable of adapting to changing circumstances that I trust him to be able to lead us and serve us well, even if he is learning along the way.