I know Secretary Clinton pretty well,” Rendell said on 1210 WPHT Philadelphia radio. “I’m not an insider in the campaign but I know her pretty well. I think she will not pick somebody that she feels in her heart isn’t ready to be president or commander-in-chief and I think Elizabeth Warren is a wonderful, bright, passionate person, but with no experience in foreign affairs and not in any way, shape, or form ready to be commander-in-chief.”Now Rendell was the mayor of a major city and the governor of a major state. If he would not have been qualified for the presidency what in the world qualified Barack Obama who had no foreign policy experience and no other governing or administrative experience to speak of besides a brief two year stint in the Senate? Indeed, Elizabeth Warren has more experience in Washington now than Barack Obama had when he was elected president in 2008.
Rendell, the chairman of the Philadelphia Host Committee for the Democratic National Convention, later called the station back to clarify that he didn’t mean to single Warren out.
“I didn’t want it to leave it hanging out there about Elizabeth Warren,” he said. “Elizabeth Warren’s problem would be the same problem I’d have. Let’s assume someone said consider Governor Rendell for vice president. I have no experience militarily, no experience in foreign affairs, and would be a difficult choice because if anything happened in week one and I became president, I would be lost.”
Rendell's deprecation of Elizabeth Warren's qualifications for vice-president and his devaluation of his own qualifications to serve as president is, a forteriori, a clear acknowledgement that Barack Obama was not qualified to be president either.
On this, if not much else, a lot of conservative Americans would find themselves in hearty agreement with Mr. Rendell.
