After yesterday’s post I vowed I would not mention Sarah Palin again soon, but David Brooks’ editorial in today’s Times made me break my vow. I disagree with Brooks far more often than I agree with him, the point being that Brooks is not preaching to the Times’ choir. Today’s editorial, titled “Why Experience Matters“, takes issue with Palin’s nomination as VP candidate and with trumpeting of instinct over experience it represents. He describes the Bush administration as “the anti-establishment attitude put into executive practice” and states this attitude “made Bush inept at governance” because governance “is hard . . . requires acquired skills . . . [and] [m]ost of all, it requires prudence . . . How is prudence acquired? Through experience.” He concludes that Palin “has not been engaged in national issues, does not have a repertoire of historic patterns and, like President Bush, she seems to compensate for her lack of experience with brashness and excessive decisiveness.” All reasons why McCain showed terrible judgment in selecting her.