I was absolutely baffled when I read the op-ed by David Wise of Annapolis, a three-time delegate to the Democratic National Convention, listing the qualifications to serve as vice-president of the United States ("What's needed in a No. 2," July 16).
If these qualifications are necessary and true, and I believe they are, then how can anyone defend President Barack Obama's election or re-election, for that matter? According to Mr. Wise's calculations, Mr. Obama would not qualify to be a dog catcher, let alone president of the United States. Mr. Obama had pretty much none of the experiences listed while running for president, so how in the world was such an inexperienced, unqualified man elected to the highest office in the nation?
The hypocrisy of it all is just mind-numbing, don't you think?
Gail Householder, Marriottsville