If experience is what we need in a presidential candidate, then no one but top military officers would be fit for the job of our top executive, given their experience at decision-making and dealing with complex military matters. The current occupant of the oval office proves the point, that even after being president for nearly 3 years, he still has not gained the experience to do the job (but of course he's a raving liberal radical with an agenda to bring America down to size, so he's really not trying to learn, just destroy).
Pundits have it wrong when they question the experience of certain candidates. It's not experience a candidate needs in order to run for president or any other public office, it's their judgement that matters, and stating that Michelle Bachman or Herman Cain don't have the experience to be president misses the point. Their judgement when making decisions and establishing policy is the important thing. All politicians have staffs and advisers to keep them informed and give them direction, but it's what they do with that advice that is critical, and if they have radical intentions, as does Barack Obama, then all of the experience and advice in the world will not cause them to make good decisions.
After all, did not our founders intend for the common laborer and farmer to be leaders of the country? And did William F. Buckley not make the wise statement that he'd rather be governed by the first 100 people listed in the Boston phone book than by the faculty of Harvard University? I don't want another highly educated and well-spoken elite liberal leading our nation, I want a plain-spoken average Joe who makes good decisions and knows why the decisions are the best ones for the nation.