Rudy lies through his teeth: “[Obama is] one of the least experienced candidates for president in the last 100 years, if not the least experienced.” This is a talking point that needs to be shut down: its simply not true – not even close.

With 11 years of experience (combined at the state and national level), Obama is more experienced than 11 of the 19 presidents elected since 1900 (that’s presidents, not just candidates, Rudy). And he’s tied with one more (Eisenhower).

And if you are looking for a correlation between prior experience and performance as president, there isn’t one. If anything, the correlation for “great” presidents tends to be slightly inverse. The list of “great” presidents with less experience includes Lincoln, Truman, John Adams, both Roosevelts and Wilson. “Great” presidents with more experience? Jackson, Jefferson and Washington. (And again, Eisenhower is a push.)

Will Obama be a great president (or even a decent one) based on his level experience? Who knows. Will McCain be a great (or even decent) president because of his 26 years* of experience as a Senator and Representative? Not if Gerald Ford and James Buchanan are any indication (but again, who knows).

* If elected, McCain would rank third out of the 42 men who have served as president.