Well, there's resumes, and then there is knowledge, and then there is understanding. And that's about the order I would give them in terms of least to most importance. You can serve for several terms (giving you the resume), yet still know little about government, how to get things done, and the background behind current situations. Then, you can have knowledge, but not really have the intelligence to apply that knowledge, or to analyze it, in order to set new policies. For example, you might be able to recount the history of Afganistan in great detail, but if you don't have insight into the motivations of the people, and why they chose to do what they did, and what is driving them now, then there is no hope in choosing an appropriate course for the future.
Palin showed she had very little knowledge about world affairs. What's worse, and this is admittedly harder to gauge, she showed little understanding. So, in this next election cycle I expect her to show up with a lot more knowledge, having been subjected to numerous jam sessions, but I question how much more understanding there will be. And, of course, the resume will be the same.
To put this in context, I am Democrat, and greatly disliked the policies of Bush Sr. However, it is clear to me that he had the resume. It is clear he had the knowledge. And it is clear that he had the understanding. I just disagreed with his values - X is more important than Y, Z is the best way to get Q done, etc.
Palin exhibits none of those 3 qualities to me.
