SCK, raises a good point. People like to say that we either need 'the outsider' or 'the one with experience' depending upon what argument is the most self serving.
The Republicans used this reverse logic in 2000 (Gore had a lot more relevant Washington experience than Bush). The Democrats are using it in 2008.
This statement is patently ridiculous, fwiw.
Bush was more qualified for the chief executive office because he was the chief executive of Texas. Governors are far better equipped to become president than Senators. Gore's executive experience was limited to his position as vice president, a position once properly categorized by John Adams upon being elected to VP, serving under George Washington, when he said: "My country has in its wisdom contrived for me the most insignificant office that ever the invention of man contrived or his imagination conceived."
VP's do nothing, shape no policy, make no decisions, and do very little leading outside of their own staff. Hence, Bush was far more qualified due to his history as an executive.