Hillary As A “Woman”. To begin with, doesn’t it strike the reader as odd, that a woman running for president almost solely on the basis of her argument that it’s time for a woman to be president (and I believe that it is, as long as she is the most qualified), has less than 50% of the support of the one constituency that she absolutely has to have behind her: white women. Why is this the case?Virtually every Hillary Supporter I know, I have asked a simple question, "What qualifications does she have?
Hillary As A Clinton. Does any one think that we would be talking about Hillary Clinton for president (or even dogcatcher) if her last name was not Clinton? On the contrary, if her last name were not Clinton, the operative question would be Hillary who? As I observed in a previous column, Hillary’s only – and I do mean only – positive accomplishment was marrying Bill Clinton and riding his coattails to positions of prominence, in which she distinguished herself for her incompetence and incredibly bad management skills (not to mention her fundamental dishonesty in dealing with the many scandals that dogged her path).
"Well, she was the First Lady!" Based on this, Laura Bush, Barbara Bush, Michelle Obama, and Nancy Reagan would be qualified.
"She was a US Senator!" So was Barry, Next!
"She was on several Corporate Board, like Walmart." So then Donald Trump would also qualify.
So on and so on. She is about as qualified as the current guy, and we all know how he's doing.
No comments:
Post a Comment