During the debates a reporter asked Senator Clinton why she thinks that she would be a better president than Senator Obama; he underscored this question by reminding the senator that she had served in public office for only a few years more than her competitor (Senator Clinton has been a senator for approximately 8-years) and yet she constantly refers to her much greater experience both as a necessity and as a kind of sideways dig against Senator Obama. Her answer began "I have 35-years of experience..."
By the way, that would be a lie. That's the word one uses to describe a false statement.
Continuing... She then went on to describe her graduation from law school and her desire to not join a firm; and instead to help impoverished children and people without healthcare. This explanation continued to her time as First Lady, leading to present day.
So apparently, Senator Clinton considers graduating law school as the beginning of a political career and *day dreaming* about helping people as the same thing as *actually* helping people.
This is why I must maintain that "either one" with regard to the leading Democratic party candidates would not be good. There will always be differences of opinion, but this was an easy-to-answer question, clearly stated, and the senator chose to disrespect the journalist by simple denial. Pathetic.
On a side note: There's also the glaring contradiction in Senator Clinton's constant claim that she represents true "change" yet simultaneously she is maintaining that she's been a politician for 35-years. But that's another post.
No comments:
Post a Comment