2007-12-26 08:04:29 · 16 answers · asked by alphabetsoup2 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
The way I read it is a little worse. It seems to me that Hillary has been misrepresenting her experience. She didn't attend national security council and cabinet meetings and briefings, had no national security clearance and couldn't read classified documents and PDBs. She couldn't have been much more than a sounding board. . . like Laura Bush. And to cap it off, her papers are sealed, so we either have to take her at her word or not. (NOT)
I recall a cute one hour puff piece on Hillary Rodham by Barbara Walters or someone like her. Circa 1994 or 5; it was after the health care plan failed. The interviewer talked about how Hillary had retrenched and was going to do the work of a first lady like Eleanor Roosevelt and basically stay out of the oval office. They interviewed her staff, all women, and then showed Hillay's succession of hair styles to that date. It was my feeling that Hillary followed that path from then on. It would be great if that interview re-surfaced, (It would be almost but not quite as good as the 1994 interview of Cheney at the AEI where he goes on and on about the wisdom of not invading Iraq.)
2007-12-26 09:15:02 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
She never did have any real experience. Just because she was in the white house for 8 years doesn't mean she knows the job of a president. Bill Clinton was in charge those 8 years not her. Her only real attempt at government was her universal healthcare and that failed. Other than being in the white house as First lady and being Senator of New York what has she done? She got elected because of her name and fame. She hasn't done anything really outstanding, she is just as Obama. No real experience. Unless, she was the one calling the shots in the Clinton presidency then she was no real experience. Age doesn't mean knowledge. Hillary should stop running on her "experience" platform because it doesn't work and she should start a new approach.
2007-12-26 10:57:31 · answer #2 · answered by cynical 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If all you want is experience, then Bill Richardson stands head and shoulders above the crowd with regard to foreign policy.
Other than that, none of the candidates on either side has *relevant* experience in the foreign affairs arena.
What experience did GWB have?
How about Eisenhower, Kennedy, Reagan?
I'm afraid you have to choose based on the likely advisers these people will bring into the cabinet, and on their honesty. Good luck with that.
2007-12-26 08:15:17 · answer #3 · answered by Charlie S 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
the only people with enough experience to win from the dems are at the bottom of the poles. richardson and biden. the rest are just slick talkers who look pretty for the press. at least from an experience standpoint, like them or not, the reps have very qualified candidates. it makes me wonder why obama,edwards and clinton are even considered viable. biden alone has 20 more years experience and, has foreign policy dealings. i think the dem voters are looking at the wrong people.
2007-12-26 08:17:42 · answer #4 · answered by BRYAN H 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Regardless to any phony stories, regardless to all anti-Hillary Neocon lies and their misleading propaganda, regardless whether you like it or not, Hillary Clinton will become the next President. Do not waste your efforts and time.
2007-12-26 08:29:21 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
What experience does she have, like Obama she is a freshman senator with no prior experience. Being the wife of the president does not qualify you to be president.
2007-12-26 08:11:03 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
The only experience she actually has is seven years as the junior senator from New York. I'll let you decide if that's enough.
2007-12-26 08:14:45 · answer #7 · answered by DOOM 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
They are the lib media,therefore they can't be correct,unless you agree with what they are saying. I don't see how she claims WH experience,but she does have more time there than other candidates.
2007-12-26 08:13:11 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
She has more foreign policy experience than either Bush or her husband did when they took office....
For G-man below, she is NOT a freshman senator! She was re-elected in 2006 by an even larger number of the conservative voters in upstate NY than she got in 2000! She has been on the foreign affairs committee of the US Senate for over 6 years!
2007-12-26 08:10:46 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 5⤋
As Obama pointed out, Cheney and Rumsfeld had plenty of experience and look at how badly they f**ked things up!
2007-12-26 08:09:32 · answer #10 · answered by Whoops, is this your spleeen? 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋