4 of 51

Write now Article Tools

The question is about qualifications-not about whether one should vote for Senator Clinton or not. However, this distinction does not change my overall view. Hillary Clinton's qualifications to be president consist of one thing. Her husband was the president. That's it. She can claim all she wants that her "experience" makes her qualified, but her experience was as a first lady. She's had eight years in the U.S. Senate to Barack Obama's four. If you want "experience" in Washington, I guess you can always vote for McCain, but you'll never hear me endorse that choice.

Hillary Clinton has the gall to claim that Barack Obama is an elitist. She is the most dyed-in-the-wool, pro-union Democrat out there. She is never going to affect positive change because she will always follow the crowd. Case in point, her following George W. into Iraq blindly. Now, that we all know that was a mistake, she says we need to get out of Iraq. But, will she admit that her vote for the invasion in the first place was wrong? No, she'll smooth-talk around it and say, I voted my conscience based on the best information available. She will never admit that she's wrong, though. She's so much like her husband, it's scary.

Barack Obama was against Iraq before, during and after the invasion. He was against the war when being for it was popular (remember 65-70% approval ratings in early 2003?). And he's against it now. Right or wrong, at least he says what he means. You will never get a Clinton to actually mean what (s)he says. It goes against their natural grains. They can only speak politically-they can't speak straight. And, Barack Obama is an elitist?

Now, does this make Barack Obama more qualified to be president than Hillary? Maybe it does and maybe it doesn't. I read an op-ed piece in the Chicago Tribune a month or so ago in which the writer started off by saying Barack Obama has not shown that he has the experience to be president. He went on to write that neither does Hillary Clinton. Neither does John McCain, for that matter. The point of the article, and the point I'm trying to clarify is, we can't know who is going to be better at the job until they're in. Then, things will either get better or worse and the new president will either take the credit or take the blame. Personally, I back Obama because he has shown that he can build coalitions and make compromises and move forward. All Hillary Clinton has ever shown is the ability to talk around the question and not give a straight answer.

So, who's it going to be, America? Barack Obama who shoots it straight, regardless of opinion? Or, Hillary Clinton who has shown herself to have no qualifications other than the ability to speak out of both sides of her mouth? Come to think of it, maybe she IS the better qualified.

Learn more about this author, Paul Schingle.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Hillary Clinton's qualifications to be president?
We want to hear your view. Write now!