You're lying. I never suggested Obama got his senate seat because he was qualified. As I pointed out, just about everyone in the field of candidates was better qualified only if one were using length of time in public office as a criteria, and that Clinton
and Obama were the two least qualified people in the field by that measure.
I did point out Hillary got her senate seat simply by being first lady and I stand by that comment. She was a partner in an Arkansas law firm. Please explain to me how, if she had not been first lady, a partner in an Arkansas law firm could come to be a senator from New York? The fact is she used her position as first lady to travel New York on an absurdly named, "listening tour," to see if she had a chance at running for office in the state. How many people would have attended a, "listening tour," by a mere law firm partner from Arkansas?
She used her position, clear and simple, as a springboard to another springboard to another springboard to gain the White House. Had she remained Hillary Rodham, partner at law at Rose Law of Little Rock, she couldn't even get a parking ticket fixed in New York. To deny this requires either incredible naivete or the intent to deceive outright.
Had Bill Clinton been first husband and did the same thing, I'd say the same of him.
You just repeat the same tired, "qualifications," equating having an office in an executive building with having executive responsibilities when she had NO constitutional responsibilities at all, not a single one. You continually state she gained, "valuable political experience," yet fail to cite any example of just what those experiences were. Could they consist of travelgate? Monica Lewinsky? Universal Health Care? Entertaining spouses of foreign dignitaries? Hosting the White House Easter Egg Roll? What experience she gained from that time was not spent as a public official either elected or appointed. She had no responsibilities, no one to answer to. She didn't write, vote, or have anything to do with NAFTA, health care, or the S-chip. She was no more informed than any number of people sitting in the rooms unless you can explain why and how she would have been, "involved," in any of these cases beyond just sitting on her ass smiling benignly. Of course, if she really did have anything to do besides that then what the hell was she doing there? As someone unelected and unappointed it would be wholly unethical for her to have anything to do with them.
I can't believe you can actually post, in all apparent seriousness, that, "Her experience on the domestic issue of Health Care is unmatched." She's not a public health administrator, not an insurance company CEO, not a doctor, not even an EMT. She has headed no department, worked in no department, not even swept the floors of a public health agency! She has precisely ZERO experience in the field short of a disasterous aborted attempt during the first Clinton administration when she held closed-door meetings and refused to disclose the list of people involved in her task force.
And yes, you did imply sexism, by citing the sex of other candidates who did not make concession speeches:
When she did not give a concession speech when Obama crossed the threshold it was viewed differently from other male candidates running for president.
Had you not meant to imply it then you wouldn't have made the distinction of the other candidates' sex.
I am, happily, not Chris Matthews, and I will not apologize.
