Hillary Has Great Response for Those Who Care About Her Email Scandal: ‘Don’t You Want a Woman President?’

Posted by $ Your_Name_Goes_Here 10 years, 4 months ago to Politics
90 comments | Share | Flag

Our Dear Leader is in the White House because he is "a person of color" despite his inadequate resume for the office. HillBillary seems to think her gender makes her uniquely qualified for the same office, and I'd question her resume for the job as well.

Is that level of qualification required to be the CEO of the world's remaining superpower?

I certainly hope that more and better vetting occurs for the 2016 election.


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 3.
  • Posted by MagicDog 10 years, 4 months ago
    I think she should say that "she had to do it because the Internet was not regulated by the FCC".
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CTYankee 10 years, 4 months ago
    I would rather see Marilyn Chambers run for President than Shrillary Clinton.

    "In the 2004 United States presidential election, Chambers ran for Vice President on the Personal Choice Party ticket, a libertarian political party. She received a total of 946 votes. In the 2008 United States presidential election, she was again Charles Jay's running mate, this time as an alternate write-in candidate to his primary national Boston Tea Party running mate Thomas L. Knapp in the states of Arkansas, Hawaii, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Utah.[45][46]"

    Unfortunately she died in 2009, but since dead Dems vote, why can't a dead celeb run?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 10 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I wouldn't put Condi and Carli in the same paragraph with Dagney. Fiorina is "well qualified" as the "worst Tech CEO" of all time, "she destroyed half the wealth of her investors and yet still earned almost $100 million in total payments for this destructive reign of terror."
    Perfect choice for the GOP.
    Condi? Another looter. National security advisor and Secy of State. Anyone thinking that American security, reputation, and foreign afffairs improved during her tenure needs to go directly to an insane asylum. I would never send my child to Stanford if they think Condi should be teaching and molding young minds.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • 10
    Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 10 years, 4 months ago
    I care not what is between one's legs. It is what is between their ears that matters. The most irresponsible reason to elect someone is a superficial, cosmetic characteristic. Any sex, any race...whatever, just have honor, integrity, uphold the Constitution... letter and spirit.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Non_mooching_artist 10 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Lol!! Oh it's the Modus operandi of the left. Ism and ist everybody to death until there is nothing but a silence the cronies of these thugs perpetuate, with their jackbooted tactics. Like Internet neutrality. Missing emails. Name your scandal. There are boots stifling the truth seekers.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Non_mooching_artist 10 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I concur, Tech. It should only matter that they uphold their oath of office, and put national interests above some perverted ideology that our current leader is so fond of enabling.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Susanne 10 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Thinking on this... perhaps a withered prune? Skunkweed? I'd say Mistletoe (a famous parasitic) tho who would want to kiss that? More like Dionaea (Venus fly trap)...

    What's scary is the candidate for VP? The jury is out on whether it will be ear corn or a cucumber...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by walkabout 10 years, 4 months ago
    Sure (not that plumbing matters in the job): Condi Rice, Carly Fiorina, Dagney Tagert (and with just a little thought the list could be lengthy and impressive as all would have credentials suggesting she was temperamentally prepared for the job), but NOT Hilary Clinton!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Temlakos 10 years, 4 months ago
    That isn't going to do her any good now. The big liberals want Elizabeth Warren.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years, 4 months ago
    "At this point, what difference does it make?" As it did then, it makes all the difference. - the difference between Hillary being elected and not being elected.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 10 years, 4 months ago
    The article said she did not respond to those who care about her email scandal during the speech.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 10 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    <sigh> Guilty as charged. ;-)

    I agree on military experience being a VERY significant differentiator. Someone who has "walked a mile in their shoes" would better appreciate what can or cannot be done with respect to our military, its funding, etc.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Susanne 10 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Speciesist! You don't approve of a rotten tomato as the CiC?

    I still favor requiring the CiC having had military service. One, you would have a more capable person in office, and two, it would keep the pretenders (nø names mentioned...) from ascending to the highest office in the greatest nation on the planet and turning it into Chop Sewage.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo