Skip to comments.Gender Up Ender 11/05/07 (Charlie Daniels)
Posted on 11/08/2007 3:47:35 PM PST by dynachrome
Gender Up Ender
I'll admit I didn't watch the Democratic debates the other night, it's not that I'm not interested, it's just that the field right now is so crowded with people who have about as much chance of being president as they do of winning the lottery.
I think the early primaries are a good thing as it narrows the field down to the people who are actually going to run and gives them more time to actually state their opinions on issues and less time to hide behind platitudes and inanities.
But I digress getting back to the debates, by now we've all seen the sound bites of a frustrated Hillary Clinton responding to a couple of hard ball questions, the first I can ever remember her being asked.
It seemed to me that on the issue of New York giving driver's licenses to illegal aliens she had at least two or maybe three opinions and gave no definitive answer when asked what she'd do about Iran.
After it was over, rather than concentrating on clarifying the erroneous answers Ms. Clinton gave, or didn't give, the Clinton blame machine swung into action and started spouting off about Tim Russert even asking the questions and insisting on an answer.
Then they claimed that the other candidates were ganging up on her and accused them of picking on a woman.
Well excuse me but what place does gender have in a presidential election?
If being a woman makes Ms. Clinton so tender that it's unfair to ask her certain questions and the other candidates, who all happen to be male, cause such a trauma by ganging up on the front runner let me ask a question.
I wonder if Vladimir Putin would ask any tough or insulting questions or pick on Ms. Clinton if she were to become president. And if he does, will some of her people say that Putin should be shot, as one of them said that Tim Russert should be for asking his questions.
Would Ahmadinejad go easy on Ms. Clinton because she's a woman?
I heard a democratic strategist on TV last night saying something to the effect that Ms. Clinton needed time to formulate her answer to the question of driver's license to illegals. Isn't Ms. Clinton supposed to be serving the interests of the citizens of New York, shouldn't she have a ready opinion on the tip of her tongue. Should she have to go back and confer with pollsters or whoever to answer such a simple yes or no question?
Ms. Clinton has only seen the beginning of the hardball questions she is going to be asked, questions she will have no time to prepare for beforehand, something she is not used to.
Race and gender simply must be put aside in something as important as electing the leader of the free world, where one decision or hesitation to make one could have worldwide catastrophic results. In the world of today indecision and vacillation can be deadly.
Ms. Clinton, remember two things, if you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen and as Harry Truman said, the buck truly does stop here.
Pray for our troops
What do you think?
God Bless America
November 5, 2007
ping. Charlie’s latest
Charlie Daniels. I love that man!
Sorry, Charlie, but I bet that was the LAST time she gets asked anything "tough" by the MSM sock puppets. And it wasn't even a particularly tough question. Her usual interview questions are: "How does it FEEEEEL to be singled out because of your gender Mrs. Clinton?"
Hillary gets the Presidency, Bill shoots the bitch, and by a willing Congress, rather than the VP taking over, Bill gets back in as President.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.