Pab Sungenis
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-13-08 10:58 AM
Original message |
"Experience?" Here were some more experienced women who never got the chance. |
|
Hillary's only political experience, on her own, was seven and a half years in the Senate. She never held political office before, not even on the local level.
Here are some other women who've run for President:
Margaret Chase Smith spent 9 years in the House and 15 in the Senate before she ran for her party's nomination for President in 1964, losing to Barry Goldwater (who Hillary organized for). That's 26 years of real national experience.
Shirley Chisholm spent five years in the New York Legislature and three in the House before running for President in 1972, losing the nomination to George McGovern. That's slightly more experience than Hillary has, and she was seen as too much of a lightweight. That's a pity because anyone who ever heard Shirley speak could honestly testify to her ability to inspire.
Pat Schroeder served in Congress for fifteen years before launching her Presidential campaign in 1988. She was considered too much of a lightweight and forced to withdraw before any primaries could be held.
So how does seven and a half years in the only office she was ever elected to translate into "35 years of experience," and qualify Hillary to be President when these three, eminently more qualified women, were never given the chance?
|
Occam Bandage
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-13-08 11:01 AM
Response to Original message |
1. If experience guaranteed the Presidency, Robert Byrd would be President. |
Demeter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-13-08 11:03 AM
Response to Original message |
2. Worse Yet, It Looks Like Hillary's Signed All Other Experienced Women Into Her Suicide Pact |
|
"Hillary or Bust" and I hate to see what happens after.
|
Skinner
ADMIN
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-13-08 11:06 AM
Response to Original message |
3. This argument makes no sense to me. |
|
In fact, it could be a seen as an argument in favor of Hillary Clinton.
Why were other, arguably more experienced women never given a shot at the presidency? Isn't it obvious? Because of bias against women. Why should Hillary Clinton be denied a shot at the presidency because other women were denied it?
To make an analogy, your argument is like saying that Barack Obama should be denied the presidency because Frederick Douglass had more experience, but he never served as president. Or Charlie Rangel. Or MLK.
|
Frances
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-13-08 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
|
Obama is doing very well now. Specious arguments against Hillary won't help him.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 12:32 AM
Response to Original message |