Hillary's credentials

Great Debates
41

OK, let’s look at the other qualifications you mention:

Academic qualifications: none exist for the Presidency. Putting that aside, Ms. Clinton holds a doctorate in law. This is equal to or greater than the academic qualifications of any number of former Presidents.

Age qualifications: Ms. Clinton is over the age of 35, and is therefore qualified under the U.S. Constitution to serve as President. Putting that aside, Ms. Clinton is older than several former Presidents.

Mental qualifications: Two possible meanings
A. Intelligence. Again, no qualifications exist. Putting that aside, I have not seen any publication of Ms. Clinton’s IQ, nor of the IQ’s of former Presidents. You may be right about this one, but I don’t (and I doubt you do) have any evidence one way or another.
B. Mental stability. No qualifications exist. Putting that aside, I have never read any published reports of Ms. Clinton’s mental health records. The only thing close I have seen about former Presidents are posthumous assertions that Lincoln suffered from severe episodic depression. So I guess that qualification is that you can serve as President if you suffer from Dysthymic Disorder or Major Depression Disorder. Given the precedent set by Pres. Lincoln, an “angry jilted woman”, according to your long-distance psychoanalysis, has sufficient mental stability to serve as President.

You can redefine Ms. Clinton’s “qualifications” (or “credentials”, as you called them in your post) as much as you want, but you ain’t gonna win this argument.

Sua(don’t blame me, I voted for Lazio)Sponte

42

-while at Yale Law, she helped defend black panther Bobby seale, known murderer and extortionist
-while at the Rose Law Firm, she put together the “Castle Grande” development deal-this resulting in the collapse of the Madison Loan (bank) and attendent loss to the US taxpayers of $50+ million
-also served as dealmaker on the “Whitewater development”. Buyers of the properties were usually elderly, blue-collar retirees. If they defaulted on a SINGLE loan payment, they lost everything! (thanks to HRC’s sharp lawyering!)
-she authored a massive health care package for the USA-her proposals would have resulted in a Soviet-style heathcare system (ggod care for the “nomenklatura”, lousy care for the rest of us)
-an expert in LABOR RELATIONS!-due to her, the entire White House travel staff was fired, to make room for her cronies. Many of these people lost pensions, due to (false) accusations of theft!
Yep-lots of good qualifications to be a senator and president!

43

I’m not sure what the point of this is, except the implicit suggestion that “known murderers” do not warrant any defense at all.

However, that’s not the way this country works. The Constitution, Amendment VI, guarantees to every person the right of counsel for his defense. As a lawyer, or a student wishing to become a lawyer, it would be entirely appropriate to defend, or seek to defend, “known murderers.”

Moreover, the trial of the Chicago Eight was not exactly fraught with Due Process. After the trial, one female juror commented that the defendants “should be convicted for their appearance, their language and their lifestyle.” Edward Kratzke, the jury foreman, also was angered by the defendants’ courtroom behavior: “These defendants wouldn’t even stand up when the judge walked in; when there is no more respect we might as well give up the United States.” A third juror expressed the view that the demonstrators “should have been shot down by the police.”

Seale’s case was severed (and the trial changed to that of the more-famous “Chicago Seven”) when the trial judge, after ordering him bound and gagged during the trial, found him guilty of contempt of court, and sentenced him to four years. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals later reversed the contempt conviction, ruling that contempt convictions resulting in more than six months in prison require jury trials.

These expositions, even if gernering no sympathy whatsoever for the Blank Panthers or Bobby Seale, certainly show the value a defense attorney plays in the system of justice we have.

To vilify Hilary Clinton for this, or other acts of advocacy as an attorney, is highly misplaced. An allegation she committed fraud, or worse, is one thing. But her client’s peccadillos do not run to her, nor should they.

  • Rick
44

I think that since she comes from a Republican background but after recieving her education switched her party affiliation to Democrat, PROVES she has the country’s best interest in mind.

Needs2know…just thought I’d throw that in since this is a troll thread anyway.

45

Damn, you’re right!! We should lynch that bastard who defended Ollie North, known felon (Ollie admitted it.)

Business failure is disqualification from the Presidency? You gonna break the news to Gov. Bush that, after all this time and effort, he’s barred from serving?

[/QUOTE]
-also served as dealmaker on the “Whitewater development”. Buyers of the properties were usually elderly, blue-collar retirees. If they defaulted on a SINGLE loan payment, they lost everything! (thanks to HRC’s sharp lawyering!)
[/QUOTE]

Um, this is called a “contract”. Contracts are voluntary. If these elderly, blue-collar retirees didn’t want to risk losing everything if they defaulted, they didn’t have to sign the contract.

I’ve heard many criticisms of the Clinton health care proposal - many justified, but I’ve never read or heard anyone besides you claim that it would have mandated a two-tier health care system. Citations please. Please identify who is in this nomenklatura you speak of, and please point out where in the health care proposal better care for the nomenklatura is spelled out.

Repeated ad nauseum - policy proposals and character issues are not “qualifications”. As I’ve stated before, I don’t like the woman, I’ve already voted against her, and, if given the opportunity, I will do so again. But please, people, stop using the word “qualifications”. That’s not what you mean, and you are making yourselves look silly by insisting on using it.

Sua

46

We would then be stringing up most of Ted Olson’s law firm then. Super cool.

Yup, between $4 million pissed away in failed oil ventures and another $15 million of taxpayer funds spent on his pet stadium, I’d say he’s sucked about as hard as Hillary has.