NYT Critical of Hillary’s “Experience” Claim
In a rare critical piece that is obviously anti-Clinton, the New York Times is now questioning Hillary’s claim of “experience”. The NYT article takes particular issue with her claim to have been “a full partner to her husband in his administration.”
The article points out some facts:
But during those two terms in the White House, Mrs. Clinton did not hold a security clearance. She did not attend National Security Council meetings. She was not given a copy of the president’s daily intelligence briefing. She did not assert herself on the crises in Somalia, Haiti and Rwanda.
And during one of President Bill Clinton’s major tests on terrorism, whether to bomb Afghanistan and Sudan in 1998, Mrs. Clinton was barely speaking to her husband, let alone advising him, as the Lewinsky scandal sizzled.
In short the NYT is now pointing out something that the right side of the blogosphere has been saying for months. Her claims of “experience” are bogus. She is fresh into her second term as the Junior Senator from New York. In other words, she’s been in the Senate, her only real experience in national politics, for 7 years. Is this enough “experience” for her to become the Leader of the Free World? That answer is a resounding NO!
Email This
Posted by Gribbit on December 26, 2007 1:38 pm
» Filed Under News, Politics As Usual
Trackback URL:
