<p>Clearly the latter.</p>
<p>I must admit, since she became a Senator, I have never liked Hillary Clinton. I find her irretrievable presumptuous, narrow minded, and just plain stupid. Her insubstantial policy goals and disturbing lack of focus on real issues bothers me very much, with a few examples in mind:
1. Flag burning amendment
2. Incomperehensive Healthcare plan (albeit with a nice premise)
3. Crusade against video games (Uneccesary)
4. Her support and subsequent opposition to the Patriot Act (On the basis that it did not provide enough money for New York anti terrorism efforts) . The fact that she switched so quickly was disturbing to me as well.</p>
<p>But the main thing about CLinton that bothers me is the close mindedness and people appeasing mannerisms with which she conducts herself with. This is eerily reminiscent of Bush's style of politics in 2000. </p>
<p>Granted, Hilalry has made a lot of valiant efforts (but no real reforms) to imrpove social reforms; she'd make a great Cabinet advisor. But her overwhelming stupidity in the realm of foreign policy causes me to wake up in the middle of the night.</p>
<p>During the recent SC democratic primary debate, when asked what she would do if a scenario similar to 9/11 occurred again and if we knew Al-Qaeda was behind it, Hillary responded in no uncertain terms that she would "retaliate".</p>
<p>When I heard this, my blood pressure rose another notch. The main things that bothered me about this bold statement were the facts that:
- She claimed that she would retaliate against an underground terrorist cell, how do you hit an enemy that's underground?
- She mentioned nothing about international support, which is something easy to at least attempt to garner
- She said it with the same confidence that Bush threatned retaliation against aggressors years ago.</p>
<p>I was saddened, here was another George Bush, albeit one who had mastered basic human speech and had taken some top-notch etiquette classes.</p>
<p>But what bothered me the most was what she responded when asked about immigration: </p>
<p>"Well, I'm in favor of comprehensive immigration reform, which includes tightening our border security, sanctioning employers to employ undocumented immigrants, helping our communities deal with the costs that come from illegal immigration, getting the 12 million or so immigrants out of the shadows. That's very important to me. </p>
<p>After 9/11, we've got to know who's in this country. And then giving them a chance to pay a fine, pay back taxes, learn English and stand in line to be eligible for a legal status in this country."</p>
<p>She said all the rote political things that any good politican should say: That there is a problem, and it needs to be dealt with. But the hideous monster of stupidity reared it's stupid hea when she suggested that:
1) We must make pay immigrants pay a fine. You want immigrants to come out of the shadows, but you want them to pay for it. I thin the igorance speaks for itself.
2) You are trying to impel them to learn english. That is such a pretentious statement I think it merits stone throwing.
3) She wants UNDOCUMENTED illegal aliens to pay backtaxes. Backtaxes on what? a year of missed payments? A day?
4) Be eligiible for legal status. Well she already implied that these people "need to learn english", but the citizenship tests require understanding of American custom, history, and english right? So all that would do is create a line of people who basically aren't eligible for citizenship under the status quo. So now that they're not eligible, what do you do with them? This suggests to me a poltician who knows how do feed the ear but siumultaneously tries to fool the mind. We've tried that before, it's called Iraq. </p>
<p>I could suggest my own solution to immigration, but that's not the point of this, although. I will gladly do so if I deem it necessary.</p>
<p>The point is, however, that Clinton is surely a woman with good intentions, but who definitely does not have the finesse or intelligence necessary for the job. She is not stupid, she is merely not smart. She speaks well, but effectually says nothing.</p>
<p>Fortunately, I can not support someone like her to lead the free world.</p>