HOT for Hillary? Hell, I'm on Fire!

She’s smart, she’s capable, she’s tough, she’s charismatic, and she’s prepared to lead America out of eight years of degenerative Bush-ism.

Plus, she wears pretty sweet pantsuits.

And that, lovely reader, is why I’m HOT for HILLARY.

Let’s be honest: If you believe in the media hype that’s overtaken the airwaves 24/7, you might think that Barack Obama is the only candidate young voters support. From the beginning, the media has portrayed Obama as the “go get ‘em, tiger” underdog, the wunderkind young Senator from Illinois who has rallied the poor, the shivering, the huddled masses and promised them liberal salvation from the past decade of Bible-thumping conservatism, infuriating foreign policies, and hillbillies who can’t pronounce the word “nuclear.”

Poppycock, dear Watson.

Hillary Clinton has already walked the walk – not just talked the talk. Obama may claim that he stands for “Change,” but he never discusses WHAT he plans to change, HOW he plans to change it, or WHY his glorious Three Measly Years as a Senator – during which time his accomplishments pale in comparison to Clinton’s - makes him qualified to be President of the Freaking United States. He’s like that college friend who spent one semester studying in Paris, and came back kissing everybody on both cheeks and calling the subway “the metro.” Let’s be honest, man… it takes a little more time to really be fluent in the political terrain.

We’ve already endured eight years of empty rhetoric and little accomplishment. We don’t need any more.

We need the person who is most qualified, and who we can trust to deliver on important issues not because she says she will… but because she already has.

When you're coming off 8 years of a President who wears a dunce cap, it only makes sense to pick a President who is at the head of the class. Not the one who talks about change the most, not the one who gives the biggest impression of change, but the one who can actually make it happen when she takes office.

Again, Obama has only been a US Senator since 2005. If he was elected, it would be totally unprecedented for someone with that little experience to be our President of the United States. He’s tried to use his inexperience as a selling point, but I’m sorry – with all the problems going on as a result of the last President, this is just not the time to risk “all or nothing” on the new guy. Our country is a car driving off a cliff... I don't want to hand the keys over to the guy who just got his learner's permit!

If people stop and listen, Hillary provides detailed responses to WHAT she plans to do and HOW she plans to enact change as soon as she steps into office. Obama is long on talk, but short on details. He never articulates what he plans to do or what issues he is truly passionate about.

But Hillary has years and years of experience (including BEFORE her years as First Lady) of addressing issues like childcare, health care reform and international womens’ rights in oppressive countries. She has already worked to support women’s rights against the Taliban, worked for abused women in Beijing, and led research into Gulf War Syndrome for veterans who suffered in that war. It’s a huge testament to her character that she was taking on these big issues, and getting any success at all, in a time when it was “not okay” for a a First Lady to show such ambition.

Obama has run a campaign high on symbolism but low on detail. He tells us he’s an agent of change, but never how he plans to change things. He also never talks about how he is going to be able to do it as a Senator with so little experience. Don’t forget, the President is just one part of the process – he or she has to have the rest of Congress on their side in order to make things happen, endorse legislature, etc.

But with only two years in the Senate before he started his campaign, Obama hasn’t established the kind of relationships you need in order to make allies and get your “change” to actually happen. Plus, one of our biggest concerns right now is a war and the state of America’s international reputation. Why would we elect a President with no experience in international relations?

Obama doesn’t have experience working with the people and places that America will need to address in the wake of Bush. He does not have the same kind of experience, clout, and respect around the world. Hillary does.

And take a look at his website, and the “O” logo that he uses in his campaign. To me, that says it all. Obama is the product of slick marketing and media relations. But it doesn’t seem appropriate to me that a President has a logo, like Wal-mart or Coca-Cola. When you have experience to back it up, you don’t need to hire an ad agency.

Obama might make a great President in a few years. But right now, he has only come as far as he has because he symbolizes the “change” that all of us want so bad after 8 years of Bush horror. But Hillary brings change too… she’s already been bringing change as a woman who has worked harder and accomplished more than any one could ever have expected.

Right now, the country does need change. But change without experience is called a disaster.

That's why I'm HOT for HILLARY!

- SCOTT -