David Johnston wrote:
Hillary couldn't manage her own house, you expect her to control anything
big as a country?

That's a really stupid way to evaluate a presidential candidate.
Almost as stupid as saying that because someone cheats on their spouse
they can't be a good president.

Whoa there Dimocrat!
Are you trying to tell us that a person who lies and cheats and
engages in criminal activity would be your choice for president?
(COME ON, you KNOW that if any CEO engaged in sex with a low-level
underling it is automatic sexual harassment. The NOW gang established
the principle that a person in authority can NEVER have "consensual
sex" with an underling. Of course, NOW lost all credibility when they
did a turn about and defended Slick!)

I'd say if a person lies to and cheats on those near to him, then it's
pretty likely he'll lie and cheat on those he works for as well.

And Puleeze, don't tell us again how Dubya "stole" the election!