Letter: Vetting Hillary Clinton

A previous writer suggested that we overhaul vetting for presidential candidates and wondered who would be running on the Republican side if we used this process. I would like to use this same vetting process for the other side.

“Psychological evaluations.” Barking like a dog on TV.

“Social stability.” Needs two men to help her up the stairs and has uncontrollable bobbing of head in social situations. Has numerous people in government and other positions who have spoken and written about the true disposition and personality of this candidate, which is far from complimentary.

“Ability to incorporate simple common sense.” However, telling the truth seems to be one common sense item. This candidate lied under oath and continues to tell lie after lie that can be checked and validated.

“Ability to manage major organizations without going bankrupt.” Has never managed any corporation, nor had one accomplishment as Secretary of State, and has endorsed many failed policies; as opposed to someone with 22,000 employees who knows how to run many businesses at the same time.

“Ability to remember what you said yesterday.” Really? Who remembers the many responses of “I cannot recall” when asked questions, and her husband does not even know the meaning of the word “is.”

Using this vetting process, which one would you choose?

This story was originally published September 19, 2016 at 3:07 PM with the headline "Letter: Vetting Hillary Clinton."