Voting on the basis of a candidate's gender is wrong
So, during her lifetime, Margaret Parypa wants to see a woman become president ('Hillary may be last chance for awhile,' Beaverton Valley Times, March 27), and for that reason she's a Hillary supporter. I can't think of a worse reason to vote for a president. Voting for a candidate just because of their gender or their race is a gross misuse of our voting freedoms in this country.
Ms. Parypa likes Hillary's compassion. Somehow I have missed that side of Hillary, and as for her expertise in health care, that doesn't fly either. Her health care plan (when Bill was president) went absolutely nowhere.
Hillary's experience, which she likes to talk about, amounts to her being the first lady when Bill was governor and first lady when Bill was president. I don't think that qualifies as 'experience' for governing this nation. On top of that, she makes up stories. I'm sure we won't find her on the TV show, 'Moment of Truth.'
A good presidential candidate will stand strong against our enemies, have good foreign policy credentials, understand that government is 'by the people,' nominate judges who will abide by the Constitution, work to keep our economy strong and will exemplify good character. That's just mentioning a few qualifications.
'Nothing is more essential to the establishment of manners in a State than that all persons employed in places of power and trust must be men of unexceptionable characters.' - Samuel Adams, patriot, politician, and signer of the Declaration of Independence.
Ms. Parypa talks about wealthy people laughing and big boys spewing hatred, and Christian radio spending millions duping people to vote, none of which makes any sense. But then voting for someone because of their gender doesn't make sense either.
BEVERLY ANN SHARPF