Debate raises more questions

” The Democratic debate on Tuesday raised quite a few questions that need to be answered before the Ohio primary March 4. First, why is it that Senator Hillary Clinton is able to selectively choose what is good and bad for her and use it to try and gain a political advantage over Sen.”

The Democratic debate on Tuesday raised quite a few questions that need to be answered before the Ohio primary March 4.

First, why is it that Senator Hillary Clinton is able to selectively choose what is good and bad for her and use it to try and gain a political advantage over Sen. Barack Obama?

It’s odd to me that she can claim that she will create five million jobs within 10 years if she becomes president.

She made a similar promise to Buffalo when she became New York Senator by saying she would create 200,000 jobs if elected.

Well, she was elected. And the city has faced a net loss of 30,000 jobs.

Sure, she counter-pointed that she believed Al Gore would become president over George Bush, but I don’t see that as a valid enough excuse for her promise.

For as bad as the economy is in Northeast Ohio, can it really rely on a promise from Clinton that she has not fulfilled in the state that she is a senator?

Clinton constantly talks about her past record and her experience, more so, she flaunts it and has used it as a driving force for her campaign but it doesn’t help her with this issue.

Our nation has become too vulnerable to unemployment, and Clinton’s past record shows that she has been unable to create jobs she promised to the people who voted her into office.

Vote how you want, but the loss of jobs in this country is overwhelming and must be turned around, and Clinton’s record, which she glorifies, does not support her promises.

Which brings me to NAFTA.

Both candidates said they would demand renegotiation with Canada and Mexico because they believe that, if done right, it would benefit our nation.

Not good enough. Not on Clinton’s, or Obama’s side.

I want a guarantee that companies in the United States will not be given tax breaks or government support if U.S. jobs are taken away and shipped overseas.

Both candidates seemed to tip-toe around the question and not give a definitive answer of, through negotiation, what will change within NAFTA policies. U.S. companies that keep jobs in America are those that deserve tax breaks and government backing.

It’s important for our country to be able to have a strong middle class that doesn’t have to scrape to find jobs to support their families.

However, the driving point of this primary is what will happen with the war in Iraq.

Republican candidate John McCain says that the war could go on for 50-100 more years, while the Democratic candidates said a withdrawal of troops will happen within six months of their election as president.

If I have to choose between 50-100 years in Iraq or a troop withdrawal within six months, there is no debate.

That’s why this election is so important. Our future relies heavily on what candidates get into office.

So I will leave you with this: six months or 50-100 more years?