Because her claims are not apparent.....candidates running on past record have voting records, position speeches, legislation or sponsoring of bills etc… a trail....McCain has one.......his record there-fore, after 25 years in the senate and Obamas year in state legislature and senate are in the open, they are not making claims that cannot be substantiated….......they can make no claim to have influenced or made law without it being readily apparent and checkable......

she is making claim to a record that has not been revealed to the public …this is not old it is in fact quite new…..she is ,making claims to have influenced votes, policy, programs etc….if she lays claim to these and they are being withheld by her, that is her problem…and any subsequent judgments made in a negative light, based the fact they were kept unavailable will fall on her shoulders.

no one would expect her to act differently, if she weren't using the process differently....who uses experience of office that they keep locked up? If she claims it , shes gotta show it...if she doesn’t claim it then she will not be expected to show it….

__________________
Obama-e fungis nati homines....

And people care about this stuff?

The woman has big hips and looks like she's sucking on a lemon.

That's about as much analysis as the average American voter is going to give it, I'm afraid. You really think anyone other than us freaks on a political forum is going to care one whit about the tedious details of voting records?

Ha!

No, but my facetious comment was more in line with asking why we're suddenly expecting Hilary to be held to a higher standard than the incumbent?

I would say because the grounds are very different.....bush has a record, apparent for all to see check etc......she has a record in the senate, but is claiming success and experience built on events that we are not being allowed to see, and these aren't national security secrets....

__________________
Obama-e fungis nati homines....

Yes the part where i question how you justify what you disagree with one person as acceptable to another person because the first person did it? Where's your outrage at this?

Bush, when he changed the law was only following the precedent set by his predeccesor.

And the answer is the same. Bush is not running for President. I dont recall there being a lower standard that he didnt have to release papers from his time in the white house before he ran. This is a unique situation.

__________________
http://www.fairtax.org

Elminate all taxes on income and replace with a national sales tax.

If she tells you they are, would you take her word for it?

__________________
A federal judge ruled today that graphic pictures of detainee abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison must be released over government claims that they could damage America's image.

Someone should tell them that bad press can be prevented by not abusing prisoners in the first place. Censorship is only needed to preserve the good reputation of those who have tortured and/or murdered already.