Submitted by Dave Figg, Apr 6, 2007 10:12

The election of any candidate to public office involves the integrity of that individual. We, the people, should be voting based, in part, on the demonstrated character of that politician. Can we trust them? Are they true to their word? Is their definition of "right" and "wrong" fixed, or does it fluxuate based upon personal desires. TAbsolute truth is fixed! But when any candidate says words which twist the definition to please the crowd who listening, this is not absolute truth.

Just because a candidate attends a National Prayer Breakfast, and they even bow their head and close their eyes during prayer does NOT necessarily reflect a change in attitude or level of integrity.

Do we have the right to question the integrity of Senator Clinton? Absolutely. It is both our privilege and our obligation to do so. History does, in fact, repeat itself. Do we, the American public, desire to have the Clinton level of integrity repeat itself?

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.