Failure of command
Had the Daily Herald endorsed Hillary Clinton as the least bad of two very bad choices, I might have understood. But your endorsement of her "enthusiastically" left me cold.
Hillary's shortcomings relative to honesty, integrity, and judgment are well documented, so I will not dwell on those. There is another fact that concerns me even more, and that is the way she totally mishandled the situation in Benghazi.
As secretary of state, Benghazi gave her the unique opportunity to demonstrate to the American people that she was commander-in-chief material. She blew it.
Anyone who has ever been entrusted with a command understands that the welfare of the people in his or her charge is a sacred responsibility, second only to the accomplishment of the mission.
If Hillary was truly commander-in-chief material, she would have known those people needed help because it was her job to know, and she would have moved heaven and earth to provide the support they needed.
Yet, despite over 600 requests from Benghazi for additional security, she steadfastly maintains she was unaware. As a result, four Americans died needlessly and the country was again embarrassed by a foreign affairs misstep.
The primary responsibility of the president is national security. If Hillary Clinton was unable to secure a small outpost like Benghazi, how can we expect her to provide security for an entire country?
The answer is, we can't.
I will not be voting for either Trump or Clinton in this election. I will write in a yet-to-be-determined candidate who I believe is strong on national security.
My message to both major political parties is this: If you want my vote, provide me with a candidate who deserves it.
George Barney
Mundelein