Hillary’s consistent non-answers

Posted: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 11:48 AM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: 2008, Clinton

From NBC’s Mark Murray and NBC/NJ’s Athena Jones
In an interview with CNN’s Candy Crowley yesterday, Clinton was once again asked whether she supports giving drivers’ licenses to illegal immigrants. And once again, she didn’t really answer the question.

CROWLEY: If I wrote a story that said: "Absent a broad illegal immigration bill, Hillary Clinton agrees about giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants," is that correct?
CLINTON: No. What I have said is that I support what governors are trying to do. And governors are on the front lines because of the failures to get comprehensive immigration reform. There are already eight states that issue driver's licenses without any verification of citizenship. That is a decision that the governors and legislatures and the people of those states have made. I understand…
CROWLEY: But you see why people think…
CLINTON: Well, but you know, Candy…
CROWLEY: … that you are not answering the question.
CLINTON: Well, but you know, Candy, well, but I think that if you go back and look at the complexity of this issue, I don’t think a lot of these hard questions lend themselves to raising your hand. And I know that that’s easier in a 30 second context to try to do.

A look at nearly everything she has said on the subject since October 16 -- which adds up to a lot more than 30 seconds -- shows that she actually has been pretty consistent in her answer: Generally, she supports what governors like New York’s Eliot Spitzer are trying to do. But she also has been pretty consistent in giving non-answers on whether she, personally, supports giving drivers’ licenses to illegal immigrants.

Below is what Clinton has said on the matter…

October 16 editorial meeting with the Nashua Telegraph
"I hate to see any state being pushed into trying to take this into their own hands because the federal government has failed. So I know exactly what Governor Spitzer is trying to do and it makes a lot of sense, because he's trying to get people out of the shadows, come forward and we'll give you this license – but without a federal policy in effect people will come forward and they could get picked up by ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) tomorrow. This can't work state by state – it has to be looked at comprehensively."

October 30 MSNBC debate
RUSSERT: Senator Clinton, Governor of New York Eliot Spitzer has proposed giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. [You] told the Nashua, New Hampshire, Editorial Board it makes a lot of sense. Why does it make a lot of sense to give an illegal immigrant a driver's license?
CLINTON: Well, what Governor Spitzer is trying to do is fill the vacuum left by the failure of this administration to bring about comprehensive immigration reform. We know in New York we have several million at any one time who are in New York illegally. They are undocumented workers. They are driving on our roads. The possibility of them having an accident that harms themselves or others is just a matter of the odds. It's probability. So what Governor Spitzer is trying to do is to fill the vacuum. I believe we need to get back to comprehensive immigration reform because no state, no matter how well intentioned, can fill this gap. There needs to be federal action on immigration reform.

Then moments later at the debate…
DODD: This is a privilege. And, look, I'm as forthright and progressive on immigration policy as anyone here. But we're dealing with a serious problem here, we need to have people come forward. The idea that we're going to extend this privilege here of a driver's license I think is troublesome, and I think the American people are reacting to it…
CLINTON: Well, I just want to add, I did not say that it should be done, but I certainly recognize why Governor Spitzer is trying to do...

And then…
RUSSERT: Senator Clinton, I just want to make sure of what I heard. Do you, the New York senator, Hillary Clinton, support the New York governor's plan to give illegal immigrants a driver's license? You told the New Hampshire paper that it made a lot of sense. Do you support his plan?
CLINTON: You know, Tim, this is where everybody plays "gotcha." It makes a lot of sense. What is the governor supposed to do? He is dealing with a serious problems. We have failed. And George Bush has failed. Do I think this is the best thing for any governor to do? No. But do I understand the sense of real desperation, trying to get a handle on this? Remember, in New York, we want to know who's in New York. We want people to come out of the shadows.

October 31 statement from the campaign
“Senator Clinton supports governors like Governor Spitzer who believe they need such a measure to deal with the crisis caused by this administration’s failure to pass comprehensive immigration reform.”

The New York Times reported on that statement:
“Mrs. Clinton’s aides said her statement Wednesday expressing general support for Mr. Spitzer’s plan was intended to signal that she broadly supported his goal of granting driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants. But they said she had not studied — and was not endorsing — any specific plan.”

On November 2, per the Associated Press:
Clinton said she generally supported efforts by New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer and others who have tried to address public safety questions in absence of federal immigration reform. Last weekend, Spitzer announced a plan backed by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to give licenses with limited privileges to some undocumented workers. "I don't know all the details," Clinton said, adding that the issue was going to be hard to resolve. "We've had, now, seven years of an administration that saw things in black and white, yes and no, up and down. I think it's time we actually had a conversation with the American people," she said.

Clinton campaigning in Clinton, IA on November 4
"I wasn't as clear as I should have been the other night. I have had a number of occasions where I have spoken to it and I believe clarified it, but I'd be happy to do it again. I believe in comprehensive immigration reform and I have been in favor of that for years. I have signed onto bills. I have voted for provisions and I think it is the only answer for our country."

"Unfortunately, because the Bush administration has failed and as has the Congress, the federal government as a whole to bring about comprehensive immigration reform, governors are left holding the bag. They're the ones having to deal with the security issues, the safety of their roads and so much else. Therefore, I broadly support what governors like Eliot Spitzer are trying to do. I don't pretend to know the details. That's up to the governor and the legislature to try to work out. But I think that it's understandable that states are trying to fill a vacuum left by the failures of the federal government."

Then in an interview yesterday CNN’s Candy Crowley…
CROWLEY: If I wrote a story that said: "Absent a broad illegal immigration bill, Hillary Clinton agrees about giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants," is that correct?
CLINTON: No. What I have said is that I support what governors are trying to do. And governors are on the front lines because of the failures to get comprehensive immigration reform. There are already eight states that issue driver's licenses without any verification of citizenship. That is a decision that the governors and legislatures and the people of those states have made. I understand…
CROWLEY: But you see why people think…
CLINTON: Well, but you know, Candy…
CROWLEY: … that you are not answering the question.
CLINTON: Well, but you know, Candy, well, but I think that if you go back and look at the complexity of this issue, I don’t think a lot of these hard questions lend themselves to raising your hand. And I know that that’s easier in a 30 second context to try to do. I think the fact that governors are being forced into this position is really unfortunate. They should not be making immigration policy. The federal government should be making immigration policy and that’s what I’m going to try to do as president again and I do not believe that in the context of federal immigration reform that that would be an issue that governors would have to contend with.
CROWLEY: So it’s – I know it’s not a yes or no question to you but you’ve had some time here and the problem is that people can’t quite get a hold of is for a governor at this time, do you think it’s a good idea for them to offer drivers’ licenses to illegal immigrants?
CLINTON: It depends upon what state they’re in. It depends upon what they think the risks are. You know. A governor of New York that has a lot of immigrants, many of whom we know are not their legally, has to worry about security. A governor of another state where that’s not a problem doesn’t. This issue has been so politicized and I understand that because you can score points. You can score all kinds of political demagogic points but the fact is if we don’t have comprehensive immigration reform, which for me includes toughening the borders, much harder sanctions on employers, doing more to help local communities that are stuck with the bill on all kinds of services. And bringing immigrants out of the shadows.

And if they ever committed a crime where they came from or here, immediately deport them. But for the others, have a tough path to earned legalization. Pay back taxes. Pay fines. Learn English. Wait in line. And once you got somebody on the record registered, deported the criminals, instead they had to keep on the right side of the law, keep making a living and do all of these other things I’ve outlined, that would be the appropriate time to give them some kind of license. But I understand – I’m not going to be second guessing governors who have to do the hard work of figuring out what’s best for their state.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

I disagree with this post: Ms. Crawley said that absent an immigration reform bill she supports Gov. giving out driver's liscenses to illegal immigrants she said no that she didn't it was up to the states and state by state decision. How is that a different answer? All of her statments have basically taken the position Ms. Crawley laid out - which is unpopular with 80% of the democrats. I think this is why people see her as a flip-flopper: we hear one thing consistently and she denies it compleletly.

Clinton has been consistent in supporting lisences for illegals. Why she can't just say it, I don't know.

Rhoda (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:07 PM)

Immigration is a complex and messy issue, and it doesn't lend itself to political soundbites. Any republican or democrat that promises to throw out all illegals is lying. The reality is, identifying these people is probably a good thing, perhaps maybe a "specific" type of driver's license that would prohibit voter fraud is in order... of course, that would require more administration and more taxpayer money. There are no easy answers now. Clinton is right about one thing.. the federal governments' failures HAS caused states to have to come up with patchwork solutions to deal with VERY REAL problems in their states caused by the influx of immigrants. This is not a 30 second soundbite problem folks... this is a complex solution that will require multifaceted solutions. Simply getting angry at illegals won't solve the problem.

Amazed, Atlanta (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:08 PM)

Dot, Illinois (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:10 PM)

She is a good Tango dancer. Dances all around the question. Bad practice of not being able to simply say yes, I support it. Or no, I don't agree with it.

Ravine Force, Kissimmee, FL (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:13 PM)

Justin, Gainesville FL (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:14 PM)

since when did the president of the USA decide about drivers licenses?
Or is that state's right to be overtaken too?

-------------

I know, the Clinton bashers would rather talk about how she doesn't answer a question that wouldn't apply to the president, but who give's a ratsass anyway?

Can we talk about an issue that the president does effect?

Chuck,San Diego (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:16 PM)

Ok. That was slightly longer than 30 seconds, she had ample opportunity to eschew sound-bites and give a good substantive answer, and I still have absolutely no idea what her position is.

Can anyone do me a solid and explain it for me?

Anyone?

Beuller?

Adam Columbus OH (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:18 PM)

Elliot Spitzer supports a modified driver's license so that we can keep track of undocumented workers. The license cannot be used to board airplanes and it is a non-breeder document, which means that it cannot be used to get other documents. It is a fairly simple concept and either you support it or you don't.

So what about you Hillary? Do you support it or not? Come take a shot at it? You know that both positions, for and against, are defensible, so you only wind up alienating one side or the other. But you can't call it nuanced and you can't have it both ways. This is not swift boating. This is policy and you have to take a stand. Presidents have to take a stand. People, even people like me, would have more respect for your candidacy if you would just take a stand.

For me the policy seems safe and simple. I support it as a safety measure and a way to keep track of these people while we take measures to tighten the borders and enforce laws to prohibit their hiring.

BTW I hope that all of you anti-immigration people are prepared to pay about 30% more for food and housing once we eliminate cheap foreign labor. I am. I only support restrictions on hiring of illegals because it lowers wages across the nation and creates a class of near slave laborers. But remember those costs of higher labor will be passed on to you, the consumer.

I think that encouraging people who are here illegally to return to Mexico (we can't round them up Tom Tancredo) and then have them reapply for legal entry is the fairest proposition. But while they are here they need a non-breeder DL so we have an idea who they are and where they live. It would help with tracking terrorists as well.
Obama '08

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:20 PM)

What a total moron.....

But seriously Senator Clinton.......

What is your stand on illegal immigrants getting drivers licenses in New York?

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:21 PM)

ANSWER THE QUESTION!!!!!!!!!!!!

YES OR NO!!!!!!!

ANSWER IT!!!!!!

That is why she is a great advisor. She can see both sides. But, a leader looks at both sides and then makes a decision.

She cares more about what Republicans think of her, and how her answers will play in the general election, than what the Democrats, who have supported the party, and her husband, for so many years, think.

ANSWER THE QUESTION!!!!

I GET BOTH SIDES OF THE ARGUMENT, I'M NOT STUPID, STOP EXPLAINING AND START ANSWERING.

Elizabeth Sullivan, San Diego, CA (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:21 PM)

I have to believe the press is an intelligent entity. Operating under that premise, why is it so difficult to understand what Hillary is saying?

As I understand it:

-- This is a complex issue; doesn't warrant a simple yes/no answer.

-- This is a state issue. Works in NY. May not work in other places.

-- What we really need is comprehensive immigration reform.

Now, I'm not a journalist and I got it. What's the problem? So when it's asked why this debate question turned into a 7 day story, it's because the press won't let it go.

Steve (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:21 PM)

It is amazing how easy it is to end the fortunes of a promising candidate. Gore got caught inventing the internet. Kerry voted for it before he voted against it. And Hillary can't give an answer to a simple question.

tyler daniels, eaton ohio (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:25 PM)

So poor little girl Hillary, she can't make up her mind. And then Bill comes to her rescue and said the boys are picking on her. Makes me wonder if she can't take the heat then get out of the kitchen! I have not notice any of the men running having to have there wives come to there rescue. Poor, Poor little Hillary.

Edna ohio (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:29 PM)

I understand what Clinton is saying. She is being rational. Would we prefer she launch into some idiotic, immigrant baiting, rabble rousing tirade? Would that make for better TV? PS. Still supporting John Edwards here. I just think he could weather attacks like this from the media and Republicans better than Hillary in the general election.

Amy B Portland, ME (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:31 PM)

yes, steve, it is an intelligent answer.. obviously if you're a tyleridiot it goes way over your head.

Chuck,San Diego (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:40 PM)

Politics of Parsing II - Cha Cha Cha

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkzlxJcbx54&eurl=http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/11/7/102859/575

Margaret, NYC (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:40 PM)

Hillary is clearly caught in a position that she doesn't want to be in...so she's refusing to answer the question. She doesn't want to alienate the far left and Latinos by saying she opposes giving DL's to illegals, and she doesn't want to disagree with 80% of the country who strongly oppose giving DL's to illegals. Finally...a Clinton is cornered into a position that requires an actual answer.

Until she clearly answers this question, she'll continue her free fall in the polls. Obama needs to continue to seize on this opportunity.

Chris, Wood River, IL (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:43 PM)

I like the idea of having some sort of document that tracks the whereabouts of illegals. Although most people don't condone the issuing of driver's licenses to illegals, it could be a different license than the one that citizens and residents receive and it could be used to track the illegals. It would be a good thing to know where they are and how many there are in any given community or state. I understand what Mrs. Clinton is trying to say. It's not an easy yes or no answer. It's more complicated than that and I can understand her trying to answer it more than just with a yes or no answer. The negative coverage has just been a tool by the right and her democratic opponents to bash her with.

Laurie, Manasquan, NJ (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:45 PM)

But seriously Senator Clinton.......

What is your stand on illegal immigrants getting drivers licenses in New York?

-----------------

Hillary doesn't feel compelled to answer the question. She says she's not from New York.

Doug Shulman, Pine City NY (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:46 PM)

Wow! Has msnbc really stopped being Clinton's cheerleader, or is this just a temporary glitch?

Class Warrior, D.C. (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:55 PM)

Wow! Has msnbc really stopped being Clinton's cheerleader, or is this just a temporary glitch?

Class Warrior, D.C. (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:55 PM)

-- This is a complex issue; doesn't warrant a simple yes/no answer.

Yes. That's it. When someone asks Hillary a tough question, she should just answer 'It's complex, you wouldn't understand.'. That would sure get her a lot more votes.

Dorthy Carlon, Hartsville South Carolina (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:56 PM)

Where is everyone’s memory when it comes to Hillary, and the Clinton Presidency?? Although it must be said, that the memories of their transgressions are somewhat lost due to the fact that George Bush has been so horrendous as a president. That notwithstanding, at least the Bush administration and family haven’t subjected this country to the disgraceful scandals, cheating and lying that this country was forced to endure during the Clinton’s stay in the White House….wherein Hillary was the First “Lady”? The facts are undisputedly the facts….

So, before we treat this ‘lady” with too much respect and allow anyone to try and illustrate her as someone other than who she is, where she’s being abused by the nasty moderators, or supposedly being “piled on” by her male political counterparts, let’s not forget who we’re really dealing with …..

This highly documented former First “Lady” of Arkansas and the White House, now a Senator from New York, has been consistent in her political life…. consistently disingenuous, ruthless and scandal prone. …..She’s a person whose veracity has been routinely questioned, because she always seems to have problems finding the truth, …whether it’s hers, …or when she’s counseling her husband, ….or directing those around her.

Arguably, she’s formidable with her legal background, it allows her a greater knowledge of precisely where, and how, to carefully parse her statements and actions, to avoid direct hits…..To that end, she’s had a professional lifetime of perfecting her “doubletalk” skills, but, it now appears that there’s a fatal flaw emerging…for when modestly pressured, she apparently can’t keep all of her BS, half truths straight, especially if they’re not accepted at face value and when she’s taken off message.

Make no mistake about it, now there’s blood in the water, her political blood, and the media and her Democrat and Republican alike foes have picked up the scent. I don’t think there will be any more instances of “Tim, (Russert), I’m not going to answer that question” or unchallenged position statements like the Illegal Immigrants Drivers license fiasco where she attempts to say both yes, and no, at the same time. It appears as though the ice maiden is finally starting to melt under the hot lights of scrutiny and the heat is only going to become greater, because the present is starting to look hauntingly similar to her past conniving past. What is it that they say about old dogs???

During a recent interview with Katie Couric: CBS political correspondent Jeff Greenfield observed: ” Hillary Clinton's dissembling answer during Tuesday's Democratic presidential debate, about why her White House records have not been released was uniquely Clintonesque, he then reminded "CBS Evening News" viewers on Wednesday night of her past scandals, scandals that have not mentioned by the media in years. Continuing on, Greenfield outlined why Hillary Clinton, contrary to her claim was still attempting to “blame the National Archives for sealing her White House papers when clearly a letter from Bill Clinton shows he asked that they be sealed for 12 years.”

The notion that there's stuff that's being restricted potentially opens the door to asking questions about, well, the travel office where the independent counsel said she had been factually false. How did her brothers get pardons for two felons after being paid hundreds of thousands of dollars? How did she raise $100,000 trading cattle futures? This stuff hasn't come up in the campaign......And it hasn't come up in the mainstream media which, until Tim Russert's question at the debate about the suppression of her records, has so far shown little interest in “asking questions” about the 1990s Clinton era scandals.

Other 1990’s Clinton Scandals, aside from those that Greenfield mentioned, in part, include the following:

Sex scandals with Jennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Monica Lewinski, Whitewater, The Rose Law Firm, Vince Foster, Travelgate, Filegate, Both being Subpoenaed by a Federal Grand Jury, Perjury to a Federal Grand Jury, (aside from lying to the American public on national television) Obstruction of Justice, Articles of Impeachment, Pardongate, etc.etc. It has to be said that Bill certainly can’t take all of the credit for the headlines:

The Senate committee accused "an American presidency [of having] misused its power, circumvented the limits on its authority and attempted to manipulate the truth." The First Lady came in for much stronger criticism, as she was billed as "the central figure" in all aspects of their investigations”.

“But the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco reinstated the case in November. According to Flowers' lawsuit, Hillary Rodham Clinton organized and directed a conspiracy to defame her. Judge Pro ruled that the alleged defamatory statements "are arguably consistent with such a conspiracy."

“With the discovery of the long sought after billing records, in Hillary Rodham Clinton’s book room in the White House, on January 26, 1996 Hillary Rodham Clinton made history by becoming the first, First Lady to ever be subpoenaed to testify before a Federal Grand jury”

”After the death of Vince Foster in July of 1993, chief White House counsel Bernard Nussbaum removed documents, some of them concerning the Whitewater Development Corporation, from Foster's office and gave them to Margaret Williams. According to the New York Times, Williams placed them in a safe in the White House for five days before the Clintons turned them over to their personal lawyer for transfer to the authorities.

More recently - WASHINGTON -- In the spring, when Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton was denouncing the Dubai Ports World deal, a consulting firm run by her top advisers was quietly lobbying for a Dubai takeover of two U.S. defense plants, Newsday has learned. Called, “The Glover Park Group”, known as the "White House in Exile" - was founded five years ago by a group of top advisers to Bill and Hillary Rodham Clinton, including former White House communications director Joe Lockhart and key Hillary Clinton advisers Gigi Georges and Howard Wolfson, who don't engage in lobbying but are apprised of the firm's lobbying efforts.

In late August 2007, a major contributor to, and "bundler" for, Clinton's campaign, called a "Hillraiser", Norman Hsu, was revealed to be a 15-years-long fugitive in an investment fraud case. He was also suspected of having broken campaign finance law regarding his bundling collections. The Clinton campaign first said it would donate to charity the $23,000 that Hsu personally contributed to her, then said it would refund to 260 donors the full $850,000 in bundled donations raised by Hsu.[ Hsu was subsequently indicted on new investment fraud charges.

Undoubtedly, there are more issues lingering in the shadows, waiting in the wings, for this person knows only one way to conduct herself. And, to her discredit her main counsel, is her husband, who even with the aid of a GPS unit couldn’t find his way to the truth…..I know this will fall on the deaf ears of the blind feminists, the straight ticket democrats, those aligned with the special interest groups that are so coveted by the Clinton’s…..But, to all of the rest of you, don’t be duped…..this is one, evil, power hungry, mercenary female that will do anything, stop at nothing, to achieve her goals…Some of you may take exception with my post, but, unfortunately in this case, the facts are etched in history and unlike Hillary, these facts don’t lie.

To that end, let’s do away with the old time, hackneyed, lobbyist aligned, special interest group compromised, not to be trusted, type of candidate and move on to a new day of honesty and dignity. Let’s elect a chief executive that can, and will bring this country together, giving the rest of the world a sense that we really care about our image and actions .There’s only candidate that has shown the dynamics, the requisite forward thinking programs, who possesses a sense of dignity, honesty, with no scandals or dark secrets trailing from the past, a person that embodies the best image we could present as a diverse society,…. the young Senator from Illinois…..

TJB, Scottsdale (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:56 PM)

What is absolutely fascinating about this, to me, is that whatever her position on this issue ultimately ends up being, the bigger story since the debate has been the tone-deaf, ham-handed response of Sen. Clinton's campaign. How a campaign with so much experience, money, and star power (and President Clinton, easily the best pure politician in post-war American history as an advisor) flubbed this so badly is beyond me. They turned a 1-2 day story about a badly worded (non)answer at the tail end of a debate she had largely performed well at into a tsunami that is still pounding them more than a week later.

If Sen. Clinton's campaign moves (or more likely, her poor political instincts) are this bad in a primary that she is largely winning, what the h*ll is she going to do in the general? The "boys are picking on me" meme is a "in case of fire break glass" response that she gets to use only a very few times before voters, who are electing the President of the USA, not Treasurer of the local school board will get very tired of very quickly. Clinton's campaign looks very strong (polls, money, organization) but also very brittle.

Adam Columbus OH (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:58 PM)

I don't think this one is going to go away. Seems to me Senator Clinton is not helping her cause by her responses----she isn't portraying herself as a decisive decison maker. Probably would be best to bite the bullet with a simply yes or no and get it over with.
Dot, Illinois (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:10 PM)

Respectfully, I disagree. I don't think every issue has a yes or no answer, and I think that Hillary has clarified her response. While she supports governors taking the initiative in trying to get a handle on illegal immigration, she does not necessarily support every measure that they take in that effort. It's more than just yes it is a good idea or no it is not. Things are rarely that simple.

Carrie, Eastern Iowa (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:59 PM)

You know for all those who say HC is calculating and sticks her finger in the wind and then makes a decision....here we have a situation completely counter to that way of thinking. I am quite sure they know that the polling on this in not on their side but has she changed her position? No. I am also confident that they know that by not putting this story to bed they will continue to have to address it.
And to Adam in OH – the answer to your question is that HC understands the governor’s position. “Understand” being the key word here. Further she “understands” that not every state will have to tackle the issue as they don’t have as huge a problem with undocumented workers as New York. I understand her answers to mean that because there hasn’t been leadership by the current president on the issue of immigration reform that the states have to try to get a handle on the problem. Giving undocumented workers driver’s licenses is one way to do this. Is it the best solution? No. But is it a thoughtful attempt at addressing the issue? Yes.
This story line is a classic example of people’s inability to wrap their heads around a complex answer to a complex issue. I mean must everything be spelled out as if she is talking to third graders? Grow up people, we live in a world with many difficult and challenging issues facing us and many of these issues do not have blanket solutions, yes or no answers. Hillary Clinton has attempted, in my mind, to address the questions with as much specificity as possible and I am satisfied with her explanation.

Daniel Elliott, Los Angeles, CA (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:00 PM)

That's a good boy, Mark! Good boy! You get a newsie-treat! Now, if you'd only do this kind of expose on the rest of her double- and triple-speak I might actually begin to think you're a real journalist. For that matter, you might consider the same for all the candidates. I feel you should focus on Hillary, though, to help make up for MSNBC's (and pretty much all other mainstream media's) be-smitten, fawning, and generally saccarine "reporting" on her.
Justin, Gainesville FL (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:14 PM)

I haven't seen much fawning recently, Justin. I've seen an awful lot of stories on First Read about the effects of her debate performance, and her answer to this question specifically. But far be it from me to challenge your obviously unbiased perception.

Carrie, Eastern Iowa (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:01 PM)

No one is questioning the complexity of the issue. However the fact remains, that the question was specifically regarding Spitzer's plan, do you support it? The answer is "yes" or "no". If you say, "No", you can explain why, or you may say you support some parts and not others, but for Christ sake answer the question already!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Crystal (Time for change) (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:01 PM)

Can any one answer this question yet? Has anyone asked Edwards or Obama or any other candidates this question? Can anyone answer this question here, let alone in 30 seconds? Go for it, I dare any of you.Answer yes or no if illegals should have whatever type of license and then why or why not. Come on Jerry! What shall we do with all illegal immigrants? Sending them all back is not an option, not possible. If you say send them back , then how? Back to their country of origin? How do we stop them from coming back the next week, then what? Jail them all? Come on smarty pants idiots on First Read. You have 30 seconds to answer. OK, I will give you a whole day to figure it out and report back to me. Oh, maybe a month, no a whole year to figure it all out. Get over yourselves, dumbasses.

Chris Penn (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:02 PM)

The answer to illegal immigration is attrition by enforcement. DLs for illegals goes the other way...stop giving illegals benefits, start fining and jailing those who hire them, get a grip on the number who are here, and then, and only then, see about reforming the immigration laws.

Bruce, NV (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:02 PM)

Don't forget that it was Edwards who drew some heavy fire the other day for a very similar weak response on the very same question: http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2007/11/remember-remember-fifth-of-november.html

Daniel, NY (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:11 PM)

Damed if you do, or damed if you don't. It's just another part of the "mess" the Bush administration has got us into. No leadership in Washington. hillaryclinton.com .

Bubba (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:11 PM)

Yes. That's it. When someone asks Hillary a tough question, she should just answer 'It's complex, you wouldn't understand.'. That would sure get her a lot more votes.

It's not that people won't get it. It's that it's more complex than yes or no. If I ask someone if they support abortion and they answer, "I don't support in abortion but I support a woman's right to choose." Are they giving me an answer? Yes. Is it a simple yes/no answer? No. It's a complex, moral issue that deserves more than a knee-jerk response.

Steve (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:19 PM)

Did anyone saw abc last sunday with stephanopoulos. Did anyone remember John Edwards to the same question?

yes criticize, but do not answer (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:19 PM)

Daniel Elliott, Los Angeles, CA

"the answer to your question is that HC understands the governor’s position."

Well that's just wonderful. I feel so much better knowing that she can *sympathize* with the quandry that Gov. Spitzer is in (and other gov's since the comprehensive immigration reform failed). Now if she could please provide some insight as to the specific details of the NY plan she does, or does not support, in whole or in part, I'd be much obliged. Many days later and she still has not provided it.

"Hillary Clinton has attempted, in my mind, to address the questions with as much specificity as possible and I am satisfied with her explanation."

I'm really not attempting to be rude or combatitive, but if you're satisfied with this waffling, triangulating non-answer, you are a very cheap date when it comes to candor from your political leaders.

The issue (illegal immigration) is, as you rightly described, a complicated one. But the question she was asked was not "Give me your solution to the immigration issue in 30 seconds or less" it was a very specific question about a very specific policy proposal by Gov. Sptizer. She can support it, oppose it, support some parts and not others, all well and good, but we have a right to an answer on this.

I care not at all what her precious feelings are on the matter, I care about what her position is now, and what she would do as president.

Adam Columbus OH (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:19 PM)

TJB, as a teacher, I give you a flunking grade on your first paragraph, so therefore you get an F in politics 101. TJB, you apparently haven't attended ANY classes(US or the world) in the past 7 years. Your statement, that the Bush family and this administration haven't subjected this country to disgraceful scandals, cheating and lying is 100% incorrect and you were obviously in a coma or living out of the country not to notice what a ridiculous and untrue statement this is. I had difficulty reading the rest because of your flawed and myopic thinking. You flunked! Furthermore, you are probably lying about being an Obama supporter because mostly everyone and their uncle,(with the exception of about 28% of republicans)knows that the Bush administration is/was far more damaging and dastardly than the Clinton administration EVER was...EVER.

Ted Kavelle, Carbondale, Illinois (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:20 PM)

Adam (Columbus, Ohio) says,

"The issue (illegal immigration) is, as you rightly described, a complicated one. But the question she was asked was not "Give me your solution to the immigration issue in 30 seconds or less" it was a very specific question about a very specific policy proposal by Gov. Sptizer. She can support it, oppose it, support some parts and not others, all well and good, but we have a right to an answer on this."

Exactly my point!!!!

Crystal (Time for change) (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:25 PM)

Daniel - Edwards answer on ABC's This Week - he opposes drivers licenses for illegal immigrants unless they're on a path to citizenship.

At least he has a position - Hillary does not.

And here's more Hillary triangulation!
Edwards opposes the Peru FTA, Obama supports it, Hillary - ???
http://commonsense.ourfuture.org/hillary_clinton_nafta_triangulation_2_0

Margaret, NYC (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:26 PM)

Oh yea TJB, we certainly won't be duped by YOU! Most ridiculous crap I've read in a long time here, next to Jerry nonsense of course. No lying or scandal in the Bush White House? Are you heavily medicated or what? HUH? What on earth is wrong with you?

F StLouis (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:26 PM)

Carrie

I understand what you are saying. But for some, this failure to respond definitively seems to shows a pattern of not responding directly to questions for fear of alienating at certain voting block. They find that troubling--political expediancy over firm stances.

My point is, rightly or wrongly, whether that perception is unfair or untrue, she is going to have to deal with this problem--- the opposition is not going to let it be forgotten. In my view, the longer it drags on, the harder it gets to correct.

Dot, Illinois (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:27 PM)

Chris Penn:

Actually Obama clearly stated that he supported Governor Spitzer's plan. He said it at the debate and it was a simple, 'yes, I support it.' It took all of a 2 second sound bite. It's really quite simple. It only becomes complicated or nuanced when one is trying to avoid answering the question.
Obama '08

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:28 PM)

I see Hillary Clinton as our next president. I know this will make some people angry. I have seen this vision. She will be our next president.

Psychic Mary (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:28 PM)

Did anyone saw abc last sunday with stephanopoulos. Did anyone remember John Edwards to the same question?

I saw it. Bottom line: he holds the same position as Hillary. I could be wrong but he believes it's something the states should be deciding. The transcript to the interview should be available at www.abcnews.com

Steve (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:36 PM)

hillary should be on dancing with the stars as she can two step with the best of them. my bet is she's trying to avoid blowing off the latino vote, especially in fla, remember 2000? as to the complexity of immigration it's fairly clear, it's illegal immigration, key word illegal. the immigration bill they tried to pass gave extra credit for job skills and education. does that sound like the illegals we're discussing in the original concept of workers that occupy low paying and manual labor jobs we don't want,no! its an attempt to bring in skilled labor to compete with our own workforce and grads at a lower pay and benefits. its the insourcing of our previous outsourcing of jobs. the outsourcing isn't going so well with all the product and food recalls from abroad. since most of the illegals wouldn't qualify for these credits it doesn't address the issue of illegal immigration. two step your way around that.

karlos (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:40 PM)

Adam in OH – Thank you for your response....I understand where your coming from but unlike you I do think HC has sufficiently answered the question. Is it as a straight forward an answer to satisfy you and others? No. But some of us don’t require our presidential candidates to button up every question put to them. This question is not, in my mind, important at all. I really don’t care one way or another if we do or do not give undocumented workers driver’s licenses. I just don’t care. But what I do care about is the lack of empathy people express toward one another. You don’t have to care that HC sympathizes with Governor Spitzer but in my mind that is part of what is wrong with politics today. Rather than attempt to “understand” how she might “understand” the governor’s position you just say “I don’t care how you feel just tell me what you think.” Your way of thinking is all too common today and very unfortunate. There you have it Adam, my feelings on the subject.

Daniel Elliott, Los Angeles, CA (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:42 PM)

It's simple: like husband, like wife. The word here is Clintonian political bob and weave. Does anyone remember what the meaning of the word "is" is???? Nuff said!

Ron, Wichita, KS (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:43 PM)

yes lets blame bush for her inability to answer whether or not she supports NY Gov's plan. She is a New York Senator. You would think she would have some thoughts on it.

Here is somthing i think we should all be reminded of. "ILLEGAL" <-- That means not legal, as in they are breaking the LAW!!! Not sure why they are still coming to USA anyway. Free trade with Mexico has all the plants moved down there anyway.

Hillary is a great politician. However she just reminds everyone how deceitful politicians are. As with her Husband, she will say anything to get into office. Right now she is stuck. A rareity. She cant give a straight answer without losing votes, and she has been called on it.

I love it.

David, Iowa (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:45 PM)

The drivers license issue is a media construct, it is a state issue masked as a national issue. Lets stop, breath and ignore this media play, what are the bigger issues on illegal immigration? JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS. WAGES WAGES WAGES. When the national language is english and these people learn it, our service jobs will disappear the way carpentry and house building is going.
Grape picking season is over, they had all the handpickers they needed, they were advertising for machinery operators, including the last week of the season, good pay, no takers. I guess flippin burgers is better than working outside.

John S. Alexander,Edinboro, PA (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:46 PM)

Hillary, if we don't know and can't figure out what you're for, how can we decide to follow when and if you start to "lead". How will we know you are leading if we can't get a straight answer as to where you're going? Huh??

Ron, Wichita, KS (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:47 PM)

Dot, Illinois

"My point is, rightly or wrongly, whether that perception is unfair or untrue, she is going to have to deal with this problem--- the opposition is not going to let it be forgotten. In my view, the longer it drags on, the harder it gets to correct."

Beautifully said. The general election can be between a Democrat and a Republican on the issues, in which case the Democrats will most likely win, or it can be between Sen. Clinton and a Republican on whether we need to diagram every sentence Sen. Clinton speaks before we know what she really means, in which case it is not at all clear that she will win.

This is soft-soap, small stuff in comparison to what Sen. Clinton will face in the general election. Nothing the campaign has done since the debate gives me confident the candidate or her campaign is very talented at dealing with it.

Adam Columbus OH (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:48 PM)

Next >>

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=453457