Hillary’s consistent non-answers

Posted: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 11:48 AM by Mark Murray

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

TEC-Spring-Tx (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:49 PM)

Daniel,

Thanks for your kind response.

"No. But some of us don’t require our presidential candidates to button up every question put to them."

This, I think, is where you and I will have to agree to disagree.

Adam Columbus OH (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:50 PM)

Marsha, Fresno, CA (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:51 PM)

Psychic Mary:

The only psychic I trust is Sylvester Stallone's mother. She predicted that Bush would win the 2000 election by a few hundred votes. Everyone laughed at her. Who knew? I might disagree with the term 'win', but certainly a few hundred votes in Florida (legal or not) did decide the election. Now that's a prediction! Can you match that precision?
Obama '08

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:51 PM)

Here’s what I believe. I believe that, first of all, we have to have comprehensive immigration reform. And for anybody in this country who is making an effort and on the path to obtaining American citizenship, yes, they should have a driver’s license. If they’re not making any effort to become an American citizen, and we have a system for doing that, my own personal view is, no, I would not give them a driver’s license

NOW HERE IS JOHN EDWARDS ANSWER. CAN SOMEBODY STATE WHAT HIS POISTION IS?????

Just telling it as it is (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:51 PM)

My prediction is that psychic mary is an idiot!!

Psychic Dante (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:57 PM)

It's not a non-answer. It's called Federalism.

JoeCHI (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:58 PM)

Hillary's answer is no, she does not approve States giving a drivers liscence to illegals. There needs to be comprehensive immigration reform bill that would address this matter as well as the multitude of other issues dealing with immigration. The absence of a comprehensive national immigration bill then forces the states to choose the lesser of evils in order to function.

Garry, Omaha, Nebraska (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:59 PM)

Ok, any one of you..answer that question in 30 seconds. Now explain why you support it. I heard Mr Spitzer just changed his position on this slightly. The answer was waaay tooo complicated and she should have said she didn't know yet or is unsure what she would do at this point... but of course dumbasses don't want to hear that either, and she'd be attacked for that too. How would any of the idiot republican candidates answer that question?

Chris Penn (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 2:03 PM)

I think it's funny that everyone of the Democrats except Dodd, agree with Hillary, but the Media hasn't been harping on them about that question. If Obama does get the nomination, his answer of a definite yes to that question will come back to hurt him in the general election. Almost everyone here is bashing Hillary, but when it comes to the general election, you will be glad she voted for the Kyle/Lieberman and took a non position on the illegal immigrant licence thing. Edwards and Obama have gone so far left, Rudy will beat them in a General election, Because Hillary was smart enough not to get trapped, the Republicans cannot go after her when it comes to the War on terrorism and every other issue other than immigration, Dems win easily. There are 10% of you on the far left and 10% of you on the far Right. Most people live in the left of Center or right of Center. That is why Hillary will win.

100 million people vote for President. Only about 4-6 million listen to politics on talk radio or watch Hardball or other political shows. Everyone on these blogs might think they are speaking for america, but the sad truth 75% of the voters don't care. Half of that 75% vote on name recognition, the others vote on how well they're individual family is dealing with the economy. The vote on Iraq happened in 2006, It won't be as big an issue by the time the election happens.

Wake up people. If you want a Democrat in office, you better start supporting Hillary.

Stopwatchingfoxnews, Rochester, NY (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 2:04 PM)

She did answer the question, but just not the way we want her to do it. How dare she???? When a question is asked, the responder has a choice, or her answer become non answer.
Thank you for clearing that up.

seib (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 2:06 PM)

david, iowa; the plants moved the wages didn't. that's why the plants keep moving' more profits no restrictions, like leaded paint and environmental pollution, decent wages and benefits. as long as we don't stop the multinationals from gross profits and tax their butts the outsourcing will continue and illegals can still make more here.

karlos (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 2:08 PM)

Folks, If you want to see all the Holywood personality in likes of Whoopy, Alec. B, Streisand, and If you to know the real meaning of "IS" go ahead and get Clinton in there, If you want real safety" and strong in Defense, We need Republicans....again... Look at both houses it is control by Democrat, Like Reagan said, I believe he said a Democrat run congress is a doo Nothing, Liberals congress, in like of Pelosi... and Reed, They all represent nothing... regards to defense...thats my take

Ed Reyes, Barstow Ca. (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 2:09 PM)

Steve, you are right about Edwards giving the same answer as Hillary on the Stephanopoulous show. I remember thinking "what the...?" It's funny George just let it drop, no follow up question, like "how is what you said different than what Hillary said?" Edwards is a slick one, I must say...but think how he will un-man Giuliani!

Amy B Portland, ME (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 2:09 PM)

We already have a card that tracks people who come to this country,it is called a green card or a visa for visitors. Why is that not mentioned when asked about security? I also don't buy the safety part of the argument, I sell insurance in an area with a large illegal population and they do not buy auto insurance, but they sure do drive cars and trucks. How will giving them a license to drive make the roads safer when they don't have proper insurance?

Ron Fl (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 2:10 PM)

Psycic Mary- NO F*N way. U r Wrong.

Traver (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 2:11 PM)

I heart the youtube generation. Bill CLinton could get away with not answering questions directly (i.e. lying) because the camera was not on him most of the time.This too shall pass must have been a mantra. Thanks god, there is youtube as the proof is in the pudding. Hillary Clinton avoids giving yes/no answers (as do a lot of politicians) as, I suspect, she is playing for the general too early. Dems and Hillary apologists wake up and send a democrat that can actually win the general election.

Mark Chicago, IL (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 2:13 PM)

Chris: I wrote a long post on this site earlier today, addressing the issue very directly. You may not like the answer but is an answer and it takes less than 30 seconds to read. If I can come up with something like that then I'm sure that Mark Penn, oops, I mean Hillary can come up with something of equal directness. Bubba/Bubbette, it's just not that hard, unless you've got something up your triangulating sleeve.
Obama '08

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 2:13 PM)

To: Elizabeth Sullivan, San Diego, CA

You ranted:

YES OR NO!!!!!!!

ANSWER IT!!!!!!

ANSWER THE QUESTION!!!!

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

My response:

Hillary has answered the question by saying that, at least until Congress passes comprehensive immigration legislation, the issue should be left to the States.

Why take an absolute position now until one knows what comprehensive federal immigration legislation is likely to include?

This whole debate has more to do with racial and ethnic intolerance than it does about immigration. Those opposing limited driver licensing to illegals prefer more people driving without licenses or driver training, something U.S. citizens themselves do at unacceptable rates. While I agree with Sen. Dodd that driving is a privledge, not a right, it is also critical to America's economic engine. If low wage jobs many Americans refuse to take were not a part of the U.S. economy, there would not be an "illegals" problem.

We could always round them all up, and warehouse them as we did in WWII among Japanese Americans! When we actually deport all 12 million or so, I'd love to know at what cost.

This nation is no longer the cradle of freedom, Reagan's "city on a hill", or the envy of the world. By our own actions, we are becoming the Cambodia of the 21st Century! Some much the pity!

Gary, Franklin, WI (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 2:14 PM)

all those "idot republicans" except maybe Gulliani would answer with "NO". You may not like their views, but at least they tell them. Drivers license is the next step towards giving them amnesty. When they go in to get their DL they should all be deported. Last time i checked, Illegal meant breaking the law. It means they shoudlnt be in this country. For all the crap people have to go through to get into this country legally (even just to visit). Isn't it kind of a giant slap in the face to them? To tell them that they have to get green cards and visa's and pay money and meet with people at the embassy to get back ground checks, while their neighbors who came illegally get off scotch free is pathetic. What a joke that this even has become an issue, send them home and make them try again LEGALLY. We don't need more criminals.

David, Iowa (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 2:14 PM)

Laurie, Manasquan, NJ / 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.

we already have a document to track immigration, it's called a green card, you get one when you enter the country correctly, if you don't have one you should be deported as current law states. there is no need for us to have another meaningless document.

this country would be better off deporting the illegal's, what we don't need is yet another incentive for them to sneak across the border, and don't believe the rubbish of 'it can't be done', we can wage war globally but we can't round up these criminals with-in our own borders and deport them? that’s ridiculous and just another cop out by the people who benefit financially from their presence.

why is it everyone thinks new laws concerning immigration will change anything when we ignore existing ones, the whole issue of controlling our population is a farce, and the taxpayer picks up the tab

MK,MO (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 2:18 PM)

Chris Penn,

Ok, any one of you named Chris Penn, answer that question in ***22 days.*** Now explain why Sen. Clinton is seemingly incapable of doing so. No extra credit points will be given for "broadly" answering the question, for "understanding" those who have to make it, and no extra credit points will be given for long-winded complaints about how the issue is "waaay tooo" complicated.

"she should have said she didn't know yet or is unsure what she would do at this point"

I think you should apply for a job as a debate prep coach for the Clinton campagin. That is, and would have been a pretty decent (and honest) answer if in fact she wasn't aware of the specifics in this policy proposal.

Can we please give up on the "30 seconds" meme? Any decently staffed and funded campaign (the Clinton campaign certainly qualifies as such) could have produced a doorstopper-sized policy/position paper on this.

Adam Columbus OH (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 2:23 PM)

It is quite apparent that this question is to complex for Hillary to answer, and that is why America is not ready for a woman president.

Rush Limbaugh (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 2:32 PM)

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)

Or when one has a more nuanced opinion on the matter. From where I am sitting, Obama seems to see most everything in black and white. Unfortunately, most things are shades of gray and deserve more than a 30-second yes or no answer.

Carrie, Eastern Iowa (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 2:34 PM)

It is a YES or NO answer. You cannot have differant laws for illegals in differant states! They would all flock to the most advantage state and still be illegal! The double talk is giving me a headache as would listening to her for the next four more years! Get this inept person out.
Marsha, Fresno, CA (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:51 PM)

With all due respect, different states have different laws about a great variety of things - marriage, crime, taxes, etc. Let's take the death penalty - Iowa does not have it. Does that mean someone is more likely to go to Iowa to kill someone because they won't get fried, whereas if they stay in TX they will certainly be hosed?

Carrie, Eastern Iowa (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 2:38 PM)

If an illegal gets a DL issued in New York, could a cop in NJ arrest that person for driving without a valid drivers license,how would the police in Ct handle the situation, what about PA or Vt?

I believe that, although the issuance of a STATE drivers license is a state issue, would we now be involved in a federal isseue ie Interstate commerce and trade?

Ron FL (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 2:41 PM)

Hillary is such a fool...

Real Democrat, CA (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 2:44 PM)

I am convinced we are living in a world where people are allowed to simply not pay attention, and many people (and those who posts on this board are no exception), choose to do that!!!

Federal or state issue? That is not the point. The point is that Clinton was asked specifically about Spitzer's plan for NEW YORK. Now her supporters can talk about how complex this is from a federal perspective but that has nothing to do with the question and it is insulting when people try to make a simply "yes" or "no" question so difficult!!! What the hell do understanding what someone is trying to do? That does not answer the question. Her supporters are insinuating that she said "No" but she never flat out said that. The question is not asking about "states, in general", it is specifically asking about Spitzer's plan for New York!!!

Yolanda, Largo, Maryland (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 2:50 PM)

Jerry, if they had a driver’s license, then they could get insurance and you would not have to worry about them hitting your Dodge Ram Hemi pickup truck down there in Corpus Christi. Anyway I thought you lost your daytime talk radio show job yesterday, so why would you still be posting here? Can you make a living on the comedy circuit yet? Did not think that the occasional local comedy nightspot paid enough to support your family.
TEC-Spring-Tx (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:49 PM)

let's take this one at a time TEC:

1. It is illegal for someone to be in this country if they sneaked across, so that goes to show what a bunch of morons liberals are if they think that insurance for a bunch of river jumpers will solve the problem.........

2. I used to drive dodges for years, but the air conditioning always goes out, so now I drive a foreign made car. And you wonder why American workers are losing their jobs in Detroit????

3. I could replace randi Rhodes on Air America. I would probably get them out of bankruptcy and actually having something to talk about instead of a bunch of diaper wearing whining liberals. You know liberals aren't worth listening to when Air America is replaced by mexican music..........

4. Comedy? I've done a few comedy shows, won one
($100) and told some liberal jokes that would have had Bill Clinton fight me on stage. If any TV shows want me to write for them while those worthless bums are marching in picket lines, call me!

Thank you
I'm here all week!

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 2:50 PM)

Sorry Carrie that's just a crock. Hillary has a constant pattern of evasiveness and the reason that this story has legs is that the 'DL answer evasion' is just a caricature of her entire campaign. She was asked a simple question and only she and Edwards couldn't answer it directly. I refer you to my post from shortly after noon today and it summarizes in two paragraphs the essence of Governor Spitzer's proposal. You either support it or you don't. Nobody asked if she understood his motivations. We all understand the motivations. You either support it or you don't. Only a deceptive politician would equivocate with that one. It seems as if the electorate is waking up to that fact. When are politicians, especially the Clintons, going to realize that directness is the most valuable commodity that can be offered to the electorate? They'll allow you to be wrong. They'll even allow a little flip-flop, if you're able to communicate your reasons effectively. But evasiveness, that's just distasteful.
Obama '08

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 2:54 PM)

MK-MO - I too would prefer that illegals be deported. However, our elected representatives and I use that word loosely, won't do that because they are in the pockets of the corporations who survive off the cheap labor. Absent a large scale deportation, I don't think it's a bad idea to track the whereabouts of illegals in each state. It would definitely make it easier to deport them if their whereabouts were known to the authorities. We are in a similar situation to that which occured prior to the civil war. Slaves were the lifeblood of the Southern economy and there was no political will to end the practice. Unfortunately, if illegals are allowed to continue to flood this country in the numbers that have been coming in, we could find ourselves with a similar "civil war" situation on our hands.

Laurie, Manasquan, NJ (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 3:04 PM)

"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"

Oh God! Rove - haven't you got another job?

Lee in CA (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 3:07 PM)

Hey Jerry, you couldn't fill Rhandi Rhodes' shoes if you tried for the rest of your life. She could squash you like a bug in 30 seconds flat. You can only dream of having 1/10th the talent or political insight she has. You give yourself way too much credit. I guess that's what happens when you let arogance get in the way of reality.

Laurie, Manasquan, NJ (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 3:10 PM)

This is a bunch of B.S. ! Ye bull s--T !

Bubab (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 3:17 PM)

I don't see anything inappropriate with Hillary's response. Personally, I'm against most forms of 'amnesty' for illegal immigrants - but I also recognize the complexity of the issue and care enough about ACTUALLY SOLVING IT to be flexible in the approach [if some form of amnesty is part of the eventual compromise, so be it, if it means we fix the problem]. However, this is an issue for CONGRESS to solve and the issuance of driver licenses at the state level is nothing more than a 'red herring' in the debate.

What amazes me with the anti-Clinton voices, is that no other Democrat on the stage [of the last debate]was subjected to the scrutiny on the issue that she was. It's an obvious bias against her for being the front-runner. Just the other night, I heard George Stephanopulous (sp?) ask Edwards about his position and it was even more confusing than Hillary's. Where's that story in the press? Hmmm???

Danny Campbell, Oak Park MI (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 3:26 PM)

We get it...dems want to legalized illegals and reps want to round them up and waterboard them...after the crops are in and the den is cleaned of course...

Rick, WS, NC (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 3:26 PM)

Or when one has a more nuanced opinion on the matter. From where I am sitting, Obama seems to see most everything in black and white. Unfortunately, most things are shades of gray and deserve more than a 30-second yes or no answer

Carrie
-------------------------------------------------
Please give me a break!! Obama's answer is spot on. We can debate about his position but we all know where he stand on the issues.

I know it is hard for politician like Clintons to answer question in a straight forward manner because they are used to lieing every time and they don't want to get caught.

As for Obama, i appreciate his honesty when answering question. Enough of nuance that makes the so called politician looks pathetic e.g. Hillary Clinton

The issue of drivers' licence for 12 million illigal immigrant is simple. It is either you support it or not. No nuance, please.

If Hillat does support it, why? If she doesn't, then say it out loud and clear. Obama said he supported it because of plublic safety issues and he challenge any body to debate him on that. What say you madame Clinton?

Bee (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 3:27 PM)

This is getting ridiculous. Hillary never said she was in favor of giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. She never changed her position on the issue either.
She originally said she supported Spitzer here in NY, and she understands the complexity of the problem.
What's so unclear about that?
Seems to me Mr. Obama and his neo-con freinds have gotten enough mileage out of this one.

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 3:28 PM)

Enforcement first.

Fine/jail those who hire illegals. No benefits paid by the govt. Secure the border.

Then, and only then, shall we discuss "paths to citizenship", a/k/a amnesty.

Bruce, NV (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 3:32 PM)

Yolanda, giving a drivers license to an illegal in NY or any state should NOT happen. No,do NOT give them a license.It is a simple question to answer,why Hillary won't thats up for debate. But this becomes a federal issue the minute the law is put in place.Valid drivers licenses do reciprocate, would these licenses be valid in other states, would some states decide yes and some say no? Maybe Governor Spitzer should have thought about this before he decided he could fix the immigration problems.
And please dont EVER think I am a supporter of Hillary the only democrat I ever voted for was Sen. Lieberman(I)d CT. before he became an independant.

Jerry if you go on tour will you be visiting the Tampa area?

Ron FL (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 3:33 PM)

Merle:

We all know what your girl said (or didn't say). If she had enough smarts to answer the question without going man crazy on Tim Russert we wouldn't be having this debate. Tell your girl to smarten up and answer the questions.

Laurie in NJ.....

At least I can walk down the street without falling and busting my teeth to pieces.....

Randi Rhodes just might be good....
If she was on a radio station that could be heard!

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 3:38 PM)

Laurie, Manasquan, NJ / very good points, it is obvious the powers that be don't intend to address the issue in any meaningful manner, they just continue spewing meaningless rhetoric, eventually enough people will be personally effected negatively by the illegal invasion to take matters into their own hands to protect person and property, then things will become very ugly, if that's what it takes so be it

MK,MO (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 3:39 PM)

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY

"She originally said she supported Spitzer here in NY, and she understands the complexity of the problem."

Which would be wonderful if that was the question asked, but it wasn't. The question was about the **policy** and whether or not she supported that policy, not whether she "broadly" supported the goal Spitzer was trying to accomplish via that policy, or whether the issue was complex. If she couldn't fashion an answer to that question in the time allotted, why could Sen. Obama do precisely that in the space of a few seconds? And why has she been unable to fashion an answer, again, on the **policy proposal** in question, in the weeks since that debate?

"What's so unclear about that?"

Nothing at all. That she hasn't answered the question 3 weeks on is crystal clear to a great many voters.

"Seems to me Mr. Obama and his neo-con freinds have gotten enough mileage out of this one."

One, and only on of the Democratic Senators running for POTUS voted with Lieberman, Kyl, most Republicans, etc, on the IRGC vote. Neo-con indeed.

Adam Columbus OH (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 3:44 PM)

Hey Jerry, you couldn't fill Rhandi Rhodes' shoes if you tried for the rest of your life. - Laurie, Manasquan, NJ

For sure. Randi wears, what, a size 18? EEE. She's a big girl.

Eddie Hamlton (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 3:45 PM)

Rick, WS, NC / 'We get it...dems want to legalized illegals and reps want to round them up and waterboard them...after the crops are in and the den is cleaned of course...'

not true rick, most dems think illegal immigration should be confronted quite forcefully, it is an old repub wives tail that dems in general are pro-amnesty and for uncontrolled immigration, although most non-hillary backers are against the water-boarding dealyo

MK,MO (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 3:46 PM)

hillary has a lot of double talk about ima. we will have higher taxes and health care cos

charles hayden chapel hill tn (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 3:46 PM)

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY / 'She originally said she supported Spitzer here in NY'

correct j, but that was before she was against it at the debate. What's so unclear about that?

the only 'clear' thing about hillary is the fact she remains consistently 'un-clear'. sorry

MK,MO (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 3:54 PM)

She does not answer because she knows you wont' like her answer , wake up people Vladimir would eat this woman alive.

Obama 08

Fernando Palm Coast, FL (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 4:00 PM)

Where is Van?

When you don't see Van on a Hillary topic you know it is terrible time in Camp Hillary and they have ran out of excuses and explanations. Unless Van is writing in another pen name.

mike, dallas, tx (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 4:00 PM)

You don't like Bush? OK we get it...but now we can have a fresh start with a new president and that means putting someone in office who will EARN it. Dancing and weaving is not good enough for us, we deserve a president that is assertive, efficient, and intelligent. We shouldn't care if they are male or female, we should unanimously agree that we are not going to put up with someone who will not do their job. And we all know that Hillary has NEVER been a big supporter of states rights, so why all of a sudden is she so concerned with them?....OH yea, because it gives her an out. She doesn't want to answer questions because her answers are not what the majority of American people agree with.
These are the red flags of someone who is not well equipped to do a good job for us. She does a good job at the politicing, let's face it, she's tough, but in a twisted kind of a way. It's too bad she puts her strength into being a back ally politician instead of being a strong sincere candidate.

Paige, Richmond, VA (Sent Wednesday, November 07, 2007 4:04 PM)

<< Previous

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