The most serious issue from the recent Democratic debate
Written by Michael Vass
Well the latest Democratic debate was quite interesting. Allegations that Sen. Hillary Clinton is duplicitous were coupled with ambiguous answers to direct questions. Perhaps the best example of this was when Tim Russert asked
SEN. 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.
…
SEN. CLINTON: 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 it. And we have failed –SEN. DODD: Wait a minute. No, no, no. You said yes, you thought it made sense to do it.
SEN. CLINTON: No, I didn’t, Chris. But the point is, what are we going to do with all these illegal immigrants who are (driving ?) — (inaudible)?
SEN. DODD: Well, that’s a legitimate issue. But driver’s license goes too far, in my view.
SEN. CLINTON: Well, you may say that, but what is the identification if somebody runs into you today who is an undocumented worker –
SEN. DODD: There’s ways of dealing with that.
SEN. CLINTON: Well, but –
SEN. DODD: This is a privilege, not a right.
SEN. CLINTON: Well, what Governor Spitzer has agreed to do is to have three different licenses; one that provides identification for actually going onto airplanes and other kinds of security issues, another which is an ordinary driver’s license, and then a special card that identifies the people who would be on the road.
SEN. DODD: That’s a bureaucratic nightmare.
SEN. CLINTON: So it’s not the full privilege.
MR. RUSSERT: Senator Clinton, I just want to make sure 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 Nashua, New Hampshire, paper it made a lot of sense.
SEN. CLINTON: It –
MR. RUSSERT: Do you support his plan?
SEN. 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 problem. 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. He’s making an honest effort to do it. We should have passed immigration reform.
…MR. EDWARDS: I want to add something that Chris Dodd just said a minute ago, because I don’t want it to go unnoticed. Unless I missed something, Senator Clinton said two different things in the course of about two minutes just a few minutes ago, and I think this is a real issue for the country.”
…SEN. OBAMA: Well, I was confused on Senator Clinton’s answer. I can’t tell whether she was for it or against it, and I do think that is important. You know, one of the things that we have to do in this country is to be honest about the challenges that we face.
Immigration is a difficult issue. But part of leadership is not just looking backwards and seeing what’s popular, or trying to gauge popular sentiment. It’s about setting a direction for the country, and that’s what I intend to do as president.”
So following the exact quotes here I come to the conclusion that in response to the first question she is in defense of Gov. Spitzer. I take it to mean that she supports giving driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants (the document ‘undocumented workers’ lack are a green card, work visa, or anything that would allow them to legally be in America), which 72% of New Yorkers reportedly are against. But Senator Clinton stops short of saying ‘I support it’ on national television.
Knowing the anger this issue has raised in her “home” state, she then says she did not say it should be done. Essentially trying to take away the support she had just given the issue. When asked by Senator Dodd about the seeming ambivalence and the fact that Gov. Spitzer’s plan was a “bureaucratic nightmare” for a privilege, Senator Clinton just asserts that at least it’s not full rights given to citizens.
When asked to clarify her position, Sen. Clinton fails to answer the question. Instead the question is diverted, going on a tangent to blame President Bush for the current immigration situation. She failed to be clear and take any position. To date, Sen. Clinton has yet to take a public stance on the issue, though her aides say she has a position in favor of Gov. Spitzer, which is not the same thing.
All the other Democratic candidates caught this. They called her on it. But the question remains, what is her actual position. Is it the position that she holds, or that the polls suggest?
Can America afford to elect a candidate who remains questionable and possibly duplicitous in their intentions on critical issues like immigration? If we cannot trust one issue can any be considered correct?
I don’t know the position of Senator Hillary Clinton, and it seems many don’t. But as the front-runner in the Democratic Primaries at the moment, can we accept anything less than direct answers to direct questions of importance to the nation?
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:11 pm
If we cannot trust one issue can any be considered correct?