October 31, 2007
Hillary's Bad Night (Dick Morris)
Hillary Clinton finally got too cute by half in her explanation of her convoluted position on giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. The American people saw her tying herself into a knot over the issue, trying to have it both ways.
It was a moment in the 2008 campaign akin to Ted Kennedy's inability to explain to Roger Mudd why he was running for president in 1980. It was one of those few moments when the real candidate is on display and visible to all.
It came about because Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) had the courage to defy the uni-speak of the Democratic debates, where everybody agrees with everybody else, and spoke out against the proposal to give licenses to illegal immigrants. Hillary, suddenly realizing how exposed she was by her seeming endorsement of New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer's plan on illegals, backtracked and pointed out that she had not explicitly endorsed the plan. It was her equivalent of Bill saying that it depended on what the definition of "is" is. It was a Hillary moment, and her parsing and mincing of the vocabulary to have it both ways was on full public display. Caught, she retreated to the claim that everybody was playing "gotcha" — but, indeed, she had been got!
Permalink TrackBack
Email This Post
Share this post
What's This 14 Comments
»
The Hill welcomes comment from anyone and will almost always post it whether it is favorable or critical, as long as it is substantive and advances debate.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
I love it! It was fun watching these clowns going after Hillary last night. I guess they figure they have nothing to lose and going after the frontrunner would protect their own backsides.
Comment by John Simmons — October 31, 2007 @ 12:04 pm
Multiple personality disorder?
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 31, 2007 @ 12:11 pm
Also, that is her state. It was a fair question and I think she came very close to losing her temper. If Edwards keeps it up, she might blow that cork.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 31, 2007 @ 12:14 pm
Hillary can't tell the truth on anything. She is never asked tough questions by the press and so she is not prepared to answer any serious questions.
Comment by Igor R. — October 31, 2007 @ 12:25 pm
Eventually she will have to take a clear stand on some important issues. If she does not, she's toast, and Obama knows it.
Comment by Libertyship46 — October 31, 2007 @ 1:35 pm
I had a gut feeling before the debate that Hillary would say something to give her a bit of trouble and fortunately I was right. It was about time that 'she' got hit for once after all these debates.
However….because of the TOPIC (giving illegal aliens drivers licenses - which most Dems want to do) and because of the audience she was speaking to - this will be a mild shake up - that's all.
If however Obama, Edwards and Dodd continue to harp on her "doubletalk" it COULD begin to sink in to voters.
My thoughts on the debate are at Coonsey's View http://www.freewebs.com/coonsey/
Comment by Connie Manes — October 31, 2007 @ 3:32 pm
Hi Connie, I respectfully disagree.
It is a big deal that Hillary is claiming credit in her husband's adminsistration, and she will not allow the records of that experience to be released. She lied by intimating that the archives people were slow in realeasing the records. Thne the moderator held the letter that Bill Clinton wrote asking that all of her records be held out of public view until 2012. It was outrageous that even with that disclosure, Hillary was still trying to mislead the public with a bold face lie that she was not in a position to release the records. It is now clear to the public that Hillary Clinton is directly responsible for not releasing the records that would support her experience in her husband's administration.
Then, Hillary refused to take a position on Spitzer's program giving out licenses to illegal aliens in New York. Finally she got pinned down to her position which favors giving illegals the drivers licenses. With 72% of the New York Liberals against that action, this pro-illegal immigration position will continue to plague her all the way to the primary.
Lastly, Hillary got pressed to take a position on her ever changing and ambiguous position on Iran. Edwards charged that Hillary's position is the same one that led to the war in Iraq, and it was leading us to war with Iran. Her response was a double negative, "we can't do nothing"; which is double speak for: we have to do something. Sort of the same double speak that Hillary used when she said the "willing suspension of disbelief" rather than the suspension of belief.
I am not sure that the voters caught all of the tricky responses, but I am pretty sure they all can recognize a bold face lie. Hillary Clinton is now officially a damaged candidate.
Richardson, continues to demonstrate that he is not a tier one candidate, and it appears that he is interested in taking a V.P. position.
This was the first real debate in which the commentators held Hillary's feet to the fire to answer the question. And, to that end, she crashed and burned. Good to know! It's not easy to be President.
All of the commentators had done their homework, especially Tim Russert. Chris Matthews gave an objective synopsis of
the entire debate, that was right on target.
Hillary Clinton is going to have to prove even to Democrats that she isn't a damaged candidate and that she is electable.
Good luck with that!
Comment by Cheryl O — October 31, 2007 @ 9:45 pm
It looks as if Hillary's attempt to use Barack Obama's stance on running a positive, hopeful campaign against him has failed. Really, what did she expect him to do? Twiddle his thumbs while she consistently attacked him.
Hopefully, Obama's "campaign of hope" will keep Hillary out of the White House. Now that’s what I would call a real “campaign of hope”.
Comment by Geeesh — October 31, 2007 @ 11:44 pm
As for Bill Richardson, he sounds more and more like he is running for "Vice-president" as oppose President.
Richardson's political strategy seems to be, "Defend Hillary at all cost and just maybe I can secure a place in her Administration."
Comment by Geeesh — November 1, 2007 @ 1:20 am
Hillary Clinton is claiming credit for the years, she spent at Bill's side in the White House. Afterall, she said she had 35 years of experience. Right, 38 years of emotional abuse, that is if there is a love relationship and not a business relationship as it seems to be. Release the papers Hillary, let's see if you really helped Bill make any good decisions. She has not helped the poor or working class people and neither has Bill Clinton. Their administration was a little better than Nixon and Reagan. And mostly she wasn,t attacked she was criticized, she is not perfect, but according to the polls a lot of people think she is. Expect more of Bush type if she gets elected. The media hates Edwards, so imagine if he was the front runner. Hillary Clinton got off easy, besides she is teflon everything rolls off, and she doesn't learn from her mistakes or admit them, just like Bush.
Comment by Lee — November 1, 2007 @ 12:50 pm
Some people seem to think the campaign is about men vs. women, which is absurd. This is about which direction we (the people) want the country to go in. This election could very well be one of the most important in history and should not be reduced down to something as trivial as gender.
As for Hillary, if she can't handle criticism from her colleagues, then how could she possibly handle the position of President of the United States?
Comment by Geeesh — November 1, 2007 @ 10:42 pm
I am reseanably sure Sen.Clinton can handle criticism from anyone ,anywhere,at any time.She is one of the few women in America that had her husband's indescretions aired on the world stage -your ex-wife would know a little about that too right Mr.Morris?
Comment by Linda M — November 5, 2007 @ 9:18 am
Linda dear, the subject is Hillary Clinton who is a candidate for the Presidency.
Should we be speaking about her personal life?
No, we should be speaking about her formal positions on important issues.
Just as Hillary continues to withhold documentation that proves her experience from her husbands administration, so too does she withhold her position on driver's licenses for illegals, would Hillary allow Iran to have nukes, and more.
Let's stay focused on what voters need to know.
Hillary Clinton ,if elected, can not waiver and waffle. She is going to have to make decisions and perform on her own and soon.
Comment by Cheryl O — November 10, 2007 @ 9:03 pm
For starters I am not your dear anything.My father speaks to women like that but he is an 80 year old white male whatever made you think you should speak to me like your grandchild? Those day are long gone.
Now on to Mrs Clinton.The author of the post is a problem for starters he is not fit to question anyone's integrity let alone hers.Now onto her postion.Call me crazy if you wish, but I completely understood what she was saying.It is a direct result of the federal government's failure to adopt sound immigration policies that has led states to seek protection for their reisdents.Get hit by an unlicensed ,unisured ,person and you will see what I mean.You probably have the other drivers in the world insured better than yourself.Most look at liabilty and never look at their uninsured ,under insured portion of insurance so Americans that are insured are not indeminfied to full restoration if hit by an illegal driver of any ethic group even fellow Americans.
The fact that most including you apparently are unaware of this is the real problem not the fact that a person is open to the suggestion of protection offered by a state until the federal laws are put in place so states won't have to.
As always Mrs Clinton is far ahead of the curve in the homework department of issues and legalities that do not always protect the right people.Pouncing on her regardign this issue actually showed ignorance by her opponents.Sorry if reality is a little more complicated than Tim Russert's carefully crafted questions designed for "gotcha" moments can give.After all why look at the actual issues when we can grab headlines instead?
Comment by Linda M — November 12, 2007 @ 12:07 pm