I Was For Giving Drivers Licenses To Illegals Before I Was Against It

The spirit of John Kerry was present at the Halloween Democrat debate last night, and he couldn’t of taken down a better person. Hillary Clinton’s campaign was moderately derailed because of a illegal drivers license program that she supported, then didn’t support, then does support:

Mr. Obama and Mr. Edwards came into the debate seeking to raise questions
about Mrs. Clinton’s credibility — and, as a result, renew doubts about her
electability. Mrs. Clinton may have helped them with her unsteady answer about
whether she supported the initiative by Mr. Spitzer.

“Do I think this is the best thing for any governor to do?” she said. “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.”

She was challenged on what she said first by Senator Christopher Dodd of
Connecticut and then by Mr. Edwards. “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,” Mr. Edwards said.

And:

She tied herself up in knots – in a way her opponents couldn’t – with her
non-answer about whether she favors giving driver’s license to illegal
aliens.

She must be the only New Yorker without an opinion on the plan (other than
her colleague, Sen. Chuck Schumer).

Her evasiveness on the most talked-about issue in the state reminded everyone
of the worst of husband Bill and what could be in store if another Clinton makes
it to the White House.

Roger Simon gave a play by play:

Asked whether she still agrees with New York Governor Eliot Spitzer’s plan to give drivers licenses to illegal immigrants, Clinton launched into a long, complicated defense of it.

But when Chris Dodd attacked the idea a moment later, Clinton quickly said: “I did not say that it should be done.”

NBC’s Tim Russert, one of the debate moderators, jumped in and said to her: “You told (a) New Hampshire paper that it made a lot of sense. Do you support his plan?”

“You know, Tim,” Clinton replied, “this is where everybody plays ‘gotcha.’ “

John Edwards immediately went for the jugular. “Unless I missed something,” he said, “Senator Clinton said two different things in the course of about two minutes. America is looking for a president who will say the same thing, who will be consistent, who will be straight with them.”

Barack Obama added: “I was confused (by) Senator Clinton’s answer. I can’t tell whether she was for it or against it. One of the things that we have to do in this country is to be honest about the challenges that we face.”

Earlier, when Clinton was asked whether she had made one statement on Social Security publicly and a conflicting answer privately, she ducked the question, saying she believed in “fiscal responsibility.”

And when Russert asked her if she would make public certain communications between herself and President Clinton when she was first lady, she responded weakly: “Well, that’s not my decision to make.”

Perhaps just as bad was her general tone and demeanor. All of her opponents seemed passionate about one issue or another. But Clinton seemed largely emotionless and detached, often just mouthing rehearsed answers from her briefing book.

HIllary Clinton emotionless and detached?  Get outta here….

We’re talking about a woman who has had one single goal her entire life and endured marrying a hack like Bill Clinton to get there.  She’s a robot who will say anything, do anything, to get in that Oval Office.  Consequences be damned.

She was not prepared for this question, incredibly, and showed her true self.  An indecisive, cranky, unlikable person.

Watch Hillary dismantle herself and smile:

You also get the feeling that the Democrats a bit afraid of Rudy don’t you?  Biden was especially the attack dog last night with attacks like”Least qualified person to
run for president since George Bush,” “I’m not running against Hillary, I’m
running for leader of the free world. Looking forward to running against Rudy,” and a crowd favorite where Biden said Rudy can only form a
sentence with “noun, verb, and 9/11.”   While I did not watch the whole debate I didn’t hear any other Republican nominee’s name at all, except Rudy.  Quite telling.

Rudy’s communication director:

As the pundits work to figure out who won the debate tonight, it’s pretty clear
Rudy Giuliani was the real winner. It is increasingly apparent Rudy is the one
the Democrats are most worried about running against in the general
election.

Senator Biden’s comments were of particular interest. The good
Senator is quite correct that there are many differences between Rudy and him.
For starters, Rudy rarely reads prepared speeches and when he does he isn’t
prone to ripping off the text from others. And, Senator Biden certainly falls in
to the bucket of those on the stage tonight who have never had executive
experience and have never run anything. Wait, I take that back, Senator Biden
has never run anything but his mouth.

Such a desperate attack from Senator Biden is to be expected
considering I — Katie Levinson — have a better chance of becoming President
than he does.

Ouch.

UPDATE

Andrew McCarthy on another Hillary flip-flop:

The “ticking bomb scenario” represents a narrow exception to what should otherwise be our categorical prohibition against torture. After all, “in the event we were ever confronted with having to interrogate a detainee with knowledge of an imminent threat to millions of Americans,” it might be necessary for a president to make “the decision to depart from standard international practices[.]” The president, of course, “must be held accountable” for such a decision; but the president would have to be prepared to make it in such dire circumstances.
 
Who says so? Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, that’s who. The Democrats’ coronee-in-waiting made the comments in an interview by the New York Daily News last October.

As is the senator’s wont (see, e.g., myriad positions on Iraq, Iran, illegal immigration, etc.), she has since flipped from this flop — just in time for a candidates’ debate before a base inherently hostile to such flashes of common sense. But she clearly made the remarks. It was thus jarring to find her announcing opposition on Monday to Judge Michael Mukasey’s nomination to become the next attorney general because, as Sen. Clinton explained, “I am deeply troubled by Judge Mukasey’s continued unwillingness to clearly state his views on torture and unchecked Executive power.”

Now that is funny.  She is troubled because the man didn’t clearly state his views.  Andrew named his piece well, “Mirror, mirror, on the wall.”