Hillary Clinton certainly knows how to read the polls – especially ones showing overwhelming public oppo sition to Gov. Spitzer‘s now-aborted plan to let illegal aliens get driver’s licenses.
No doubt that’s why she released a statement late yesterday declaring that “As president, I will not support driver’s licenses for undocumented people.”
But that’s not what she’s been saying.
In fact, it comes just two weeks after her campaign declared that “Sen. Clinton supports governors like Gov. Spitzer who believe they need such a measure to deal with the crisis caused by this administration’s failure to pass comprehensive immigration reform.”
Not that that statement actually cleared things up.
In fact, it has never been all that easy, given her public statements, to figure out exactly where Clinton stood on this contentious issue.
Other than as far out of political harm’s way as possible, that is.
Spitzer unveiled his controversial proposal back in September; for weeks, Clinton maintained a stony silence.
Not until the last Democratic debate, on Oct. 30, was she forced to speak to the issue directly. And when she did, she gave several different answers – each more confusing than the last.
Asked if she supported the plan, Clinton replied: “I certainly recognize what Gov. Spitzer is trying to do.”
Which prompted the followup: So, does she support it?
Well, she said, “It makes a lot of sense. . . . We want people to come out of the shadows.”
“I was confused on Sen. Clinton’s answer,” said rival Barack Obama. “I can’t tell whether she was for it or against it.”
He wasn’t the only one.
Which is why Hillary responded the best way she knows how: by accusing her rivals – and debate moderator Tim Russert – of “piling on” against her because she’s a woman.
Only after taking several days of serious heat did Clinton finally admit, “I’d be the first to tell you that I wasn’t as effective in answering the driver’s-license question as I should have been.”
Which led to the obvious question: How about telling us where you stand?
Sorry, said Hillary, nothing doing. The best she could do was: “I think it’s unfortunate that governors are being forced to make immigration law.”
Not until Eliot Spitzer pulled the plug yesterday was Hillary ready to say what she really thought – yesterday, anyway.
So, let us be clear, even if the senator can’t be: Hillary Clinton lacks principles.
After all, as Rudy Giuliani noted, “This is not one of those difficult issues of war and peace and diplomacy that she usually often hides behind to have two or three different positions. This one you either know the answer to – it’s yes or no.”
That’s especially important, given that Clinton is the clear front-runner for the Democratic nomination – and, perhaps, to be elected president.
But when things don’t go according to the neat little script that Team Clinton has crafted for this campaign, watch out – the candidate simply unravels.
This bodes poorly for a Hillary presidency – for the real world is anything but scripted. It’s full of nasty surprises – just ask George W. Bush.
If Hillary Clinton can’t even cope with a relatively simple challenge – answering a tough question at a campaign debate without panicking and losing her cool – how on earth does she hope to deal with people like Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and North Korea’s Kim Jong-Il?
Accusing Iran of leading a global pile-on against her sure won’t solve the problem.