Hillary Clinton changed her tune and flip-flopped on the licenses for illegal immigrants

She did the right thing.

How refreshing that we finally have one candidate who has the guts to unequivocally change her mind on something she was talking about recently and come out and make her official position perfectly clear...instead of lallygagging around like other more chronic flip-floppers, especially Edwards, who like a chameleon changes his tune more frequently than a DJ so you don't know if he's coming or going.

There will be no more guessing about where Hillary stands on the licenses for illegal immigrants. She made it official, and she said as President she will not support such a thing.

Changing your mind, doing it BEFORE any damage has been done, and being obvious about it, can be a beautiful thing.

I didn't think she came out unequivocally about the issue until recently. To me anyway, she seemed to dance on the question when asked about that issue.

People who view everything through the lens of false dichotomies make mistakes about complexities all of the time. And there is no environment, other than the internet, that mediates that problem. In fact, most communication environments are hostile to REALITY.

"Flip flop" was a scheme created by Karl Rove to defend a candidate who doesn't have enough healthy brain cells to change his mind.

I've done a lot of sailing in my life and found it to be a good metaphor for life. You set your destination (goal) and chart your course (how you get there)...but, when you are in the water you have to be very alert to waves, wind change, visibility, tides, etc. It's important to take a stand on the destination, but you need to be totally willing and ready to change your course. If you are going east and suddenly the wind starts coming from the east, does that mean you have to turn around and go home? No...you "tack". That means you go north south north south, etc, toward the east...actually zig zagging to your destination.

sweet mary, i hope that the train is on time...

would have been nice if she apologized for it long ago but, hey, whatever.

Giving a parent authority over their children is a good thing...unless they are abusive parents. If it had been President Gore, someone who is trustworthy and intelligent, who when he says "last resort" means it...it would be a good thing to give him authority to go to war when we feel there is a threat. From what Hillary has said on the subject it seems that she is more regretful of trusting Bush. And...maybe she was looking to the future and possibly being a president who has to ask for that authority.

Edwards voted for the war (and co-sponsored it), then has the gall to apologize for doing so, years later and only after the war had become so unpopular in the polls that he thought people would forget about his dumb mistakes. Whatever way the wind blows for John.

Hillary, OTOH, clarified something that she knew she was very vague about, and she came to the quick conclusion that she better make clear what her official position on this issue is going to be. She's done it, and now we all know where she stands, and she changed her mind BEFORE she ever voted on the issue or before she did anything else about it in any official sense.

someone else. She's moved on.

I think it is important to identify those who are driving. With the license, they are ID'd in case of an accident. YOu know that they are driving anyway--so why not have a record of who is driving?

Like the war in Iraq, immigration is a big problem without any good solutions. But, even bad solutions are better than doing nothing about it. I was happy with Hillary's answer to the debate question and I'm disappointed that she changed her mind.

But, let's face it. We all want our candidates to be honest, yet when they don't say what we want to hear we are all over them. If we really want them to be honest and to be themselves we have to stop jumping on them everytime we disagree or any flaw or little mistake. They aren't going to be human until we give them permission to be human!

"Changing your mind, doing it BEFORE any damage has been done"

OK, sure.

Who only takes 30 seconds to make a decision. Most of us go back and forth quite a bit before deciding what car to buy or what restaurant to eat at or whether we are for or against illegals having driver's licenses. Fortunately most of us don't have to do it in front of a microphone.

Why don't we start giving our candidates a break...all of them (the Democrats that is, the repubs we can pound to a pulp). They are human beings running for president, not the second coming of Christ!

In my book, major kudos go to Hillary for thinking things over, as you say, and making her position clear, a gutsy move on her part. She'd rather do the right thing than worry about whether or not she's going to be called a flip-flopper for doing so.

Notice how all her naysayers are so upset about it because Hillary came up brilliant again.

...rather than making an on-air decision about being for or against it herself. She seems to have done her homework and realized what a big issue it is for American citizens. This is a smart move, if she wants to get elected. (And imo nobody wants to get elected as much as Hillary does ~ which is the reason she will probably soon find herself in the Oval Office.)

who won't vote for her anyway and pissing off Latinos, where she had a chance to clean up.

The funny part is she thinks she still has a chance at the indepenedent vote.

So how do you really feel Hillary?

More doublespeak to come tonight from her tonight in Las Vegas!

I have heard that Wolf Blitzer has been warned by the Hillary manure spreading organization to not let her get attacked tonight, or asked tough questions or else . . .

and suggested it might have been mischief from another candidate that started the story. Jack Cafferty asked; Wolf answered.

not throw NY's Democratic governor under the bus during the debate & now that he's backed away from his position, she felt free to make this statement. That's what I took from the way she answered the question, and I never thought her answer was all that bad to begin with though, it certainly didn't deserve the massive media hits it got afterwords.

It was actually a cleverly worded response for the most part, even if it was unclear. The worst thing about it was the delivery; she became visibly pissed off, let her voice rise and looked and sounded rattled.

You're pretty much implying that the only people who don't want licenses for illegal immigrants are "white hawks". That's precious.

And how do you know that she's pissiing off Latinos in general? There are plenty of Latinos legally here and plenty of other legal immigrants, too, who I'm sure don't all feel that illegal immigrants should be driving cars either.

There are plenty of people in between who favor her (new) position, but they also care about other little things like health care, the economy, etc.

This is how Democrats lose elections; cozying up to people who don't necessarily share our values with re-fried, shallowly held positions. As for your other point, If you think Latinos will enjoy her pandering to Lou Dobbs Republicans on immigration, feel free.

I agree, its great that she did the right thing.

Will we see JE cry or Obama have a brain freeze and tell us for the umpthousanth time about his childhood growing up overseas?

But she's now wrong on the issue. It is a serious public safety concern as she did make clear at the last debate. The feds have left the states no choice in struggling for a resolution as she also made clear at the last debate. I'm not troubled that she changes her mind on one thing or another, but I am troubled that this matter is tossed out. I think it is irresponsible.