"Crowd boos Clinton over immigration reform"

SNIP:
"Hillary Clinton, a U.S. senator from New York, felt the glare of their displeasure after Billy Lawless, a Chicago immigrations rights organizer, asked her if she’d commit to giving undocumented workers a path to citizenship in her first 100 days as president.

Clinton, who spoke via telephone after weather prevented her flight to Iowa, said immigration reform is a top priority.

But Lawless pressed her, asking if she’d do it in the first 100 days.

Clinton said it’s up to Congress to pass such reform, but as president she would do as much as possible.

The crowd booed, apparently upset that she wouldn’t commit to a 100-days promise."

More at link: http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071201/NEWS/71201024

As President, she can do all she can to advocate and work for the immigration reform. But this is something that has to be done legislatively, and in order for her to sign it, Congress has to pass it and send it to her.

That's just a simple fact.

And so this a@shole, left-wing crowd booed her for stating an absolute fact. Very unfair.

How pleasant of you... That'll sure win some friends. :eyes:

And the truth is that what needs to be done with immigration reform cannot be done by executive order. It has to be done legislatively.

So it would have been disengenuous for her to promise reform w/in the first 100 days. She cannot promise them that the Congress would send something to her w/in 100 days.

So yes, I make no bones about calling that crowd a group of left-wing a@sholes.

They apparently do not understand how our government works.

:thumbsup:

That's sure to be a winning strategy...for the "anyone but Hillary" candidate.

Given that you claim to value *truth* so much, it's incredible that you've thrown your weight behind her as a candidate.

Do you?

n/t

The fact he called those who booed "assholes" doesn't negate that they were, indeed, naive and rude for booing. And that is the hallmark of the leftwing. Politically unaware yet reactionary at the same time.

However, I will not simply dismiss the crowd as "left wing assholes" and their reaction as "naive and rude" as you and your fellow Hillary apologists have.

Perhaps the crowd was frustrated with what they saw as a lack of commitment on her part to *lead* any serious *legislative* effort if she was elected. It's easy to pawn off responsibility on Congress but the reality is the president still has major pull on what ultimately gets enacted.

I think these people can sense inauthenticity in political candidates and that's what we heard.

:thumbsdown:

Fine. Maybe that will give her some solace as she remains junior Senator from New York into 2009. She can tatoo it on her tummy in WINGDING font --- "I WAS RIGHT!"...

you've criticized her for triangulating and now you are flat out bashing her for being straight up.

This is one of those instances...and I would not say she's being straight up.

oh sanctimonious one. If anyone used that kind of language about Obama, you'd be howling your sanctimonious head off. And I'd join you. She gave a perfectly honest answer, and you go off your rocker about it. Partisanship does wierd things to people. You can't see that because you ARE an extreme partisan.

While technically correct, Hillary DID duck the issue (again).
As President, she could not author legislation, but the reality is that ANY president can have party members author legislation for them. She could then advocate for this legislation from the Office of the Presidency.
Its called the "Bully Pulpit".

Does anyone really believe that the fucking PRE$IDENT meekly and powerlessly waits around the Oval Office for the legislature to send them something to sign????


So, Hillary is technically correct, but once again displayed the evasion for which she has become notorious.
She did NOT say she was FOR it.
She did not say she was AGAINST it.
She did NOT tell America what she will Work For, or WHO she represents.





The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

:rofl:

They do what the people in DC won't do for them.

i feel a purge com`n on do`t you?

Its called the "Bully Pulpit"!
Look it up.

I am happy to add to your limited understanding of how our government works.
No Charge this time.
:hi:


"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans. I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans, family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."---Paul Wellstone

What flavor is the kool-aid you're drinking?

Is it grape or is it cherry?

For a so-called journalist, your use of profanity shows a sad, pathetic person.

(P.S. she has me on ignore, but everyone else can read this).

The "one size fits all" bogus straw man.

Boring.

Another word's she will sit around and do nothing. I take that back, instead of doing nothing she will continue in allowing cheap labor to flood this country - I have no doubt. Jeez even Bush goes after something from Congress when he wants it. Quit making excuses for her.

She clearly said she was going to be working for comprehensive reform and a path to citizenship (which, sadly as a Clinton supporter, I disagree with).

She was not at all saying she wasn't going to try. She was simply saying she cannot promise it in the first 100 days, when it's the Congress that has to pass it and send it to her to sign.

She can't make promises for a Congress that doesn't even exist yet. We don't know what this Congress will look like in January 2009.

"And so this a@shole, left-wing crowd booed her for stating an absolute fact. Very unfair."

Immigration is one of those topics that you simply cannot win. The issue is a 50/50 split through both parties. If you satisfy the unions, you'll piss off the Hispanic population and vice-versa. On the other side of the aisle, if a Republican candidate satisfies the Xenophobics, they'll piss off the corporate community that wants cheap labor.

So, all immigration packages are some mish-mash hybrid efforts that are deliberately engineered so that they cannot pass. The candidates can say they favored "comprehensive" reform and ultimately nothing happens to piss anyone off. Illegals still stream over the border. That pleases the Corpratists and the Hispanic population. They are not given papers which pleases the Xenophobics and the unions.

If one party was for it and one against it, there would political victory to be had. Then they would actually try to enact something. Expect that status quo to stay in effect. No one has the stomach to do anything substantial.

Yeah, liberal community activists at a Democratic candidates forum. Damn, what were they thinking?? :eyes:

(funny how nobody else got booed either. :) )

Telling them what they didn't want to hear...but what was the truth...

Good on her!!!

She's supposed to wave her magic wand like the other candidates --and then make sure there is a chicken in every pot!

Sen. Clinton panders and tells people what she thinks they want to hear, is utter crap.

If she was concerned with pandering and political expedience, she would have given a much different answer today. She would have made promises that she has no clue she can fulfill.

She has no idea what the Congress will look like in January 2009. So she can't make promises that they would send a President Hillary Clinton the legislation to sign.

Not everyone is a great leader.

"The Congress shall have Power To...

"...To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, ... throughout the United States."

At least she understands that Congress makes the laws, not the all-powerful executive. Maybe the crowd will understand that too if they ever have to take a citizenship class.

That's just the way it is. Hey, maybe Hillary will let John be part time WH gardener when she's president, if he asks her nicely.

:crazy:

Sorry, I couldn't resist :evilgrin:

:toast:

& if she says she can't, might as well go independent!

If she wanted to promise to make it a priority, she could. Personally, I don't think it's a priority for the first 100 days.

Laws that benefit poor people take forever. Look how long it took to increase minimum wage. Don't kid yourself.

But not nearly her worst. It might not be a priority for the first 100 days. It's OK to say that.

She flip flops so many times. Never gives direct answers - oh... unless it's a plant in the audience asking if she likes diamonds or emeralds (i believe). Flip flopper she is... 5 times on immigration drivers licenses.

It's something she can't promise.

Too bad the reform wasn't passed last time. I knew it was going to be a raw deal and a long time till the window opened up again.

As a minimum they should have found a way for people with families with kids here to find some relief.

Our government is so built to be slow and inefficient and that's too bad.

start with the "ignorant assholes" in that audience even if the are american citizens. how fucking dare they boo hillary

Why not? She deserves to be booed if they can't stand her political agenda. I don't agree with them but that is not the issue or is it? She's not Queen yet.

Yep, and we cannot implicitly promise amnesty and let another 500 million in. We have the right as a nation to determine who comes in and who comes out. If you don't believe me, PM me your address so I can help myself to the amenities of your home whenever I please. I promise I'll do some undone house chore each time as obviously it's a job that no one else wants to do.

give me a break, the entire country doesn't want Hillary's position as it is and you think this little gang of open border attorneys,
who have a vested financial interest in all of this are a good thing? No, they are not and their little boos are nothing in comparison to what the majority in the country have to say about it and it sure ain't their agenda.

for illegal immigrants.

How many, in both parties, even on DU, do you think support this?

It has been easy for us, Democrats to ignore the issue and watch and see how this implodes the Republican party.

I think that it took courage of her not to pander to the audience with its own clear agenda.

who are not on the same page as those who want illegals to have citizenship.

OK, well, they were told to stay home. They came anyway. They were told that they would be deported if caught and we waffle. And now you want to give them citizenship.

What message does that give to everyone else? What message does that send to those who waited in a legal process?

No we cannot deport 12 million people. But deporting 12,000 would send a serious message. We told you not to come. Now we're showing you to the door.

I am in no way a clinton supporter, but that's bullshit that they'd boo her for that.

Quite ado about nothing...I would like to ask the Obama group something--perhaps they can clear something up for me

if the audience boos Clinton--are they Obama plants? Are they rude and inappropriate? Is the network or sponsor purposefully sandbagging Clinton? Or is that response only for when Obama and Edwards get booed? Just trying to get the rules down.

Because that would make things clear, like they were in Nevada.

and she will sweep all the right-wing bullshit under the rug.

the Clintons, who i actually love, seem to be able to become friends with people who are evil and who made their lives miserable, and who are hurting so much of society.