El Rushbo Forced Hillary Question on NY Driver's Licenses for Illegals
Posted on 11/02/2007 7:07:24 AM PDT by 3AngelaD
Until Tuesday night, Democratic presidential candidates had largely ignored the subject of illegal immigration. The topic, strategists concluded, was fraught with too much potential for alienating general election voters. But after Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton struggled to answer a question about whether she supports giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, the topic burst into the forefront...
While voters are in line with Democratic positions... immigration remains a thornier subject. Polls suggest that most Americans want to allow illegal immigrants to stay in the country and create ways for them to obtain citizenship, but party strategists say the voters who care most about this issue are those angry about illegal immigration and want to hear a tougher message...
The debate...also illustrated the fine line Democrats, who depend heavily on the Hispanic vote and soft-pedal the idea of harsh penalties for people who enter the country illegally, will have to walk...
All of the Democratic contenders have embraced some form of "comprehensive reform..."
Polls showed a majority of Americans supported that legislation, but two-thirds also thought the United States was not doing enough to stem the tide of illegal immigration..According to a CNN poll last month, 76 percent of Americans oppose giving licenses to illegal immigrants, compared with 23 percent who favor it. But noting that many African Americans, a strongly Democratic group, oppose creating a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, they wrote "this is a real wedge issue that Democrats need to get right."...
After Tuesday's debate, a group of Democratic strategists moved to tamp growing fears among party candidates across the country, warning them not to duck the issue and coaching them on how to defuse the topic...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Democrats would not win one election outside of their blue spot cesspools called “cities”
if positive voter identification were enforced.
He is one of the Wash Post hacks that covers immigration for them on a regular basis. Usually, he isn’t nearly as bad as that Perry Bacon character, whose work is reliably inaccurate, ill informed and biased. Bacon is one of the ones who was let go when Time magazine was forced, for financial reasons, to cut its Washington, D.C. bureau back to the bone. So now he’s lying for the Wash Post instead. He also plays “for the other team.”
She is being badly advised if someone on her staff didn’t tell her this was going to come up, eventually, and she needed to figure out what to say. What happened to her is what happens to people who have no principles, except for the promotion of socialism. All of their feet need to be held to the fire. Tim Russert, debate moderators and drive-by media: ask the questions that need to be asked and INSIST on straight answers:
1 - What should be done about the illegal immigrants that are here? Deport? Amnesty? Enforcement and attrition? If amnesty, how do you propose treating the people who obeyed the law and got in line?
2- Do you support allowing illegal immigrants to get drivers licenses?
3 — Do you support taxing overseas money transfers to pay for benefits to immigrants such as health care?
4 — What level of legal immigration do you think would be good for our country? More? Less. The current level?
5 — Chain migration: How many and to what degree of relationship should immigrants be allowed to sponsor their relatives to enter our country?
6 — Should English be our official language?
That is very correct. I am tired of having my civil liberties violated by democrats stealing elections through fraud.
Actually, it was our party leadership setting off an IED at the national party convention. Thank God the party base defused it before it went off and took out the entire party.
I won't attempt a comprehensive deconstruction, but, While voters are in line with Democratic positions... gives me a migrate. But, it does add to the evidence that liberal "journalists" have finally given up their delusions about neutrality. (Not this voter! Not even these voters.)
And the best polling I've seen done in North Carolina shows 85 percent of people who vote (not "likely" voters, as the "journalists" like to say, which could mean anything but the poll I saw of people who have demonstrated a consistent history of having voted, in that state actually want nothing short of deportation for Criminal Aliens, not drivers licenses, or health care (using emergency rooms to rob community taxpayers) and they want their employers "sanctioned," which the crosstabs define as "locked-up."
Perhaps "voters" and people of whom "polls suggest," etc. must be Post subscribers who live in Washington's Maryland suburbs. They can't be just "voters" who live in the District of Columbia, where the Department of Commerce's Census insists the population is 95 percent "African American." A poll of that segment would undoubtedly be more strongly opposed to "Illegal Aliens," (note, I did not say "illegal immigration) than the righteous sampling of North Carolinians done last spring.
Only a poll of Post subscribers who are (1) liberal Democrats and (2) federal bureaucrats and, perhaps (3) would be the "universe" of those polled whom the Post assumes reflect the opinions of "voters."
This is not only anti-journalism, it is such a flawed Worldview that if consistently believed should thrill, not anger, Conservatives in the United States. It indicates such a flawed presumption of how the world thinks and works that it simply will not work. Therefore, it must fail.
You can bet, however, that Democrat pollsters can't stay in business long reporting such results. Whatever their agenda for the rest of us and out pocket books, they can't actually act as though these conclusions are correct. They will run into a brick wall of reality, inevitably. Like a Drunk "hitting bottom."
Unlike the aforementioned Drunk, however, too many of these, our fellow Americans, God of Abraham have mercy upon us, are apparently immune from ever having moments of clarity.
I think Hillary is in LaRaza’s pocket, and she doesn’t want the voters to find out. That’s why she gave the (non)answer that she did.
However, if a Republican gets elected in 2008, he's got a clear shot to run for the Dem nomination in 2012. That could explain his "timing" in announcing this drivers' license plot - a perfect way to bring Hillzilla down!
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
What a ...
Polls DON’T show a majority supporting amnesty, just the opposite. Polls show 2/3rd’s of the country AGAINST amnesty and FOR border enforcement and you only get those kind of numbers when DEMOCRATS and INDEPENDENTS agree.
I don’t see McCaskill having a difficult time picking sides here and she’s in Missouri, a swing state that’s had more then a few close elections.
The real difficulty, and WAPO damn well knows this, is that they want uneducated poor workers pre-disposed to vote Democrat to be eligible to vote while LEGAL Americans white, black AND Hispanic in their own party no less resent these illegals driving down their wages and making the low skilled jobs more competitive.
And the white union workers in their party are the ones most likely to “swing” in elections. They are blue dogs. Reagan Democrats. They got a majority because Republicans screwed up and these folks swung back to Democrats, and they can just as easily swing back to Republicans on this issue alone.
Democrats are hamstrung on ths issue only because they don’t want to get rid of the DREAM of tens of millions of new Democrat voters all at once. If they support enforcement and border security they’d lose no one. they might een gain support. The illegals lobbying for this won’t go to the GOP. The Blue dogs would be happy. The legal minorities would be happy. Even Liberals, mostly, would be happy as we see their real feelings on display in N.Y.
The only ones unhappy would be the illegals, mexico, a few family an friends of the iellgals that won’t leave the Dem party, and big business that would then find both parties unreceptive to them on this and have nowhere to go.
Repeat the lie often enough...
Unfortunately, there are a large number of people who rely on public opinion to determine their own position. After all, 2000 lemmings can’t be wrong!
it was all them not me... that’s what people keep saying
to read later
This statement, "most Americans want to allow illegals to stay in the country and become citizens" is just BS. Where was he during the amnesty fight? 80 percent of americans, dems and pubbies alike, DO NOT WANT amnesty. This is the Wapo so I guess lies and bias in reporting are to be expected.
All of the Democratic contenders have embraced some form of "comprehensive reform..." Polls showed a majority of Americans supported that legislation...
Complete, utter Toro Mierda.
“RUSH: That was the most pathetic skate; the most pathetic avoidance; that was horribly bad. Governor Spitzer — she wouldn’t even tell us what she thought about it. What governor Spitzer’s trying to do is fill a vacuum created by this administration? It’s BS. Let me give you the dirty little secret. Driver’s licenses for illegals in New York, is all about one thing: voter fraud. Because of Motor Voter, the federal Motor Voter law, everybody getting a driver’s license in New York is automatically handed a voter registration form. Five hundred thousand or more — Mrs. Clinton just said a million — illegal aliens. The potential for voter fraud here is profound, and to say that he’s just trying to fill a vacuum?”
Rush at his best!
Time to ask Rudy The Big Question.....he will lie, of course : )
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.