Question for those who say Clinton did not get caught in a bold faced lie during the debate?

Question

According to her campagn:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/11/05/clinton-broadly-supports-states-efforts-to-license-illegals/#more-2904
She is saying: she 'broadly supports' it and that the plan “makes a lot of sense"

ok, Let's review the transcript:

1) Hillary gives give run around answer, that she now says meant (according to her campaign): "the plan “makes a lot of sense" "

2) Dobb disagrees that it is a good idea

3) Clinton responds: " Well, I just want to add, I did not say that it should be done"(compare with cnn link above)

4) Dodd: "No, no, no. You said — you said yes…"
Dodd: "… you thought it made sense to do it. "
5) Clinton: "No, I didn't, Chris."

so at the end of the debate…quote:

Dodd: "… you thought it made sense to do it. "
Clinton: "No, I didn't, Chris."

SO IS SHE LYING NOW? OR WAS SHE THEN?

(Note: I'm not a republican, and Bush is NOT running for president, so don't give me a bunch of BS about Bush, as it is not relevant

Clinton supporters, please clear this up for me

Invoice Jones: That did not answer or clarify anything. You used a logical fallacy to support an argument you could not prove with facts.

I am "singling her out" because she is the most dishonest.

Prove me wrong

By your logic, anyone who questions Obama is now a racist.

Van Basten: Tom & Jerry happens to be awesome.

I liked the guy below you answer better. It would be a lot better if her campaign could say it simple like that. That would be understandable. Unlike VB who is just a d##$

Answer 1

This a political campaign, is also a learning proccess for many candidates, America is so different from east to west, that the message of change can be sometimes complicated. Hillary has been a consistent advocate for change. She highlights the issues that concern americans, and talks with people about the need for a committed and effective progressive voice in the White House.
Hillary for president

Answer 2

i understand this would possibly not make any distinction to you, yet no, that may not what Obama mentioned. He mentioned that he himself had had no touch with Blagojevich pertaining to to the Senate seat emptiness, and that his team had had no beside the point contacts, i.e., they had had no longer something to do with the so-referred to as "pay for play" subject. He initially mentioned he grew to become into going to look into any contacts his team could have had with Blagojevich, yet discovered none that could desire to be considered beside the point with regard to the scandal (see first 2 hyperlinks under) So no, Obama has no longer been caught in a "formidable confronted lie." And by the way, the greater nicely suited term is "bald confronted" lie, inspite of the indisputable fact that i'm conscious that folk in many circumstances say "formidable confronted" (see final link under).

Answer 3

Sorry, that doesn't qualify as anything like a bold faced lie. She meandered a bit but I understood what she was saying. Barring the federal government establishing so sort of national ID program the state governors are obliged to come up with their own plans and any plan is better than none.

Answer 4

Hillary is the front runner in the democratic field and also the front runner in the general election, according to the polls. So that's normal rivals and haters raise a lot of critics when it comes to talk about her. By the way, if this game is too tough for you to understand, go watch Tom & Jerry ...

It is a lot easier because it's for kids, like you!

Answer 5

Part of looking at what her intent is is researching her patterns in the past. Like this little documentary for example:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7007109937779036019&q=hillary+clinton&total=9598&start=0&num=100&so=0&type=search&plindex=4

Answer 6

Basically she IS for it, just like she's for Illegals getting amnesty. She just didn't want to say so for fear of alienating 50%, at least, of the AMERICANS who would vote for her. Look on her website, it says right there that she backs amnesty for illegals. If they get licenses they would also be registered to VOTE. She would LOVE that, as she would be the one getting the votes.

Nobody has been attacking her due to her sex. If Obama or Edwards had made that same flub, the rest of them, HER INCLUDED, would have been on him like sauce on a pizza. Her PR people are trying to spin this thing into a sexist attack, just like they did when she was running for the Senate.

She's probably mad at Tim Russert for putting her on the spot like that. She obviously wasn't at all prepared for that question. You don't believe me? Check it out.... video of her answer on licenses...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_B0uHybfmmY

Answer 7

She's not a liar. People get confused under those circumstances. Anyone would.

The only reason you are singling her out is because she is the only female candidate. No one is questioning any of the male candidates, or writing bumper stickers that say "he's a b!+ch," etc. Cut the woman some slack!!!

Answer 8

Honestly, I do not know a single person who supports hillary. In fact, most people I know absolutely despise her, so I have no idea where these national front runner numbers are coming from.

I call foul.

Answer 9

She's trying to do what her husband did...but she can't wink at the camera with that magical little "Yeah, I'm lying, but ain't I cute" grin and get away with it. She turns abrasive when cornered. She'll be a polarizing force that will end up being unelectable.