Keith Olbermann Says It All On RFK Assassination and Hillary
Sometimes there is simply nothing one can say. Words simply fail me. Luckily they don't fail Olbermann.
PS. Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson told The Post, "She was talking about the length of the race and using the '68 election as an example of how long the races in the past have gone -- she used her husband's race in the same vein."
Not true. Until 1996, the California primary was always at the end of the process so things kept going until June. All the big California primaries were capstones at the end of the race. That is why Bobby was in California in June. And that is why Bill Clinton was there in June. There were hundreds of delegates still to be won.
But this year California voted in February and as June begins only Puerto Rico, South Dakota and Montana are still to be heard from. The analogy is ridiculous.
HILLARY RAISES ASSASSINATION ISSUE
DEFENDS LONG RUNNING CAMPAIGN
May 23, 2008 --
Hillary Clinton today brought up the assassination of Sen. Robert Kennedy while defending her decision to stay in the race against Barack Obama.
"My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. I don't understand it," she said, dismissing calls to drop out.
Clinton made her comments at a meeting with the Sioux Falls Argus-Leader's editorial board while campaigning in South Dakota, where she complained that, "People have been trying to push me out of this ever since Iowa."
Obama, the first African-American to advance so far in the race for the White House, has faced threats, sources have said.
Robert Kennedy, the younger brother of President John F. Kennedy, was gunned down in 1968 after winning the California primary. He had been a hero on the left for his civil rights agenda and calls to end the war in Vietnam.
Barack Obama, who leads Clinton by nearly 200 delegates and has already secured a majority of pledged delegates, has been the subject of threats. Early in the campaign, the Secret Service gave him a security detail at the request of Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Illinois).
Clinton criticized an "urgency" to end the campaign prematurely, saying, "Historically, that makes no sense."
Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson told The Post, "She was talking about the length of the race and using the '68 election as an example of how long the races in the past have gone -- she used her husband's race in the same vein."










except all that BS about her husbadn not winning till june is crap. technically, he didn't get enough delgates till june, but he was the only candidate left after new hampshire or something like that. so its not exactly a fair comparison.
and as far as assasination thing goes, she really wants to make the case to stay in because obama might get shot?!
what a horrible human being hillary clinton is. seriously. thats a disgusting tactic from a disgusting politician who will say or do anything to retain her power and stave off the realization that she is becoming more and more irrelevant every single day.
May 23, 2008 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
HEIL HITLER
HEIL HITLER
HEIL HITLER
HEIL HITLER
HEIL HITLER
May 25, 2008 11:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
The fucking BALLS on this woman. Of course, nowhere in Greg Sargent's post on the interview did this get a mention. I thought I couldn't be surprised by anything she says anymore, but this ... what a horrible, horrible excuse for a human being she is.
May 23, 2008 4:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. She should be banished from the human race. What a horrible, filthy monster she's turned out to be.
May 23, 2008 5:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
How date she discuss political history! I mean to mention that two campaigns went into June! How horrible. Get me the smelling salts please. Of course we need to parse her words in the worst possible way, what else are we to do between now and Denver.
May 23, 2008 5:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't be a complete moron, OK? Why in the FUCK would she bring up the Kennedy assassination? Why would she even mention it?
May 23, 2008 6:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh but it worked so well in SC. Remember JJ won there twice! And we took that out of context, so we must be taking this out of context too right????
No FREAKING WAY. RFK was assasinated, that is why she is staying in. Putting it in the nicest way possible "Hey this guy just might get assasinated, then where would we be? I have to stay in for the good of the party."
She is a freaking disgusting, and I am sorry to say it, call me sexist if you want (I am a woman), BITCH!!!!!
May 23, 2008 6:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
The sin that Olbermann has committed is
contributing toward dividing the democratic party,
for the sake of ratings.
He is hate mongering to pander to his blog base.
The blogs are full of operatives whipping up hate
to manipulate young people in the direction corporate
wants them to go in.
Olbermann knows this, and accommodates out of
opportunism.
I have gone from being a fan, to thinking he should
be out on his ass. The sooner the better.
May 24, 2008 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lute, you are so right. I am so glad that you brought this up. On a daily basis he feeds into the hatred of people. He and most of the others on MSNBC have almost singlehandedly created this huge division the American people are feeling. Day after day they ridicule and insult Hillary Clinton and fan the flames to keep the misery going. His ridiculous diatribes night after night are hateful and unprofessional. He absolutely won't be happy until he has completely destroyed Clinton. Why is he so afraid to let the process continue. If all of these so-called journalists would have just let things play out without all of the sensationalism maybe voters would have been more open to voting for the democratic nominee, no matter who he or she is. All they have done is cause voters to dig in their heels and refuse to budge. Why not at least play nice for the last ten days of the process. But I guess he has forgotten or never knew how to be fair and balanced. What a shame for the American people.
May 24, 2008 6:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
For many Americans, myself included, that day in June was a milestone. A sad milestone that I will always remember in June. That is what it has to do with June.
Isnt it time you went back to your facebook page? Sheesh... Your comments are reprehensible these days.
May 23, 2008 7:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ah yes, the old ad hominem dodge.
May 23, 2008 7:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, but she wasn't talking about June. She was talking about why she should stay in the race. And the implication was that part of the reason she's staying in the race is because Obama might be shot. And that's not only a filthy, vile thing to say, it's a stupid thing to say, because she just blew her chance at the VP slot.
May 24, 2008 1:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, she was. talking about June, bunnybrain. She specifically said "June" twice.
May 24, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well as you always seem to point out the "new" generation of voters is for Obama so they don't have a clue of 1968 or Bobby Kennedy for that matter. Your making up a probelem where there was none.
May 23, 2008 7:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's some pretty lame spin you're trying out there, louie.
May 23, 2008 7:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
New voters; young voters doesn't mean ignorant voters. My high school and college kids know all about JFK and RFK, and they are Obama supporters.
Now when Hillary screams about her West VA and Kentucky demographic...THEN we're talkin' about those who will vote for a white woman over a black man any day. Of course in the general, they'll also vote for a white guy over a white woman. I'm not saying they're IGNORANT, but they are sure set in their ways, and don't let reality affect their voting habits.
May 23, 2008 8:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
She bought up Robnert Kenedy as an example of a candidate going all the way to June and she was probably thinking subconsciously that he had not gone further because he was assasinated.
But you psychotic Obamanoids are certain she was "sending a message to Obama" that he will be assasinated. You need help.
May 27, 2008 12:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Her remarks were in extremely poor taste.
Remember that Huckabee had recently made comments about Barack dodging a bullet. Also on a sad note, a few days earlier, we learned thatSen. Ted Kennedy had a brain tumor.
Hillary Clinton was indescribable to make such callous, racist, and narcisstic remarks. She is destroying the Party with her attitude. Each day that Sen. Clinton remains in the race, she loses more crediblility.
May 29, 2008 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are we seeing the evolution of a Clinton/Huckabeee ticket?
May 23, 2008 9:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fan those flames, MJ. Either you're ignorant of about 1968, or you are being inflammatory on purpose.
Had he lived, Bobby would have gone into the convention facing an overwhelming deficit in delegates. Hubert Humphrey, who did not campaign in the few primaries that were held in 1968, had amassed a lead in delegates through caucuses and state conventions run by Party bosses like Richard Daley.
So get your facts straight, or just keep quiet. If anyone is the RFK of this campaign, it's Clinton herself.
And, as other, cooler heads are beginning to point out, there is nothing in it for Clinton to argue that Bobby's death and not his fight for the nomination is a reason for her to stay in. Whether she stays in or gets out, her situation would be exactly the same if anything were to happen to Obama.
May 23, 2008 9:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Though I usually strongly disagree with you, you make a valid point here. I wish she had said that in her apology.
May 23, 2008 11:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry to hear you usually disagree with me.
May 24, 2008 1:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
"get your facts straight, or just keep quiet."
so, the steel cracks...
and another poorly made sword loses its temper...
What will Billy do from now on?
Please, everyone who is trying to spin this with stuttering excuses, STOP.
Take your own advice Billy, just keep quiet.
Or just stfu, take your pick, you don't have a monopoly on frustration here.
Some of us are sincerely sad about this, not just bitter that we somehow finally, conclusively lost our self-appointed pundit credibility...
For those of you who think the rest of us, because we support Obama for President, don't feel compassion and sympathy for Hillary right now, go find a lonely room and brood in it.
This has been a long, hard day for everyone, and no one I know is rejoicing but Rush Limbaugh and the dittoheads.
If these campaigns weren't converted into such high-stakes poker matches, people like Hillary wouldn't be pigeonholed into exhausting and mind-numbing media traps like the one she stumbled into today.
And people like "Billy" wouldn't be losing "his" temper and belittling people out of personal disappointment.
May 23, 2008 11:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please don't characterize my mood. The fact is that Rosenberg is inciting people like you who are far too easy to incite. He's good at it.
May 24, 2008 1:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am excited about a fresh, young generaton and a sea-change in our political future.
It was you diehards who incited this whole mess.
May 24, 2008 1:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
There's nothing in it for her to mention Bobby Kennedy's death, but what does that prove? There was nothing in it for her to lie about being shot at by snipers either, but she said it anyway. Is she just nuts? I mean, why would she say this? The problem is, there's been very little in it for her to say many of the things she's said, but she keeps doing it. What the hell is her problem?
May 24, 2008 1:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
To all Clinton supporters,
It’s time to consider that your candidate has crossed the line with her remarks alluding to the assassination of RFK as a reason for staying in the race. Please don’t try to rationalize this even though it is tempting out your compassion for your candidate. As her supporters, you have asked the rest of us to excuse her on many fronts and we have tried to do just that. Her list of misstatements lies and racist innuendo is too long to repeat here. Either you are blind and completely naïve or extremely in denial to have not seen or heard of her many transgressions. That being said, you need to accept that there is a limit to her behavior. You cannot expect the rest of us to continue patiently tolerating her nonsense when it turns insensitive at best and deadly and morbid at worst. Hillary has lost all sense of decorum and decency and drifted into a kind of madness reserved for the certifiably insane. Please, out of respect for the rest of us who can see this situation for what it is, please don’t insult our intelligence by rationalizing her despicable words.
May 24, 2008 9:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree.
I was appalled with Sen. Clinton's comments. She should be forced to resign.
May 29, 2008 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is beyond.
It's one thing to defend ones words as being politically "canny," or showing that you're "tough," or excusing them because you're "sleep deprived." And maaaaaybe you could even defend the context around remarks like "hard-working white people" and "obliterate Iran," - but this? And just days after Ted Kennedy's health announcement?
There are things elected leaders do not say, ever. This is beyond bad judgement. Or being sleep-deprived. Or being politically tough.
This is a revelation of a character flaw so serious, in this individual, that it cannot be explained or apologized away. Part of who this person is, is simply.... not right. Certainly for the position she pursues, with its responsibilities.
May 23, 2008 4:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
There would so many pre-conditions Hillary Clinton would have to meet prior to being INVITED on the VP ticket. Here's a few: She would have to sign a political pre-nupital and if she breaks that contract (like she did with signing off on punishing Florida and Michigan against Party rules), she IS banned from the Democratic Party (like a Sen. Joe Liebermann). The contractual agreement would include things like - promising not to upstage, backstab or undermine Obama himself and his administration; promise not to conspire a 'mutiny on the political bounty' of sorts; promise not to push Obama off a proverbial cliff; promise not to take advantage of any mishap as a result in the lapse of Presidential security, which would then open the door for a Clinton Presidency following the nation’s loss of President Obama; promise to relegate husband Bill Clinton to the way, way back of the White House office, and lastly, (at Clinton’s own personal expense) a promise to chaperon Bill Clinton’s activities whenever around women half his age.
May 23, 2008 4:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
So much for the VP slot, and so much for being considered for the Supreme Court (which I heard being kicked around of late).
Wow. Just...WOW.
May 23, 2008 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
For many of us, the assassinations of Bobby and Jack is still an open wound. This is breathtaking for someone who pretends to have the temperment to lead the party, let alone the nation.
May 23, 2008 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
And you can't leave the 1968 assassination of MLK out of the picture either.
May 23, 2008 6:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was an idealistic teenager in 1968. I remember hearing the news of the King assassination, and seeing the cities of America burn. And the RFK assassination - I was up late, watching some mindless late night movie, when the local station broke in with the news. I woke my family to tell them.
I often wonder how things might have been different if those tragedies had not occurred. What sort of alternate future my country may have had.
And to hear Hillary Clinton cite the potential of Obama's assassination as a rationalization for staying in staggers my imagination. She is truly contemptible. She must be excluded from any consideration for VP, SCOTUS, the Cabinet, anything. There is no room in my Democratic Party for anyone who makes such implications about another candidate.
Give it up, Hillary. You will never be President. Never. I personally would now vote for literally anyone over you. Spongebob. Ralph Wiggum. Charlie Sheen, even.
May 23, 2008 7:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sad. She just can't seem to give an interview lately without making a major gaffe. I don't believe for a moment that she would ever wish for harm to come to anyone as it did to RFK. However, her sudden inability to articulate seems troublesome. If I wanted to play pop psychologist, I'd say that maybe she wants out of this herself.
Anyway, this comment strikes me as a gaffe, worrisome only in that it is one of a string of gaffes that might indicate some problem that could impede her ability to communicate effectively as president. However, Clinton's latest communication problems are nothing when set in comparison to the incredibly inane and troublesome remarks McCain seems to be in the habit of making every day. There's no comparison.
And this is just a communication issue -- Clinton has a sharp mind; I have no doubt about her abilities.
The reason I have not supported her as a candidate is because of the things that she has thought out, said, and meant as a matter of policy -- things like, "I would obliterate Iran." That's the kind of thing I worry about.
(But at least she doesn't sing about it . . . Oy! As an aside, have we really sunk so low as a country that we can have a presidential candidate who sang about the destruction of another country? It's beyond understanding; maybe that's why we don't necessarily get the horror of it.)
Clinton's statement is stupid. It may be hurtful to the Kennedy's -- I don't know how I would take a light remark about the murder of my family member. However, in the larger schema it is relatively unimportant. Her statement that she would "obliterate Iran" is terrifying.
May 23, 2008 5:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. But I would say it was less a gaffe and more a Freudian slip.
May 23, 2008 5:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. But a Freudian slip is an expression of a repressed desire. Not easily dismissed, don't you think?
May 23, 2008 10:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
It may be a "gaffe," but what people say when under pressure - especially when they follow a stream of other "gaffes" - REVEALS something. A pattern. And you don't have to be a Freudian to decipher that pattern. Beneath the controlled politicians' statements, her words are increasingly extreme, and often, actually violent. "Obliterate" Iran, as you mentioned, being one which was only passed over because it's a "foreign" place.
Above all.... this person is not WELL. And the bloody superdelegates, waiting for the "game" to play itself out, so they don't risk their precious political careers, are at this point risking their OWN good names. Would you sit by and say you hadn't "seen enough" - after this? How much would you have to see, BEYOND this? For everyone's good, and for the good even of her own name, they should act, en masse, NOW, to put an end to this "game."
Some game. My God.
May 23, 2008 5:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
"invade Pakistan" ring a bell?
May 23, 2008 7:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
"If I can just hold out until somebody kills Barack" ring a bell?
May 23, 2008 9:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are you teaching your kids that Hillary Clinton said that? Are you telling us she said that? All in all you're just another brick in the wall ring a bell?
May 23, 2008 10:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Then, the military went right ahead and did what Obama had suggested! Oh! People just can't see. I mean, sure we killed some high ranking terrorists who actually had something to do with 9/11, and Mushareff isn't the best "president" in the world, but still. To turn around and do something BO suggests! Incredible!
May 23, 2008 11:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who talked about invading Pakistan? I haven't heard that one yet.
May 24, 2008 1:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
that's because you are a clueless troll
May 27, 2008 12:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary's pattern is she keeps putting her foot in her mouth by saying the stupidest f'ing things imaginable. From sniper-fire to this, Pakistan to Iran, sweet Jesus, make it stop.
Ready to lead on day one? How many months and gaffes ago was "day one" anyways?
Between Hillary and Bill's repeated misstatements, that anyone could ever remark on their political skill and "teflon" just boggles the mind. Both of them are "tenacious" but have otherwise been absurdly awful candidates.
They go from being the former Presidential couple, with all the machine, all the name recognition, a 20+ point lead nationwide, and the presumptive nominee, to the present where a half black guy with a funny name, no name recognition, no machine, and nothing but personal qualities to go on, is beating her by a 15+ spread, out fund-raising her by 2-3 fold, etc.
When are people going to stop patronizing Hillary, drop the sentimentality, and in her own words take a "reality check" and see her candidacy is stinks. The Clintons have made complete fools of themselves and seem determined to drag us all down with them.
May 23, 2008 7:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Worrisome only in that it is one of a string of gaffes?"
No, it shows a truly depraved lust for power.
But hell, I'm glad she said it.
The cowardly Democratic SDs who have yet to come out for Obama no longer have any excuse to sit on the fence.
As Arianna says, time to end it.
May 23, 2008 5:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Klassy with a K. Does she have Tourette's?
May 23, 2008 5:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know, you've got to hand it to her...them. They really will say anything. In this case, the unspoken/unspeakable subtext benind this VP thing now becomes spoken. Obama's chances of assassination are higher than other politicians. Did she mean that O will be assassinated and/or she wants that to happen? No. But she/they really do think of anything and everything and you can't tell me that they haven't thought about this. I'm glad, in a way, that she voices all this stuff -- like the white low income voter thing. It is kind of like Tourette's, like Veritas78 says.
May 23, 2008 5:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree, M.J. I'm beyond shock. When I heard what she said, it was like someone kicked the wind out of me. And this filthy creature wants to be considered for the vice presidency? If I was Obama, I'd issue a standing order that she not be allowed anywhere near the White House.
May 23, 2008 5:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
You heard what she said but did you actually listen to the interview???
May 23, 2008 7:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
The interview is linked in the original text of this blog. What is your point?
May 23, 2008 9:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, I listened to the interview. That's how I heard what she said. What's your point?
May 24, 2008 1:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
That's pretty funny.
May 23, 2008 11:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's actually pretty un-funny when you think about it. I'm sort of wondering how much time she spends thinking about all the reasons she has to stay in this race, based upon the demise of Barack Obama.
May 24, 2008 1:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
And this filthy creature wants to be considered for the vice presidency?
This is what TPM Cafe has degenerated to. Sad
May 28, 2008 2:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
CNN is quoting a Hillary "regret" statement where she claims that she only mentioned Bobby because the Kennedys have been on her mind so much this past week. BUT she made the exact same statement in her comments the night of the Indiana primary...
May 23, 2008 5:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hmm, does anyone have a cite/full quote on that?
May 23, 2008 5:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Also at least one other time - http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/05/hillarys_bizarre_rfk_comment.html
If anything she should wonder why it's only blowing up now I guess. However this proves her "Kennedy's on my mind" excuse is a lie.
May 23, 2008 6:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Check the link in the blog entry. It shows her making her statement.
May 23, 2008 9:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, no, no. She doesn't get the benefit of the doubt on this one. She's said it before, and this was no mere gaffe. As Billy Glad pointed out, there was no advantage to her in saying this. But, like the Bosnia lie, there was no good reason for her to repeat that one either. Next we'll have Bill trying to explain this away by saying she's 60 and she's tired.
May 24, 2008 1:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
A gaffe? Hasn't she mentioned RFK several times before in other speeches, in the same way?
May 23, 2008 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
And compared herself to LBJ don't forget.
May 23, 2008 6:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess we know who's gonna be Olbermann's "worst person in the world" tonight...
May 23, 2008 5:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
So the reason she should stay in the race, possibly up to the convention, is because Obama could get assassinated? What in the hell??
Hey lunatic fringe Clinton supporters, did you hear that? There is your marching orders straight from the womans mouth. Should Obama get assassinated between now and the convention Hillary would be the defacto Dem candidate.
First their reasoning for Obama to select Hillary as his VP is because JFK chose LBJ (and the rest is history there) and now when it seems they must have been rebukes in their VP quest, they want to draw comparisons to Bobby Kennedy getting assassinated as reason why Hillary should stay, you know - just in case.
May 23, 2008 5:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
And if she's the VP and he gets assassinated AFTER he's elected, she gets to be president. God forbid, of course...
May 24, 2008 1:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow. That's a new low in rationales for staying in the race. The Sopranos analogies, not so abstract anymore.
"You know, I would cede you my turf, but uh, you know, I'm just concerned you might have an unfortunate accident."
May 23, 2008 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would really, really like to think about this as just the latest, if unusually awful, example of what human beings who are working 18 or 20 hour days for months on end are capable of saying when they are exhausted and bereft of their better judgment.
This is really just inexcusable. A new low for this campaign season, and maybe going back quite a ways, has been achieved. This might be a candidate for the next Southwest Airlines commercial "Wanna get away?" moment. If it were some laughing matter. Goodness gracious.
May 23, 2008 5:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am going to choose to interpret this statement as just a goof that did not come out the way she intended it. I think her intent was just something like, "I know the race in 1968 was still going on in June because I remember that's when Bobby Kennedy was assassinated."
Still, it really is an embarrassing gaffe. And I agree that in general her language has been getting more extreme, especially the comment about Zimbabwe. This is really dangerous stuff. While she is apparently losing supporters, according to national polling, I fear those who remain are being radicalized, and encouraged to ball themselves up into a fetal position of persecution of victimization. It's going to be very hard for them to reconcile if they talk themselves into believing the election was "stolen" by that crazy anti-democratic African dictator, Bwana Obama.
May 23, 2008 6:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Any Clinton supporter who happened to see MJ Rosenberg fanning the flames of this flap might harden their heart against the Progressive wing of the Party, but not necessarily against Obama. I'm waiting to see if Teddy steps in and nips this flap in the bud. He knows the truth of the 1968 campaign and he knows what it's like to go into a convention behind in the delegate count as Bobby would have done.
May 23, 2008 10:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, that might be useful. But she really had a chance to back out of the gaffe on her own this afternoon, and didn't do a very good job of acknowledging what the real issue is.
The timing couldn't be worse for her campaign. At the same time I was hearing about this statement on the news tonight, there were other reports coming out that Bill Clinton wants Hillary to be VP, and is even considering pressuring superdelegates to help mount a convention floor fight to force Hillary onto the ticket, even if she is not Obama's choice.
I sincerely believe Hillary was just choosing a poor reference example for alluding to the fact that earlier campaigns have gone on through June, rather than suggesting she needs to stay in the race in case something happens to Obama. But the overall effect was ghoulish and creepy: one Clinton making a statement that could be interpreted by some as a reference to the possibility of something happening to Obama in the future, while another Clinton is talking about forcing her into the VP slot, which would put her in a position to assume the presidency if anything ever did happen to Obama.
They couldn't have done more to bring out the Vince Foster conspiracy crazies if they tried.
May 24, 2008 12:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
These people are DEFINITELY NOT the Progressive wing of any party. My guess is they are a cocktail of people with a chip on their shoulder who find it conveniet to lash out at Hillary (they are piling on) as if she was a punching bag for their inner frustrations. Notice cowards always pile on never take a position that is not part of a group-think.
The rest are definitely Operatives of some sort or another whose mission is to demonize Hillary no matter what. Some of them have done it since Whitewater. MJ's post are their venue.
May 28, 2008 2:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
the statement is not just offensive, but also illogical and disingenuous.
illogical - if clinton dropped out on june 4, and the horrible event she was implying happened in july, does she think the democratic party, in search of a new standard bearer, would say, "how about hillary? oh wait - she dropped out, we can't pick her."
disingenuous.....AS IF clinton, soon after the horrible event, wouldn't reactivate her campaign and position herself as a consensus candidate for nomination at the convention.
and her apparent explanation simply isn't credible.
i'm disgusted.
May 23, 2008 5:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Day by day, I think I cannot be more aghast. And then, on the following day, the HRC ante of risk is raised again.
Freudian slip? Absolutely. And so very tasteful during the week when Ted Kennedy's brain tumor has been diagnosed.
I guess mortality is on her mind.
Now, if she can just stop projecting mortality onto others, and see that it is her own campaign that is in its deaththroes, all will be almost well. Too bad for her VP hopes. But would you, if you were Obama, ask the Grim Reaper to be your sidekick?
An aside: isn't the Clinton pattern of self-sabotage amazing? What slip does that signify?
May 23, 2008 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Re: Clinton's "invocation":
From "Head of State"
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/05/vice-presidential-candidate-clinton.html
Friday, May 23, 2008
A Hypothetical Speech by Vice Presidential Candidate Clinton
Thank you for welcoming me here tonight. I know that we are all proud of Barack, who has risen from humble beginnings to such heights--great heights, perilous heights. As you may know, 30% of serious accidents occur from a height of 10 feet or above.
And so we now set out together on our journey--a journey of hope, a journey of change, and yes, a journey of great demands. For the Presidency places great demands on all of those who hold the office--we have seen how amazingly quickly it can age people in the poignant photographs of Franklin D. Roosevelt, who was succeeded by Harry S. Truman while still in office.
In this journey, we will put forward our shared goals--of expanded health coverage, against the unexpected and often fatal illnesses that can rob even those citizens that seem the healthiest of their ability to work, even of their lives.
Of protection against unexpected attack on our country, often aimed at those who are placed in the most critical positions to lead this nation. Of conservation of our precious energy resources, without which, even the most powerful of us can wind up stranded in a desert motorcade, without food, water, or wireless reception to contact others for help. Of greater support for culture and the arts--beginning with increased support for our very own Ford's Theatre here in Washington, DC.
Many of you will hear Barack speak later today, from a platform in Norman, Oklahoma--a humble platform, a rickety platform, a platform susceptible to Norman's notoriously strong and unexpected winds. There--god willing--he will tell you of what we hope to accomplish. He will speak of the unity that he and I wish to achieve for this nation, just as Andrew Johnson and Lincoln strove for such national unity. And he will tell you of our wish for change.
Change. An important word. None of us can know the changes that will occur in our lives. None of us can predict what momentous events, what disasters may befall us. A simple damaged left engine turbine stabilizer in a campaign plane. A frayed electrical line dangling, unseen, from a remote access satellite hookup van. A safe, falling, unexpectedly, to the sidewalk from the 8th floor of the Hotel Aldion in Norman, Oklahoma.
And so, we must dedicate ourselves, consecrate ourselves, to reach these most important national objectives today--while we still can. And like Kennedy, Garfield, McKinley, and other Presidents before him, we know that Barack will strive to achieve these goals--in the face of the awesome unknowns that lay before us all.
Thank you.
Cite:
Head of State
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/05/vice-presidential-candidate-clinton.html
May 23, 2008 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Reading the posts I get the feeling many think Hillary planned this comment about Bobby Kennedy's assassination.
May 23, 2008 5:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
John, it doesn't matter. It's the thought. Especially this godawful week when so many of us are crushed by the news about Ted Kennedy.
It's like making an ethnic slur. Whether you planned it or not, you said it, and people draw certain conclusions.
May 23, 2008 5:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's a twofer, she gets to remind us about RFK and MLK at the same time.
May 23, 2008 6:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, MJ. Clinton rules are in full effect. Everyone parses every word she says, yourself especially, looking for the very worst interpretation. I remember June because of the the RFK assasination. It is a sad milestone, something that people my age remember. She was saying that in June, RFK was turning the primary around. Dont you remember that? Sheesh...
May 23, 2008 7:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
What I hear is everyone trying to give her a break from the most egregious and destructive statements. She has gotten more slack than any other human being in the world. No one has gotten away with more than she has.
This is her Waterloo. The good news is, she brought it on herself. It is a completely self-inflicted wound. She can't claim sexism, pantsuitism, ageism, or anything else. She screwed up, but as usual, she couldn't even make a dignified apology.
May 23, 2008 9:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly. This would be intolerable if anyone besides her had said it. The fact that she's the wife of a former president has afforded her all sorts of slack that no other person would have been given. I'm sick of this notion that she's been treated unfairly. She has been given a pass more times than I can count.
May 24, 2008 1:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's not the individual comment. It's also that she's supposedly campaigning on her great ability to lead and experience, and yet she's constantly making these gaffes that are just amateurish, at best.
Has anyone put together a YouTube video on all the Clintons' gaffes? Add this to the long list from sniper fire to annihilating Iran, to Jesse Jackson comparisons and "white workers" race baiting.
Enough already.
May 23, 2008 7:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jedreport does the best Hillary montages.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exsmFDYyK4U
Hillary Didn't always plan on running through June
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnEqZEh2eNo
God Bless Us
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RR_vyHTfqro
All the votes count?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xiiwWQSy8Q
Hillary channels Rove?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTTDknAhjqw
May 24, 2008 7:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
She planned it and she meant it. Why would we believe a smart woman wouldnt know the possible negative interpretations of the RFK reference- which she made several times!?
May 23, 2008 7:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is this the kind of work you used to do at AIPAC, MJ? Inflaming emotions? Turning out the lynch mob? You know exactly what you're doing tonight, and some of us do, too. Beneath contempt.
May 23, 2008 10:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
She said nothing about Obama. The only one making it about Obama is you. It's shameful.
May 23, 2008 11:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
MJ,
You know I support Obama, and with that said,
I stopped watching Olbermann when he joined the bash Hillary crowd and devoted the first 15 minutes or more of his show to attacking Hillary.
Olbermann's show has become Hardball II, which I rarely watch anymore.
One other thought;
Everywhere you look, its Bash Hillary here, Bash Hillary there, on Cable TV, on Network TV, on the blogs, and newspaper columnists. As one who likes political opinion and news I feel like I'm suffering the Death of a Thousand Cuts.
I find it sad that intelligent, rational people can continue to wallow in this sort of behavior.
McCain is the enemy, not Hillary.
May 24, 2008 8:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
i don't know if she planned the comment, but i have a sense that, in clinton's mind, the possibility of injury to obama is one of the reasons to stay in the race.
not the primary reason, but a reason.
it disturbs me if she is thinking of such an event as a rationale for staying in the race, even if she wouldn't intentionally make that rationale public.
May 23, 2008 5:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
If it was planned it is a terrible view into the type of calculating and amoral person she is. If it was a gaffe, it was truly a window into her soul ( she really can't believe she won't be president -- if Obama has to die so be it -- as long as it is in June!). Which would you prefer?
The point she was making was, "Why should I get out? Obama could be assasinated like RFK and then I'd be in. Remember, I'm IN IT TO WIN IT!
I just don't get it" When asked why people wanted this spectacle to be over. She is CLUELESS about people. That is why she would be a shitty president. Bush is clueless about people. I could go on, but you get my drift.
THE BRIGHT SIDE: No more Hillary for VEEP! If no one else, Michelle Obama will take care of that little detail!
May 23, 2008 8:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, come on people. It is time to stop looking for any reason to cut down Hillary.
She was simply making the point that RFK did not have the nomination secured yet that summer. She was using the assination event as a mark in time - an event we remember and can associate with June.
This kind of angry snipping and cutting down of honorable party leaders is why I will not want to identified as an Obama support (not wear Obama button, etc.). I will vote for him to save the Supreme Court but I can not identify with these terrible people and will not advertise it.
Wouldn't it be helpful to have Hillary and those of us who support her on Obama's side?
May 23, 2008 5:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
you could be right, tower - but even that point is illogical.
if obama doesn't have the nomination locked up, who cares what happened in june 1968? clinton would have a valid rationale to stay in, and no need to allude to the assassination of a past democratic nominee.
if obama HAS the nomination locked up, what difference does it make that RFK didn't have it locked up in june 1968?
and in the former situation, the superdelegates would be the reason that obama doesn't have it locked up. so how does alluding to the RFK assassination help her with the superdelegates?
May 23, 2008 6:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
RFK jumped in to the primary season late and was coming on strong. At the moment of RFK's death he was still trailing Humphrey by over 150 delegates. So I don't see a parallel here at all.
Parse it any way you want, she made an idiotic statement.
May 23, 2008 6:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wait, you dont see a parallel? Behind by 150 delegates and coming on strong??? Hint (behind by 172 and WV, KY, PA).
May 23, 2008 7:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, but there was still CALIFORNIA, which I suspect is slightly larger than Puerto Rico.
May 23, 2008 7:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Both of you need to learn your history.
RFK had just WON California when he was assassinated.
And Hillary does NOT have the same momentum that Bobby had in 1968. If you believe THAT, then you need to share whatever you're smoking with the rest of us.
May 23, 2008 8:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, but she faces the same uphill battle at the convention he would have faced had he lived. If you know history, you know that.
May 23, 2008 10:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
If it wasn't for you arrogant diehard d*ckheads, Hillary probably would have dropped out after Super Tuesday on February 5.
It was her "loyal" supporters who forced her to extend their delusions, now those of us who support Obama are to blame?
If not for you hard asses who couldn;t admit defeat, she would never have had to suffer this bullsh*t, I hope you are all proud of yoursleves.
Stop blaming everyone else for your willful and arrogant egomania.
Hillary got pushed to the edge by you people, as far as I'm concerned. If that makes you bitter enough to vote for McCain, go right ahead.
You can go vote for Donald Duck, as far as I'm concerned, we'll gather two new, young, enthused and excited voters for every one of you hardasses who pushed Hilary into this, maybe they can help fix the system you tore down by constantly justifying your new rules, and maybe this new generation will set their goalposts in stone, so there's no thought of moving them, and justifying it to win at any cost.
After what Hillary's been through, all you can say is "be nice to Hillary's supporters."
Maybe all of you need to search your own souls and see if there isn't some contritin still hiding there beneath the hubris.
It is YOU who should be thankful you still get to vote for someone like Obama, it should be YOUR priviledge to give it, not ours to earn it.
How arrogant, you all think it is a gift to us.
May 24, 2008 12:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
That last comment, especially the last esentence, was in response to this arrogant piece of horse manure from "Tower"...
"Wouldn't it be helpful to have Hillary and those of us who support her on Obama's side?"
Please, oh PLEASE, honor us with your vote.
What must we do to earn it, oh mighty one?
Like I just commented, YOU should feel fortunate you have someone like Obama to vote for.
You arrogant, self important egotist...
May 24, 2008 12:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Just a suggestion. Try not to comment when you've been drinking, man.
May 24, 2008 1:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't drink. I am stone cold sober. You egotists always want to pose your own self-willed arrogance as someone else's weakness, and that is what got Hillary into this mess in the first place.
May 24, 2008 1:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
I hope you can play better guitar than you can think man. Peace brother. Just chill out ok?
May 27, 2008 1:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Perhaps You-Know-Her had herself confused with Henry II and Barack Obama with St. Thomas Becket and really intended to say -- to no one in particular:
"Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?"
As the old saying goes: "If wishes were horses then beggars would ride."
May 23, 2008 6:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
>>>Wouldn't it be helpful to have Hillary and those of us who support her on Obama's side?
Of course it would Tower, but Sen. Clinton is making that very difficult. At best, her remark was a careless and insensitive gaffe. She has repeatedly said that her husband hadn't sewn up the nomination until June. The bring up the RFK assassination now seems really odd -- and unnecessary. Maybe she should just get some sleep.
May 23, 2008 6:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary has stepped over a line with her remark about Bobby Kennedy's assassination. Hillary supporters at taylor marsh have been fantasizing about her as Obama's veep so that she can gain her rightful place when he is assassinated. Or so I've heard since I don"t inhabit that sphere.
My AA friends were worried about assassination when Obama first started talking about running and they were against it because of their fear. I've heard he has received threats. For someone like me who remembers exactly where I was and what I was doing the day JFK was killed and who sat in front of the television through the dramatic mourning period and furneral it is inconceivable that any person in Hillary's position would talk of assassination as she did. The woman is toxic.
May 23, 2008 6:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
>>>Wouldn't it be helpful to have Hillary and those of us who support her on Obama's side?
Of course it would Tower, but Sen. Clinton is making that very difficult. At best, her remark was a careless and insensitive gaffe. She has repeatedly said that her husband hadn't sewn up the nomination until June. The bring up the RFK assassination now seems really odd -- and unnecessary. Maybe she should just get some sleep.
May 23, 2008 6:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
It was absolutely classless of her to bring it up around the time of Ted Kennedy's recent diagnosis. The same goes here about voting for Clinton if she were the nominee to save the supreme court and keep the women in my life safe from the wingnuts in power. We have to vote democrat no matter what for the sake of the country, but seriously...seriously, how f*cking inappropriate. I will give her the benefit that she was clearly on a rant and grabbing for examples, but I'm literally beside myself.
May 23, 2008 6:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
So Sen. Clinton wants everybody to accept it as a innocent misspeak, however ran Obama and "bittergate" into the ground in Pennsylvania? Is only Hillary allowed to misspeak? And just like Tuzla/Sniperfire, she's made this statement more than once and before Ted Kennedy's health scare.
May 23, 2008 6:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
well, i think i'm a troll. i have left some rather 'snarky' comments which get deleted rather quickly, so i must be. i didn't bother suggesting she was waiting for the vast right wing conspiracy to step up and take care of her problem, as i thought such a suggestion would have been dealt with similarly. now that she has asked them to, though, can i say, WTF?
May 23, 2008 6:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
She could have easily mentioned the 1984 Mondale/Hart primary that went into June to make her point.
You know, to me it doesn't matter what she meant. If she didn't know the impact that an RFK assassination reference would make right before the month he was assassinated, that is equally disturbing.
As she once said to Gen. Petraeus at a hearing on Iraq, It requires a suspension of disbelief.
May 23, 2008 6:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's probably better to point to the examples of divided Democratic conventions, though. 1968, divided convention, result: Humphrey lost. 1980, divided convention, result: Carter lost. 1984, divided convention, Mondale lost.
May 23, 2008 6:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not just before the month, but before the 40th anniversary.
And later this year, it'll be 45 years since JFK was assassinated.
May 23, 2008 6:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I support Obama. Sometimes I'm ashamed of other Obama supporters who can be as nasty to Hillary as the right wing is. Its disheartening.
May 23, 2008 6:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
(sigh)
Me too.
May 23, 2008 10:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
actually the right wing has been pretty nice to her as of late. As a matter of fact, she is just as helpful back.
May 24, 2008 10:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
"The geese will cackle, and then they'll stop."
Chekhov
May 23, 2008 7:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary's explanation does not let her off the hook. This is the same woman who beat Senator Obama over the head about the words, bitter, and cling.
There are some reports out there that this is not the first time that Hillary has mentioned the Robert Kennedy assassination.
Considering her string of Tuzla lies, then her "white Americans" remark, and now to have her bring up the Robert Kennedy assassination, and to then claim that she just did not realize how sensitive an issue it was, makes her unsuitable for to be on the ticket.
We can not have a VP who makes so many offensive remarks, and then always claims that she did not anticipate how they might be offensive. Some one who is that slipshod with words would cause an international incident every couple of weeks.
May 23, 2008 7:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Her political career is over. Not only will she not be President, but she can kiss being VP or Senate Majority Leader goodbye.
She just isn't qualified to hold either of those posts. And surely there must be someone in New York who can mount a credible campaign against her in the Democratic Primary in 2012.
At this point, a guy who solicits prostitutes would be preferable to someone who openly discusses the assassination of her political opponents.
May 23, 2008 7:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Its like making an ethnic slur MJ? What planet are you on? Why would anyone take offense with what she said unless you specifically wanted to take offense to it. Blathering about a non issue is something that you seem to be very good at M.J. Freakin grow up.
May 23, 2008 7:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
He never said that it was equal in offensiveness, and you either know it or are an idiot.
May 23, 2008 8:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary refers to a sad milestone in American political history. The fact the Bobby Kennedy was about to change the outcome of the Democratic primary in JUNE, yes JUNE and the Circle Jerk of Hatred (formerly known as TPM Comments) is now saying that she is openly calling for the assasination of her opponent.
Pick up a history book and then READ it.
Sheesh... And that means you MJ!
May 23, 2008 7:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Couldn't agree more.
May 23, 2008 7:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
In 1996, the Iowa caucus was held in February. Does that mean that Iowa shouldn't have been called for Obama until February?
May 23, 2008 8:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, 1992.
May 23, 2008 8:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think she feels pretty gut-awful about this. Because while unintentional, she realizes how reckless a thing it was to say.
She's a very intelligent woman.
May 23, 2008 10:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
You apologists are making her look pretty bad here, stumbling around for excuses when most reasonable people are just closing their mouths and dropping the subject.
Give it up, the more you protest, the worse it looks for Hillary, she's got enough to deal with without having people slobbering all over themselves to answer for her.
I would bet a big part of her exhaustion comes from having to keep up with all of you diehards and your lofty expectations.
She never would have had to suffer this kind of exhaustion and desperation if you people had been willing, like us Edwards supporters, to let her get out when it was obvious the numbers were impossible.
but you all just kept bitterly attacking Obama and urging Hillary to stay inthe race.
Cui bon from Hillary's persistence?
Your arrogant egoes. An those of her husband and the self-willed staffers surrounding her.
Now she's got a burden to carry that none of you seem willing to acknowledge, let alone bear. You just keep pushing your own willful agendas, as your egoes shrivel inside your shell of bravado.
May 24, 2008 12:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why would anyone take offense with what she said unless you specifically wanted to take offense to it.
no one is taking offense to what she said how could you even imply that people would take offense. And how could you imply that people would even think that she would ever say anything offensive.
just stick to the issues and the facts because that is what decided this campaign along time ago.
May 23, 2008 7:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
As someone who is old enough to remember exactly where I was when I heard that Bobby Kennedy had been shot, I find myself absolutely speechless. Hillary is a few years older than me, so she remembers too. I find absolutely no excuse for her statement. I am quite sure she knows that Obama has had threats, that the AA community is nervous about this-- as are many of the rest of us. I'm just apoplectic. And her statement that she apologizes "IF anyone has been offended" is totally insensitive and appalling.
It is time for the superdelegates to end this.
May 23, 2008 7:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I share your view and "disheartening" is the appropriate word. I was genuinely shocked when I heard her RFK reference live. However, after speaking with a Clinton supporter in my office, I was able to see how I'm predisposed to interpret her remarks as more than a date reference. I don't have much love for Clinton and I understand the negative reaction at Clinton's statement but seeing blog posters whose avatar, for example, compares Clinton to Hitler makes me only sicker. I hope this whole thing settles down.
May 23, 2008 7:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
That post was addressed to JohnW1141.
May 23, 2008 7:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I appreciate that post man.
May 23, 2008 7:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Someone tell Hillary that the California primary was held a long time ago, so her June excuse is more of her patented bullshit. She caught the virus from Turdblossom after she gave it a big wet kiss just a few days ago.
May 23, 2008 8:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oy, vey, Hillary. Is this another case of not knowing the rules? Not only did she ignore the rules for caucuses, but she can't even remember the primary schedule 12 years ago. I wish the press (or even TPM) would focus on her careless ignorance of the universe outside her own head.
May 23, 2008 8:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Her saying that the campaign was only clinched in the June California primaries is probably the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. If anything, that fact gives precedent to the notion that Clinton should drop out, as we're past the California primaries.
May 23, 2008 8:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary is like some reckless driver who knocks down a gas pump, causing gasoline to spill all around. "Hard working White Americans" is the gasoline. She then takes out the assassination match and strikes it.
She is a very dangerous firebug.
May 23, 2008 8:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Even is we are to accept her at her word that she was using Bill and Bobby as nothing more than historical reference to the dates in which they secured the nomination then Clintonites need to admit she was playing loose with the facts in order to benefit from peoples ignorance. She obviously wants people to believe primaries always started in January and that California's delegate count caused the candidates to "stick around" longer.
If she would mention the fact that while primaries have in the past extended into June that they didn't start until March and that candidates stuck around so long for California's high delegate count, but that since California has since moved up in the process that is no longer she would be giving people a full picture - of course then she would lose her footing for her argument.
May 23, 2008 8:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's 3am...and Hillary is showing her true colors...
May 23, 2008 8:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Someone posted this on the CBS news site...it would be a lot funnier if it wasn't so true....
"I''''m staying in the race and you should support me because everyone knows someone is going to take out the black man. I''''m Hillary Clinton and I approves this message."
May 23, 2008 8:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Enough is enough. I'm inclined to ascribe some malevolence to this gaffe. But even giving her every benefit of the doubt, HRC is rapidly becoming an embarrassment. On June 3, she needs to find the nearest sunset and walk straight into it.
May 23, 2008 9:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rosenberg, you said it yourself on May 21st, and I quote MJ Rosenberg:
"Barring accident (God knows this is a violent country so that caveat is always in order), the Democratic party is going to nominate a black man for President of the United States."-MJ Rosenberg
What kind of accident were you thinking of as representative of America being a violent country? Not only are you a kingmaker, but Hillary reads your posts!
May 23, 2008 9:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did he really write that? And he's whipping the crowd into a frenzy tonight? Give it a rest, MJ. You're hysterical.
May 23, 2008 10:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's the ideal or pragmatic calm and collected response you imagine people should have to Clinton's remarks?
May 23, 2008 10:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd like to know what Ted Kennedy has to say. If I worked for TPM, I'd be trying to get a statement from Kennedy. Failing that, I'd be asking what she has to gain by arguing that she should stay in because Obama might get killed? As I said upthread, there is nothing in it for her to make that argument. Finally, I'd notice the way the people she was talking to reacted to the remark. Are they less sensitive than MJ and the other Hillary haters here, or just more objective?
May 23, 2008 10:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I'd be trying to get a statement from Kennedy..."
Oh, how thoughtful!
Like I said, when you egotists think you have a big idea, matters like Ted's own health problems just don't enter your self-willed psyche.
Hey, lets wake him up and ask him what he thinks about this!
May 24, 2008 1:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
MJ is not the Hillary campaign. He was simply stating the fear that many of us felt when Obama surged ahead. I remember 1968. Today I feel an attachment to Obama that I have not felt since RFK. I, and many others who share my experience, have felt the same fear for Obama. Hillary is the last person on earth who should be joining us in this anxiety. Why? Because that is her only hope to win the nomination. No we are not hysterical. If Hillary is pinning her campaign on that horrible possibility, and talking about it publicly, then she deserves to be loathed and rejected.
May 23, 2008 10:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
But, you see, the truth is she's not. I have a lot of hard bark on me, but I am truly saddened to hear you talk about Obama getting hurt as a "hope" for Hillary Clinton or about her "pinning her campaign" on something happening to Obama. MJ should be ashamed for inflaming your emotions and increasing your anxiety. Try to remember that propaganda is his occupation. He's had a lot of experience doing this kind of thing. Let's see what Teddy says.
May 23, 2008 11:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
My reaction to Hillary's statement was exactly the same as MJs. He did not inflame my feelings, he simply expressed them. That is what good writers do.
May 23, 2008 11:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
The conclusions that the Obama supporters are drawing are sick.
Clinton does not mention Obama in any way. Does not allude to Obama in any way. All she does is talk about how she is going to keep up until the end, and cites Bill Clinton and RFK as examples of people who kept going into June. The Obama supporters hear "assassination" and a lightbulb (or something) goes off in their heads that Hillary MUST have been talking about the possibility that Obama could be assassinated! Because Obama is the only candidate in this race that could be assassinated! Because Obama is the only historical candidate in this race and has so much opposition to him, unlike Clinton!
Then they go a step further and decide that not only is Clinton hinting that this could happen, but she is sending code to any American whackjob out there who wants to take the first shot at him! Because she mentioned it once before, see? In the same context! And sure, that could be interpreted as a sign that she was willing to go to the end back then, as well as now, but why go with a reasonable interpretation? She was sending a code! Because the Clintons never, EVER do anything by accident! She wants Obama dead!
I don't usually write with so many explanation points, but rarely am I so angry. There have been controversies before this, where both sides have accused each other of ridiculous things, but this accusation that Clinton wants Obama to be assassinated is sick. It is absolutely sick. The fact that there are Democrats who actually believe it makes me ashamed to be a Democrat.
May 23, 2008 11:02 PM | Reply | Permalink