« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Hillary Melt Down means no VP
It's official. SHE HAS LOST HER MIND!
Obama needs to cut her off and cut her now!
Ted Kennedy is fighting for his life and she has the lack of judgment to invoke RFK's assasination to make a political point-- a point which also injects the idea of killing a presidential nominee. Do not even attempt to spin this for me. It's not gonna work.
This is a melt down. Things are out of control at her campaign. I think with this remark, she's taken herself out of contention for VP. Not just because I'm angry, but because she's too out of control to ever be President.
Advertisement
Comments (379)
Agreed. It's time for the rubber room.
May 23, 2008 5:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama supporters, stay away from this one... let the fake Hillary supporters show the sincere Hillary supporters who they are, the provocatuers are the only ones who will touch it...
May 23, 2008 6:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
She's sick in the head. It's up to us to make sure she gets treatment.
May 23, 2008 6:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
But the Hillary supporters, real or fake, won't point out that this is the THIRD TIME she's brought up the RFK assassination in this fashion. It's just the first time she got any flack for it. So everyone should keep that in mind as she tries to spin her way out of it.
May 23, 2008 6:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
She skated around the edges before. This was the first time she directly invoked assassination as a possible reason for staying in the race.
In today's comment she invoked (1)Bill's campaign completing in June, and (2)the assassination in June. Are both reasons equal in in her eye? The first is somewhat logical, the second in indefensible and disgusting.
May 24, 2008 12:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is fascinating (if revolting) proof that people believe the TPM spin. You just used Greg Sargent's language verbatim.
"Invoke" is Greg Sargent's word, "a reason for staying in the race" is Greg Sargent's phrase.
Hillary didn't invoke anything. Invoke means "conjure." She spoke directly, matter-of-factly. Kennedy's assassination is not the "reason" she used to stay in the race.
There's that word "invoke" again. She didn't invoke anything. She didn't conjure Bill's campaign, she mentioned it directly.
There is nothing disgusting about what Hillary said. What's disgusting is TPM's spin and its gullible unthinking readers.
May 24, 2008 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
From the American Heritage Dictionary:
Invoke: To appeal to or cite in support or justification.
When asked about her reasoning to stay in the race she invoked (see definition above)
1. Bill's campaign ending in June
and
2. RFK's assissination in June.
There is no way these two events are equal except they both happened in June.
May 24, 2008 11:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, BTW your statement:
Directly? Matter of factly? Hmmmm...lets see
"People have been trying to push me out since Iowa"
Then asked if she buys the party unity argument as a reason, she said "I don't. Because again, I've been around long enough. You know, 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. You know, I just don't understand it. You know, there's lots of speculation about why it is. “
Yep pretty matter of fact to me.
May 24, 2008 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're right, mageduley. Congratulations. That's exactly why she mentioned Bill and Bobby in the same sentence. Duh.
I used Webster's, not American Heritage. Webster's is what the entire publishing industry uses, so I'm sticking with it rather than what some crazy blogger uses.
May 24, 2008 12:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Too Funny.
In the Webster link you provided it is interesting you used the second definition "conjure" rather than the first (and most common meaning (cite as authority)
From the Webster link you provided:
Main Entry: in·voke
Pronunciation: \in-ˈvōk\
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): in·voked; in·vok·ing
Etymology: Middle English envoken, from Middle French invoquer, from Latin invocare, from in- + vocare to call, from voc-, vox voice — more at voice
Date: 15th century
1 a: to petition for help or support b: to appeal to or cite as authority
2: to call forth by incantation : conjure
3: to make an earnest request for : solicit
4: to put into effect or operation : implement
You spin as well as Hillary. Congrats on your willful misrepresentation of your argument.
May 24, 2008 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
You watch Olbermann. You have no authority whatsoever.
May 24, 2008 12:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
A nice reply when no other reasonable argument is available.
May 24, 2008 12:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
You threw "nice" out the window some time ago.
May 24, 2008 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, not gullible here. Just angry and extremely upset by Clinton's comments. This is not the first time she's said this and it is just in plain "bad taste" - worse yet, it might actually fuel the fire of someone out there that is considering an option like this.
Comments like these just prove she is absolutely not "ready to be Commander-in-Chief on day one".
May 24, 2008 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
There's nothing to be upset or angry about. You must have a very active fantasy life.
May 24, 2008 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary crossed a line yesterday, and it will have its greatest impact on her "base," older boomers. Those who lived through the sixties will not be able to see Hillary's comments as just another "gaffe." And many influential superdelegates fall into this demographic.
My take is straightforward,
“It’s Over: Clinton Won’t be the Democratic Presidential or VP Candidate (and Boomers will make sure)”
http://msa4.wordpress.com/
May 24, 2008 3:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not sure what you mean.
Do you think I don't support Obama?
May 23, 2008 6:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sup, girl? I'd like to think she was thinking Bobby would have won if he hadn't been assassinated in June. Teddy's cancer makes me feel worse than I could ever have imagined. All of the times I've been angry with him, I guess I never really thought he could die.
May 23, 2008 6:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, Billy. "Wassup" is I been pretty down lately, too.
You're right, Teddy's illness is a huge blow. I can't imagine what he and his family are going through. And it makes her remarks all the more insane.
My reaction to this is purely visceral and from the gut. I had to have my final say here. I wish you and all the Hillary supporters well. But it's time to give this guy his chance and see what he can do.
I think Obama has what it takes to be a great President and make an historic contribution.
May 23, 2008 7:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
One more thing:
Kind of odd that you and Desi are my peeps on this site, don't you think? The two big Clinton supporters. I can't help liking you guys because in many ways you two are the sweetest people on this site.
May 23, 2008 7:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I know Des is. But you'll get a lot of arguments about me. This campaign has been going on too long. I'm with you. Time to move on to November. Teddy's only about 10 years older than I am. Way too soon.
May 23, 2008 7:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Billy, hard as you may try, you can't fool me.
May 23, 2008 8:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
GFTB, I must say the folks around here have been pretty hard on Mr. Glad. I think that's what he's refering to.
As for Clintons remark, it was a basic historical comparison that she made before Kennedy got ill, as well. It just sounds disrespectful at this time. A gaffe, but not a malicious one. I'm sure of it.
I agree with you about Senator Ted. This is horrible. We need him. He's a fighter, a tiger, right?
Let's all think good thoughts.
May 23, 2008 8:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey Bee,
About Billy.. let's face it, the people who are so hard on him can't live without him.
May 23, 2008 8:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, I hope he sees it that way, too.
:D
May 23, 2008 8:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll second that. He has a razor sharp wit and he's the guy I love to hate. He brings something real to the table in his opposition and breaks up the group think around here that I'm clearly guilty of at times.
May 24, 2008 10:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Think how I feel, Bee. I was joking about him getting drunk and falling down. You know what I think about when I think about Teddy? Sitting there watching CSPAN just waiting for Teddy's turn to come to go after the Republican bastards. We would sit there and say okay Teddy is next you lying bastards!
May 23, 2008 9:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
No one knew, Billy. Don't beat yourself up. We were all hoping it wasn't anything serious.
I guess that's why I blew a gasket at some of the disrespect I saw there. You weren't one that was being disrespectful. Not at all.
May 23, 2008 9:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, I don't believe that is what she was referring to, she was referring to the floor fight at the 68 convention which would have been a floor fight between Kennedy, McCarthy and Humphrey.
May 23, 2008 7:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, and if RFK were alive, who do you think he'd be supporting?
May 23, 2008 8:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know who he would be supporting and neither does anyone else.
May 23, 2008 8:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd guess Teddy might have a good idea.
May 23, 2008 8:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama. But the ironic thing is Clinton is probably thinking of herself as the RFK of this campaign right now. Bobby would have gone into the convention facing a huge delegate deficit. Humphrey didn't even campaign in the primaries, but built a huge delegate lead through caucuses and state conventions controlled by bosses like Richard Daley. I do think reactions to her comments by Obama supporters might persuade her not to fight at the convention. There is just too much bitterness on both sides now.
May 23, 2008 8:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can't discuss the convention with you, because I don't know enough about it. But I do think we've all hit some kind of collective boiling point.
Now Billy, you know I will shunned many in the TPM community for using a foreign language, but the perfect words for me are in German are -- "Wir sind alle fix und fertig!
May 23, 2008 9:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Very appropriate. My favorite now is: Ich kann nicht mehr! If I remember it right. Saw it on a poster of Munch's The Scream on a tram in Frankfurt a long time ago.
http://www.ivcc.edu/rambo/eng1001/CopyofMunchScream.jpg
May 23, 2008 9:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Appropriate. My favorite now is: "Ich kann nicht mehr!" Saw it on a poster on a tram in Frankfurt a long time ago.
http://www.ivcc.edu/rambo/eng1001/CopyofMunchScream.jpg
May 23, 2008 9:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's hysterical! Thanks for the sending the link. Even though I know the painting, actually looking at it with the text was perfect. I always liked Frankfurt, even though it's not regarded as one of Germany's more beautiful cities. I think I liked the cosmopolitan flavor, being a New Yorker. There was a great American dancer/choreographer named Billy Forsythe who worked there.
May 23, 2008 10:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Billy, another one more thing. After today, I'm taking a rest from TPM for a while, so if you see Desi, tell him I said, "Hasta luego." Take care,Billy Glad.
May 24, 2008 11:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hola, chica - you can drop by e-stuffus.blogspot.com - I understand wanting to take a break. I'm torn between commenting today and letting Billy do all the heavy lifting. I was going to mention your "Obama is the first black Kennedy" as perhaps the most insightful of this campaign - tying in with Billy's myth, perhaps the person/sentiment RFK invoked in his eulogy for MLK. Too distracted to write anything intelligent, glad German is taking off as TPM's 2nd language. Polyglotsville 'R Us. Hasta la bye-bye.
May 24, 2008 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Desi,
Mi respuesta está abajo.
May 24, 2008 3:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, yes you can.
May 24, 2008 6:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's why Clinton is comparing herself to RFK - she has the popular vote but not the delegates.
May 23, 2008 9:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah. On Planet 12.
Got to love Hillarymath. So, popular vote = all the caucus states I don't like and I get to keep Michigan votes, but Obama doesn't because his name's not on the ballot, and never mind that we all agreed those votes don't count and nobody campaigned there so the vote was a "whose name do you recognize" contest anyway that early in the campaign anyway... .
Yeah. That math. That popular vote. The popular vote that no single vote counting analyst or pundit or politician or... mathematician... that does not work for the HRC campaign agrees with.
Sincerely,
55 year old hard working beer drinking latte-hating, white average American male Obama supporting Michigan resident.
May 24, 2008 12:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton was COMPARING HERSELF TO RFK? Oh, give me a break!
Please don't pull stuff out of your ass. It doesn't smell very good.
May 24, 2008 8:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
I find this lack of current history amazing. Wasn't she the inevitable candidate? Didn't she have a superdelegate lineup before the primaries even started? Didn't she have a boatload of rich donors and even more powerful "backroom friends"?
Then along comes this guy, basically unknown to anyone outside Illinois, with a funny name, no big Democratic party contacts who is now running a winning campaign while she is debt ridden?
How again is she like RFK the underdog? To use Hillary's words "I just don't understand it".
May 24, 2008 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, she wasn't the "inevitable candidate" in fact, the press from the very beginning we're commenting on Obama's overtaking her lead. Unfortunately, the press conveniently forgets what they said when they decide to move to a new narrative.
May 24, 2008 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I beg to differ. From Hillary's own lips before the IA caucus:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnEqZEh2eNo
I find her statement in this vid that she started in single digits amazing.
This Real Clear Politics graph shows her starting pol numbers in the 37% vs Obama's 17%.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/democratic_presidential_nomination-191.html
May 24, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sicko.
May 23, 2008 6:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
No VP FOR YOU!!!!! http://i29.tinypic.com/34gxdw4.jpg
May 23, 2008 6:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
As far as I'm concerned, there's no spin possible on this one. It was undignified, it was desparate. She is unhinged and has lost her moral compass.
It's over.
I've held out for a month now thinking she might even be a possibility for VP.
But I'm done now and I think she is too!
May 23, 2008 6:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're entirely right. Maybe this will help people understand why Obama won't take her, which I'm certain was already the case.
May 23, 2008 7:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
A-man, my husband has been trying to convince me to support Hillary as VP for a month. He actually had convinced me for a couple of days. But after tonight, I think finally, he'll will "understand why Obama won't take her."
May 23, 2008 8:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
gftb, please see my forlorn comment below.
May 24, 2008 12:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
If Obama had said something as bad I would be forlorn too. I thought that was what your comment would be, but I see it is otherwise. Blaming the "Obama Camp" for misinterpreting what Clinton said is par for the course. Can you not step back and think for a moment about how an objective person might take that comment?
I didn't think so.
May 24, 2008 8:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's people like you, CVille Dem, who depress the shit out of me. Hillary is just fine in my book.
May 24, 2008 10:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
I know she is fine with you. I find that depressing.
May 24, 2008 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
That thought cheers me. Thanks.
May 24, 2008 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bipolar, then, huh? You'll feel better in November when Obama wins and you know that your phsyciatric care will finally be covered.
May 24, 2008 2:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama's plan won't cover me. But he's not going to beat McCain in November anyway, so it really doesn't matter whether it would or not.
May 24, 2008 5:17 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 7:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good point. Also, Rabbitsmorg makes a good point that she said it several times before Teddy got sick. Shes smart, she knows what negative connotations hold for things like RFK, good grief she has 35 years of experience politicking to not gaffe. Not just a date reference, a disturbing insight into her mind.
May 23, 2008 8:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sadly, it is Obama supporters who are in meltdown. It's as if the 68 convention never happened. It went to a floor fight - McCarthy had the popular vote, Humphrey who had avoided primaries had the bosses' vote. If Kennedy had lived it would have been a three way floor fight between McCarthy, Kennedy and Humphrey, instead of McCarthy, McGovern and Humphrey. If the stupid reporters and pundits don't understand her reference it is because they're either too lazy to research it or they do know and are deliberately misunderstanding the comment.
May 23, 2008 7:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Spin, spin, spin...
May 23, 2008 8:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know, I am not spinning anything, I have no reason to spin anything - the comment makes sense if you understand the reference to the 68 convention and it doesn't make sense as a call to assassinate Barack Obama - that is just plain silly. Now if people want to act like paranoid fruitcakes I can't stop them, but I am not going to encourage this kind of stupidity.
May 23, 2008 8:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
So what you think is that she just used bad judgement.
May 23, 2008 9:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, what I really think is that people who believe this are gullible, spinnable rubes who want to believe it. It is tinfoil hat territory, it is insane to think she was calling for Obama's assassination, it is nuts to think she's deliberately calling for his killing, it is crazy talk. That is what I really think about this.
I can't believe that intelligent, rational, sentient human beings would truly think that Clinton is trying to trigger Manchurian candidates to kill Obama, or hopes that Obama is killed or anything so insanely stupid.
May 23, 2008 10:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I haven't heard anyone infer that she was "calling for Obama's assassination." No one! Remember, this was in response to why people are suggesting that she drop out. I took it to mean that anything can happen; RKF was assassinated in June -- if something like that happened she would be around to pick up the pieces.
To me it was just a huge Freudian slip. But the kind that shows a nasty soul beneath.
May 24, 2008 9:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Read the thread and other blog entries. It's embarrassing.
May 24, 2008 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Didn't I see you on another thread lecturing people about not calling names and being insulting? Asking for civil discourse? Of course, when you are flinging crap for me, Ms. Pantsuit, I think it's just fine!
May 24, 2008 9:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
That was for Bev.
May 24, 2008 9:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
No.
May 24, 2008 12:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, but why submit '68 -- assassination aside -- as a good reason for sticking it out till June? That doesn't make much sense either. She was trying to make a point but it exploded in spectacular fashion.
I think her focus was on June, she was thinking of June, and perhaps has been thinking of RFK and '68 in recent days due to Teddy's diagnosis, and then while fatigued she opened her mouth and something stupid came out. I think we've all been there, where our interior monologue is racing and we just utterly fail to articulate what we mean to and are left a bit embarassed afterward.
She's made a mistake. The pundits and reporters know what she intended to say, but they will love raking her over the coals for the gaffe that occurred instead.
May 23, 2008 9:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Watch the interview, not the pundits. Then think for yourself.
May 24, 2008 12:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's fodder for pundits to seize upon. That's mistake enough, no?
May 24, 2008 3:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Fodder? She didn't say anything wrong.
May 24, 2008 10:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Now you are just being obtuse. The object in political speach is to speak so that one cannot be misubnderstood. Sen Clinton missed that mark by a mile.
May 24, 2008 5:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm obtuse? She was talking to 5 people. They understood her, why can't you?
May 24, 2008 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
You missed My Point. She spoke so that she could be understood. In politics that is not the standard that one must meet. One must speak so that one cannot be misunderstood. She failed.
May 26, 2008 1:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree that she might not have said it if she were at the top of her form. I also know that (based on the way she beats Obama over the head with anything he says that can be used against him) she would be out there doing a "Shame on YOU, Barack Obama" all over again.
At least Obama has the good sense to stay out of it. Hillary hasn't. He talked about bitter voters and she called him "elitist." etc etc etc
It's KARMA
May 24, 2008 9:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
Right. That's what "it" is: karma.
May 24, 2008 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Because of the parallels to the 68 convention - her situation and Kennedy's situation are similar - both are going into a convention where one candidate claims the popular votes and one claims the lead on delegate votes, the convention went to a floor fight as all conventions should.
May 24, 2008 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama leads in popular vote AND delegates. But facts mean nothing to Hillbots.
May 24, 2008 8:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thats a hanging curveball BevD, failed spin.
May 23, 2008 8:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, what's stupid and dangerous is playing this kind of spin to the rubes nonsense, instead of stopping it at the beginning. Clinton wasn't calling for Obama's assassination and every sentient being knows that.
I have had endless discussions about the 68 convention and its parallels to this convention, about floor fights, about balloting, about the rules of balloting and how it applies to the 68, 80 and 08 conventions. Clinton's mistake was in thinking that people who cover politics would get the reference - of course they wouldn't. Most of them don't remember the 2004 convention. We don't want our politicians to treat as dumbasses, and yet when they do make erudite references no one "understands" them. Of course when it comes to Clinton, it's always Cider House Rules around here.
May 23, 2008 8:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is just nothing in it for her to use the assassination as a reason to stay in the race. Staying in the race or not staying in the race doesn't change her situation one way or the other in the event of something happening to Obama. But if everyone who supports Obama is as full of mistrust for her as the people who believe she would bring up RFK's death instead of his fight for the nomination as a reason to stay in the race, she needs to walk away from this and let Obama go on to the campaign against McCain.
May 23, 2008 9:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I swear I didn't think a Unity Ticket was possible for a long time, but now I'm actually hoping for one. Obama-Clinton. Because I want all the snotty Obama supporters and snotty Clinton supporters to SUFFER. ha ha ha!
May 23, 2008 10:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I like you, Joe Perez! Very funny. Thanks! ;-)
May 24, 2008 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Billy, the reference wasn't to the assassination, the reference was to the 68 convention/election cycle. This is group insanity.
May 23, 2008 10:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
IF the reference was not to the assassination then why did she use the word assassinated?
May 23, 2008 11:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Because she was giving the signal to the Manchurian candidate to trigger his mission.
May 23, 2008 11:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excelent non-answer.
May 23, 2008 11:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Larry, I have answered this question several times. Perhaps if she had said, "God called Bobby home in June" it might have passed the rube test and the self righteously obtuse who can't seem to get their minds out of the conspiracy gutter.
May 23, 2008 11:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am not making some conspiracy argunment and have not seen one (though I admit to not reading every post and comment on the internet). She was clearly refering to the assassination because she refered to it using that word. She was talking about contests lasting well into June but she did so by referencing the RFK assassination. That is what we call an amazingly stupid gaffe. It is only one of a long line of gaffes. She is worse than Biden or Kerry at going off message and distracting from her own candidacy. It has lost her the nomination and today it lost her the VP slot if she ever had a chance at it.
May 23, 2008 11:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please see my comment below. I watched the whole interview live, and one of my links has the interview. Watch it. It's like taking Rev. Wright out of context.
May 24, 2008 12:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
It is like taking Rev Wrigh out of context if Rev Wright were running for office. He is not. She is. She is also reported to be a political genius. This is an incredibly stupid thing to say regardless of what point she was or was not trying to make. Not because it is evil but becase it is political suicide. Watch the Sunday shows. This will be the number one topic. No one from the Obama campaign will touch this one with a ten foot pole because they are politicaly astute enough to let her alone when she is in the midst of self destructing.
If it were Obama's Gaffe she would be piling on trying to get a dig in about it and inadvertently kill the story for him because, as we have seen throughout this campaign, she is a political doofus who cannot be nice even when it is in her own selfish best interest.
May 24, 2008 12:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well said Larry, I wish I'd articulated that myself.
Maybe the fleeting references before were excusable. But after Ted's illness hit the headlines, her people or Bill or her own "political genius" should've told her not to mention Kennedys anymore this election, except to wish Ted well.
The Kennedys have given more than any family should have to for this country and the Democratic party.
When Teddy Kennedy has a seizure and it turns out to be inoperable, malignant brain cancer, we're only reminded of their many, many other tragedies.
Remember that the Kennedys support Obama.
So soon after we learn about Teddy, HRC should have the class, the decency, and the diplomacy to know not to mention any Kennedy tragedy in any context - other than, perhaps, sincere condolence.
She referenced this tragedy, instead, to make a political argument about primary races going on for a long time - a self-serving argument to stay in the race. Even granting BevD's kindest & most generous spin, the comment is still:
1. bad timing due to Teddy's illness
2. terribly insensitive
3. more publicity on the Kennedy Curse at the worst time, when I'm sure they're in need of privacy
4. politically stupid
No matter how you spin it, HRC sti