What disturbs me the most about her statement was that her main point was completely wrong. She cited examples of when the nomination process has lasted until June by noting Bill's June win in California in 1992 and Robert Kennedy's June win in California in 1968.

This, in her thinking, proves that it is not unusual for a primary contest to last until June. What it really proves is that she is either incapable of learning from history or delusional about the lack of logic in her argument. Maybe both.

The year is now 2008, and things were changed this year. The California Primary was in February, and many other state primaries were moved up in the calendar as well. There is no big group of delegates waiting to be decided until June. This year is different from those in the examples she cited.

None of this should have to be explained to Hillary, but she seems to have missed this important point. She disproved her own argument for extending her campaign.

A reference to assassination, with or without any other intention, was shows a grave lack of judgement at the very least.
But what disturbs me the most about her statements was that her main point is completely wrong.  Whe cited examples of when the nomination process las