The more I have thought about Hillary's remark the clearer it is to me that she knows she will get the nomination ONLY if something terrible takes Obama out of the race. She has no scandal to use or she would have put it out there already therefore only a physical disaster befalling Obama would allow here to win. She has obviously allowed herself dark daydreams to avoid facing the failure of her campaign. Musing about RFK, another inspiring young candidate, has been just below the surface for weeks. Hillary is exhausted now and her natural restrains are diminished.

All of us allow ourselves innocent revenge fantasies. Who hasn't briefly imagined something bad happening to someone we are angry at? However, we seldom give voice to them unless we are with trusted acquaintances who realize it is only our frustration or anger speaking. They know we would never act on our impulses and in truth we would be horrified if something terrible did indeed happened to the object of our anger, but deep down we are searching for some way-anyway-- to make the person disappear from our lives.

Hillary's monumental failure was to not immediately offer a complete unqualified apology.

I do not know which offends me more Hillary's reference to Robert Kennedy's assassination or her non-apology.  "I regret IF  . . . .I in any way offended."
When you have made a deeply offensive remark no matter how innocently you say unequivocally:  I apology. My remark was inexcusable and cruel.
This is a character flaw of the deepest kind: the inability to accept blame and responsibility. The press should not offer any excuses for her.
She should not be president and after this should most certainly not be considered for Obama's VP.  There is no defense Hillary or her supporters can offer at this point.

But
Sen. Clinton is doing much more than this. She is embarking on a gambit that is
uncertain in its result and simply breathtaking in its cynicism.

Josh Marshall is referring in the above quote to Hillary’s new-found devotion to FL and MI voters’ rights. He concludes:

What she's doing is not securing her the nomination. Rather, she's gunning up a lot of her supporters to believe that the nomination was stolen from her -- a belief many won't soon abandon. And that on the basis of rationales and arguments there's every reason to think she doesn't even believe in.

One could also argue she is making this big push because she is now trying to force Obama to add her to the ticket. To do so would be absolutely contrary to the central theme of his campaign of change but if he denies her he will have to contend with an increasingly aroused and angry army of her supporters who believe he stole her rightful place.

Think about this for a moment. It is becoming clearer day by day that if Hillary is “denied” the nomination she lost by a poorly-run campaign she is willing to pit Democrat against Democrat. The only winner will be the Republicans.

We as a country have suffered eight years of division for political gain by the Republicans and now Hillary is contriving to offer us another four.  When he secures the nomination Obama will now have to watch his flank because of this insurgency Hillary is creating within the ranks of Democrats. Putting her on the ticket won’t cure it as that will only bring the insurgency within the walls of his White House. If he loses to McCain in the fall because of the refusal of Hillary's Army to support him Hillary will be responsible for the resulting decades-long conservative swing of the Supreme Court will take with McCain appointments.

Today Obama drew a crowd estimated to be 75,000. I watched his speech on CNN and they showed him standing in front of the river but they never pulled back to show the crowd or given any indication of how big it was. I wonder why? Would it seem to much of a contrast to the modest crowd Hillary drew?

blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/05/18/record_obama_crowd_the_size_of.html

Paul Begala wrote the following on the Huffingtonpost:

All this is to say George W. Bush is a hypocrite. So deep is his cynicism that he would go on foreign soil to invoke history's greatest crime to condemn conduct he himself has engaged in.

As an American I am ashamed that such a man represents me.

I say this as someone who has not supported Barack Obama in the Democratic primaries; someone who has reservations about Sen. Obama's plan to engage Iran in talks without any preconditions. But there comes a time when intra-party rivalries must yield, and all of us must stand together against the degradation of the Office of the Presidency.

huffingtonpost.com/paul-begala/bush-uses-holy-land-pulpi_b_101921.html

When Obama vigorously challenged the attack by President Bush Democrats across the board rose to stand by him--even Hillary without reservation. This is how Democrats need to and must act going forward. We must stop every smear, every swiftboat attempt that is directed at our nominee. 

 I have read at TPM and other sites that if Hillary is not the nominee some of her most devoted supporters will not only not vote for Obama but will actively work against him.  Intra-party rivalries must stop as soon as our nominee is chosen. We are about to face an onslaught that will be as vicious as it is desperate. Republicans are facing potentially hugh losses (three safe seats in special elections already) and they will not go down without employing every base tactic they can contrive. (If they are starting with Hitler analogies in May where will they be this fall?)

It made me proud to see Democrats  respond vigorously as one voice and ashamed of McCain that he crassly endorsed Bush's ignominy. The time to end intra-party is almost upon us.