May 24, 2008
Will Clinton's RFK Comments Sink Her Campaign?
Presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton's remarks recalling Robert F. Kennedy's June 1968 assassination (as well as her husband's June 1992 California primary win), as why she was staying in the race, have caused an uproar. However, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a Clinton supporter, said, "I've heard her make this reference before... I understand that the atmosphere is supercharged right now but I think it's a mistake for people to take offense."
Yes, Clinton did make the remark in a March interview with Time's Richard Stengel:
Time: One group that probably ultimately wouldn't want it to go on too long is the Democratic Party itself. Can you envision a point at which — if the race stays this close — and with the difficulties that everyone has analyzed in accumulating enough delegates to get any distance ahead where party elders would step in and say "Senators Clinton and Obama, this is now hurting the party and whoever will be the nominee in the fall. We need to figure this out."In one of his "Special Comment" segments last night, Keith Olbermann, though, said the media failed by not calling Clinton out when she made the remark in March, saying it was dry in print. But yesterday's mention occurred during a live webcast of Clinton's meeting with South Dakota newspaper Argus Leader's editorial board. The NY Post's reporters were watching the feed and quickly put up a story.Clinton: No I really can't. I think people have short memories. Primary contests used to last a lot longer. We all remember the great tragedy of Bobby Kennedy being assassinated in June in L.A. My husband didn't wrap up the nomination in 1992 until June, also in California. Having a primary contest go through June is nothing particularly unusual. We will see how it unfolds as we go forward over the next three to four months.
Obama's campaign tersely criticized the statement and Clinton's campaign first said the comments were just references, but then Clinton herself issued a statement apologizing for the statement. The Daily News told the Reverend Al Sharpton about her remarks and he said, "She said what?...The danger of her staying in is that she keeps making statements that do serious harm to the party and, increasingly, irreparable harm to her and her legacy."
Today, the Washington Post's Libby Copeland writes in an essay, "Smart candidates don't invoke the possibility of their opponents being killed. This seems so obvious it shouldn't need to be said, but apparently, it needs to be said."
| 
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
email this
add to facebook
add to del.icio.us
No. This comment makes little difference. It's possible that she was misinterpreted. Either way, her campaign was over a while ago.
This looks more like a dig at the Kennedys for leaving her at the altar. Kind of vicious considering recent news concerning Ted, but hey, I'm cynical.
The Obama campaign owes Sen. Clinton an apology for trying to sabotage her campaign.
"Obama spokesman Bill Burton said Clinton's comment was 'unfortunate' and 'has no place in this campaign.'" This comment showed Burton's ruthlessness and his lack of integrity.
It was scurrilous for Burton to pervert the comment into a meaning that clearly was never intended by Sen. Clinton. It was vile demagoguery for Burton to seek to inflame people's passion against Sen. Clinton with a malicious attack and misrepresentation on her.
the objective in the circus freakshow, aka: the campaign, is to spout a lot of damn nonsense hoping some of it will make the news.
so Sen.Clinton was successful in helping her campaign to get in news.
the larger picture is this not going help her.
she's been a miserable failure as a senator. october 2003, she votes for funding the illegal war in iraq.
well, history only gives one chance and that was hers and she blew it.
shes not getting another chance.
Who cares anymore? she's not going to get the delegates to win. Obama won't get enough delegates to win. It's just gonna be a win by attrition by Obama. I think she's doing a favor to Obama by staying in the race so he remains relevant cause all the hipsters seems to hate her ass. All the liberal papers hate her and all the conservatives hate her. Once she drops out you are going to see so many conservatives beat the shit out of Obama he's going to see stars. She's actually protecting and insulating Obama from that at this point.
She was clearly trying to invoke a historical example to make a point, but it doesn't matter because she's already done. It's also silly, I think, because if anything did happen to Obama, she would clearly be his successor as nominee whether she's technically still a candidate or not. The lady got nearly half the votes, after all.
Also, good for RFK, Jr., for staying above the fray.
It was a poor choice of words. So poor that I think she knew exactly what she was doing at the time.
It was a suggestive remark that can very well be interpreted as "I should be the nominee because my opponent will be assassinated" and that interpretation is exactly what I believe she wanted.
Her number one goal has been to cast doubt on Obama's ability to be president. The idea that he might be shot by people like babyhitler is exactly what she wants us to think.
Paraphrase: "I have to stay in the race because some crazy person [do it] might kill this black man [do it, happens all the time], who sounds like an American-hating Arab [do it, do it, freedom, terror] and I'll have to fill his shoes [Oliver Stone project]."
is it in any way possible she was just pointing out that Kennedy was STILL ALIVE in June, actively campaigning? Maybe that's how she should have put it: Well, Kennedy was still alive in June just before he got shot.
That would have sounded better, right? Ummm.
You know what's sad? If Obama hadn't entered the race, I would have been all for Hillary. All my friends who support Obama felt that way too -- as soon as she announced she was running, we were all for her. Then she opened her mouth! And then, of course, Obama showed himself to be a much more interesting human being, while she showed herself to be some kind of female Sinclair Lewis character.
It doesn't matter anyway because the Repubs will just hot wire the polling machines and steal the election as usual.
fuck this westchester soccer mom gross middle aged bitch haircutted annoying fake clinton lady acting like a jealous ex girlfriend. what an animal.
Cucarachita is exactly right. All she said was that RFK was still campaigning for the nomination in June when it all came to a very abrupt end, and she chose the assassination to mention because it was the most memorable moment. Does anyone remember what RFK was doing a week before? A month before? Nope. But people remember the moment he was shot. Clinton never once said that the same thing could happen to Obama. Bunch of jackasses putting words in her mouth. And I'm still pissed at Obama for not dismissing the comment as irrelevant. So much for him being a much bigger man.
Babyhitler, I actually agree with everything you said.
Also, LOL at Sharpton outrage. Pot...kettle.
I had been hoping she'd flame out so badly to ruin her position as Senator as well, but this is almost too sweet.
Thanks, Hil! Keep those gums flappin!
#7 -Matty, why are you still here? you've already shown your true colors. You don't have a platform to speak cause you've already broken down and anything you say is absolutely irrelevant.
She said similar stuff before. It's coming from somewhere deep within that overly competitive creature who's frustrated that she will never outperform her husband. Something inside her wishes that Obama were "assasinated", in some way, in June. But this bit of political wreckage needs to realize that it is her that's been done in, by her own mouth. She's self-immolating before our very eyes and all Obama has to do is shrug her off and get busy with the Republican Asshole Machine. She's like a cat that's partially run over in the street: she's wailing and she can't drag her still-alive self out of the way of traffic.
half dead cat metaphor is spot on
She's an egomaniac who needs to drop out, and this is only one of many nails in her political coffin.
The headline shoulda been "That's what she said?" though.
Even if Senator Clinton wasn't implying that there was still time for Obama to be assassinated, the comparison to prior elections is false. In the 1992 campaign, all meaningful competition dropped out by March 20th. In 1968, the primary started in March, two months after this one.
I don't understand how everybody doesn't see her comments as completely disingenuous. It seems Senator Clinton's supporters view this exact duplicity as the primary validation for her campaign. In other words, they view Senator Obama as too naive, and prefer someone who blatantly lies to them. It's just so cynical.
Oh, that's total BS. I defy anyone to point out where she said, "It happened to RFK. It can happen to Obama," or anything to that effect.
She is hoping that BO is murdered.... her being president should not, to her, be stopped for any reason. That is obvious to a 5 year old. Him getting killed is OK with her, if thats what it takes. She has forced the D party to take a hard look at itself since sadly it has been exposed as THE biggest bunch of racists on the planet. If the party does not re-tool and stop the phonies from running it into the ground it will fracture and end up in years of turmoil. Not good for the country.
Babyhitler says to Matty:
"You don't have a platform to speak cause you've already broken down and anything you say is absolutely irrelevant."
Babyhitler, you've done that and much worse. If this were a reality show I think you'd be the first to be voted off.
Cool is correct; she wasn't trying to imply that Obama would or should be killed; she was trying to hustle us (again) into thinking that her campaign still has a chance, by implying that the '92 and '68 races were structured similarly to this one.
Because she was trying so hard to fool the public on one level, she lost sight of how grotesque her example would appear.
She's not a murderous, racist monster, just utterly shameless.
#22 - ummm, unlike Matty the misogynist, I've never pretended to be anything other than a cold hearted bastard.
Cool and Virgil are correct. In fact, RFK was assassinated in June 5 AFTER winning the CA primary - and also AFTER having launched his campaign in MARCH. Further, at the time, the Party was split into a bunch of different camps, far more fractious than today's race with two candidates, I'd suspect. Moreover, there were three candidates at the time: McCarthy, RFK, and Hubert Humphrey (sitting VP).
As a side note, Humphrey (the winner) had a strategy that focused on the non-primary states - which is a core part of Obama's strategy and one whose results have been routinely dismissed by the Clinton campaign.
Also, as I've stated before, the fact of RFK's assassination had NO bearing on the duration of the race in '68. Part of the reason for the way the '68 race played out was the fact that Johnson entered and then withdrew (no pun intended), the party had different factions, represented by various candidates, and the nation/Party was divided at its core by the Vietnam War.
By the time of the Convention, there were still three fairly viable candidates. Think about it this way: the comparison would have been appropriate if we currently had a 3rd candidate who appealed to the so-called working-class whites separately from HRC's appeal to older white women and from Obama's appeal to younger college-educated people and blacks. You'd also have to erase Obama's appeal to whites and rewind the race to the time before HRC was getting wider support from the working-class whites in Southern states.
So, the point is that HRC's history example breaks down upon further analysis. Oh yeah, and does anyone remember there being a President Humphrey? No.
I haven't even addressed the factual inaccuracy of her statement about her husband's candidacy. There simply is no defense for this statement. Perhaps the furor is overblown by the media, but the criticism remains quite valid.