Ok, Enough With the Hysteria About Clinton's Kennedy Statement

Ok, based on Hilary's mention yesterdaythat RFK was still campaigning in June when he was assassinated, I'm hearing reasoning that Clinton is staying in because if Obama gets assassinated, then she'll get the job.

Enough. Does no one think these things through for two seconds before setting fingers to keyboard?

So follow with me down the following logic chain. Clinton drops out this very second and does not release her delegates. Obama is assassinated before the convention. Who has the most nominees? Who is most likely to get the nod?

It is, in fact, damn near unthinkable that Clinton would not get the nomination in that case. Hilary Clinton does not need to stay in the nomination race in order to be the nominee if someone assassinates Obama.

The level of near hysteria, of complete unwillingness to read Clinton's words in any context with any good will that is sweeping large portions of the blogosphere is tiresome. Clinton has used the exact same examples in the past, and no one has objected.

If you don't believe me, believe Robert Kennedy Jr., who said:

It is clear from the context that Hillary was invoking a familiar political circumstance in order to support her decision to stay in the race through June. I have heard her make this reference before, also citing her husband's 1992 race, both of which were hard fought through June. I understand how highly charged the atmosphere is, but I think it is a mistake for people to take offense.

Turns out Hillary was wrong about her own husband, amusingly, but the point remains that all she was doing is saying "races have gone this long before."

Comments

[blackfrost]

It's not hysteria. Pay attention to what she says. It starts off all right and then it meanders into"where in the world is she going with this" assasination dialog. It's not a complete thought. It's just thrown out for no apparent reason at all. If she wanted to make a case for running into June there are other examples she could have used. Why keep going to this.... and she has done this over and over>

[scottarino]

It's phoney outrage in a political race. End of story.

[NoSpinTruthZone]

Wah negative nancy. You ignore 20 years, but spin this like there's actually something there.

Grow up net troll

[snowhusseincat]

bad writing.

def of hysteria:

1. an uncontrollable outburst of emotion or fear, often characterized by irrationality, laughter, weeping, etc.
2. Psychoanalysis. a psychoneurotic disorder characterized by violent emotional outbreaks, disturbances of sensory and motor functions, and various abnormal effects due to autosuggestion.

not happening but a popular and common clintonista type ( hysterical)response to any disagreement with their collective opinion.

[tressie22]

basically. i can forgive people for disagreeing, but to do so dismissively and using poor word choice is a bit unforgiveable. Is there anything of merit on which a non Hillary supporter CAN disagree with Hillary on without being attacked? Just asking, because I'm happy to adopt that position should someone from the other side provide it for me. That way I can have my own intelligently formed opinion AND not have to deal with the HILL stalkers.

[charley0008]

I am a staunch Obama supporter and I agree, we need to just let this go, don't add to the talking heads out there. I am more inclined to agree with Sen. Obama's take on this, everyone is tired, less guarded and sometimes unthinking in what they say, but that does not mean it had some deeper and darker, hidden meaning. I watched the entire tape and I am prepared to give Hillary the benefit of the doubt on this one. Having said that however, I understand that there are many who fear for Obama, it has crossed my own mind, but we should not project our fear onto a careless comment by Hillary. That does not help our candidate or our party .
However, using her husbands purported finish in June is pure Clinton malarkey, he was the presumptive nominee in March further more, the race started a month later than this race.

[mitaka]

Obama is being gracious. I don't think he really means it when he gives Hillary the benefit of the doubt. She said the same thing on at least three different occasions over a period of 5 months, for God's sake. How can this be the result of being tired? If she is perpetually tired, then she has no right to run 3am ads for sure.

[graffen48]

"everyone is tired, less guarded and sometimes unthinking in what they say,"

The problem is she has said this before, in Time Magazine, in March. This was not a "careless" comment, sorry, not this time. She's had too many passes on careless comments, being tired or whatever. I'm glad everyone is getting hysterical about this because sometimes politicians go too far.

[ZinZen]

Saying it three times is a pattern not a gaffe.

[NoSpinTruthZone]

I fear for Obama. I fear that if he becomes president we'll be paying 60% in taxes to supplement 40% of the population that's too lazy to work.
I'm fearful that we have a candidate who will talk to terrorists without any conditions, while simultaneously initiating aggressive military tactics in lands of our allies.
I'm fearful of the sincerity of someone who says they support civil rights, while voting away our civil liberties.

You should be afraid too....

[dagnew]

I could overlook the assination statement if she had only mentioned it once, but she referred to it at least three times. Same with being under sniper fire in Bosnia, she lied about it at least three times. There is a pattern here, and it's hard to just let it go.

[tbone99]

Then why the upset now?

[sethyeah]

No more Hillary appeasement. This has been out only one day and you call already it "tireseome." Perhaps you should step away from your computer for a few days.

[sfsj]

You have your opinion, some of us have another -- and the fact that she said this twice (first time in March to TIME mag), sells it to some of us as more of a tactic. If anything, it proves she's insensitive and thoughtless and not someone I'd want as President. Also, she apologized to the Kennedy's but not Barack! She's clearly not a nice person. And just as you have your right, so do millions of us who support Barack. She went over the edge! And in a week following the stupid and equally disturbing comments by Gov Huckabee (who seemed to have gotten a pass, much more so than Clinton -- although I think he should be completely called more on his comments).

If you support Barack like me, you probably heard her say "I'm qualified and John McCain is qualified -- and Barack Obama has ONE speech." That too evidenced her insensitivity and total disrespect for him and for those of us who support him. Sounds like she'll vote McCain this November. What do you all find appealing about her behavior? I guess it's that she can survive sniper fire and obliterate Iran (but not before obliterating our Dem Party first!).

In the meantime, why don't you show me a quote of him personally attacking her -- she's done so repeatedly about him.

[SignedSealedDelivered]

from hate to hope...see ya, hillary!

[DocThink]

Your logic trail has it's flaws. If Hillary dropped out, she very well may not be the one to get the nomination nod. It could be Obama's likely VP nominee (not likely to be HRC) or a true unity candidate who could bring us together in our grief, like Al Gore.

So, she is motivated to stay in because she isnt' the automatic "go-to." Frankly, I am mystified as to why she feels she should expose this repugnant strategy in public--but it's the only one she has left. I would have just kept quiet, if I were her. And I would apologize to the Obama family. But I am DEFINITELY not her.

[Sapphire9]

"And I would apologize to the Obama family."

Very good point. Defenders of her comment seem to think it's all good because Robert Kennedy, Jr. says he wasn't offended. If Hillary was capable of a heartfelt apology it should certainly include the Obamas and not the throw-away "I'm sorry if anyone was offended by my comments."

[DRaymond]

Frist of all, because this race has been unprecedented in how early it has started it has already been unprecedented in modern times as to its length. Her analysis of Bill's campaign is bogus because even though Jerry Brown had not dropped out until the California Primary Bill had been the presumptive candidate for many weeks before that.

Races have gone long, but statistically the party that picks its candidate first has an advantege in the general election.

The problem with Hillary isn't that she isn't dropping out but she is willing to suggest anything (not just hinting at assasination but also changing the rules, having superdelegates ignore the people's results, and winning based on state in which hers was the only name on the ballot.

Oh I can just imagine Hillary's 'concession' speech. "I must admit that there is no chance of winning and Obama has won, but I want you all to know that I am more than willing te serve the needs of the party in case, you know, something happens, you know like somebody kills him."

[dsbsh]

"Frist" of all: typo, freudian slip, or deliberate attempt to slip in a reference to the former Senate Majority Leader?

[Mdazes]

Question: Hillary why do you stay in the race?

Answer:
1. My husband wrap up a win in June
2.RFK was assassinated in June

Footnote:
1.I may wrap up a win in June
2.Obama could get assassinated

[CommittedDem]

Fantastic post! It is 100% accurate, but the people on this board will demonize you. Read the other comments for proof

[oommoore]

Maybe this is Hillarys way of uniting the party. If she were to just drop out, her supporters would likely be extremely upset given the uproar of sexism, being bullied, or for whatever reason. Maybe she wants to turn her supporters off bit by bit without them feeling they abandoned her to support the obvious nominee.

I say we should let her hang around for another week or two. She's already proven that she's a pro at shooting herself in the foot. By then, she may not have any supporters at all.

[America4Obama]

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/5/23/224630/771/5/521718

Please read this link. It is the best thing I have read so far on this topic. Amazing stuff.

[graffen48]

thanks, great link

[anothergreenbus]

Thank you for the tip. That post has to be the most eloquent and poignant statement on assassination-gate.

[tyrdofwaitin]

Sorry you didn't register my last post Mr. Welsh. Please allow me summarize: Apologies, rationalizations, minimization and WHITEwashing the truth is as old as humankind. It's a tempting ploy when what you've just witnessed is so horrendous that it's difficult to grasp. That's what happened yesterday, Mr. Welsh, when Hillary exploded with bile from the deepest recesses of her Id. She is what King Lear pined to be.

Mr. Welsh, you gain nothing by trying to metabolize Hillary's poison. If the sight and hearing of it is too gruesome, as it is for many of us, kindly remain still and say nothing. You needn't labor to put a band-aid on Hillary's open wound; she needs more than you can offer.

[Amminadab]

More hysterics.

[SeriousBlack]

No, insightful and eloquently stated points.

Unlike anything YOU ever post.

[thinkb4uleapII]

Thanks for this article, and your previous articles entitled: "Ok, Enough With the Hysteria About Rev. Wright" and "Ok, Enough With the Hysteria About Barack Obama's Bitter Comments". All three articles are shining examples of objectivity - if you know what I mean...

[StillIRise]

Thanks for your comments, which reflect my sentiments exactly. The hypocrisy is GLARING!

[CKieffer]

Bravo!

[Maury66]

excellent take....nicely done

[preemptivelove]

......."all she was doing is saying "races have gone this long before."

wrong. ALL she was doing is saying that it's only may, and anything can happen. she did not cite any races besides bill clinton's.....and then says "we all remember" bobby kennedy was assassinated in june. no other tight races or examples, of which there are many. she chose to cite bobby kennedy and his assassination. she uses, as a comparison for today's race, the last charismatic and hopeful candidate we've seen. it's chilling.

anyone who doesn't think this is the last straw with that slimebag of a politician needs to have their head examined......and their heart. there is NO context for her remarks, no excuse, no explanation. it was painfully clear exactly what she meant, and no amount of words will change that she said it, and said it on more than this one occasion.

[genia]

You sir are a fool. ..Or...you think your readers are .
This Bobby Kennedy assassination remark was talking points. She had referenced this a few times in the past weeks...this was not the first time she said this. I watched the video......she chose her words carefuly..this was no slip.
Nothing Hillary does is a slip up
After the campaign the Clintons have run...how dare you come here and try to make us look irrational.
ENOUGH !
The total answer she gave to the question was bullshit. Yes, her husband didn't wrap it up until June...but this primary started two months earlier then others in the past.. She knew that and I'm assuming so did you. So, cut the crap....stop trying to put lipstick on a pig........
The Clinton's need to go.

[useyourbrain]

No, sir, you are a fool. HRC had nothing to gain by mentioning the assassination of RFK. What she was referring to was the nature of primary battles that continued to the convention. Perhaps she should have mentioned 1968 when RFK's last public words were, "Now on to Chicago!" meaning the fight for the nomination would continue to the convention floor. RFK had much fewer votes than HRC had at that time and was an up and coming nominee, not the favorite.

She could have mentioned Ted Kennedy (Obama supporter) who challenged a sitting Democratic President and took his battle to the convention floor trying to get a rule change go allow delegates to not have to vote their pledge on the first ballot. Since Carter had more delegates, that rule change failed and Kennedy didn't get the nomination. Carter did and lost the general. Ironically, the rule was changed so that today delegates do not have to vote their pledge for either Clinton or Obama. They can vote for whomever they want. Another irony is that Kennedy would have been the better candidate and likely would have won against Reagan. Imagine what the country would be like now if he had won.

[graffen48]

then why mention the assassination at all?? She could have made all of the points you bring out without referencing that awful moment in our history.

[Janemas]

Or she could of just acted professional and give women pride and stop the public bi-polar display on national television every day since she lost to Obama in Iowa.

[civilityliberty]

word