Friday, May 23, 2008

Hill-Dog raises spectre of assassination

It's not talked about above a whisper, but since Obama chose to run for office, those who love him and even those who don't, share one common unvoiced anxiety on his behalf: that the "lone gunman" will find him and take him out.

So today, when Hillary Clinton explained why she will stay in the nomination race through June, jaws dropped across America (fans and foes both):
"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. I don't understand it," she said, dismissing calls to drop out.
Uh, so we are supposed to believe that the common thread in this comment is June! She's not trying to chase uncommitted superdelegates to her camp through fear?

She back pedaled once she drew immediate criticism:
Clinton criticized an "urgency" to end the campaign prematurely, saying, "Historically, that makes no sense."

She later issued an apology for the remark.

"I regret that if my referencing that moment of trauma for our entire nation and in particular the Kennedy family was in any way offensive. I certainly had no intention of that whatsoever," the former first lady said.
Hmmm. No apology to the Obamas. Or his campaign.

DKos points out that if this had been the only time Clinton had made this remark, a generous reading of her comment could allow for mis-speaking. However, she made the same remark in March. There's a calculation to her comments that leaves many of us breathless.

One other point. If anything (God forbid) did happen to Obama between now and the convention, whether or not Hillary campaigns through June would not change the likelihood of her taking his place as the nominee.

Somehow, it feels as though she's hopeful that some event (even an unthinkable, horrific crime) might occur as long as it secures the nomination for her. It's just wrong!

4 comments:

brian said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
brian said...

As fed up as I am with Hillary, I think we really need to give her the benefit of the doubt when it comes to this particular remark. Not that she hasn't made and doesn't continue to make the most reprehensible remarks imaginable.

I think her point was there is no need to get a nominee named before June. But, the assassination remark is just stupid no matter what she meant. If Obama is assassinated, or his plane goes down or he goes into a sudden unexplained coma, she would be the nominee whether she continues her campaign or not. It's just idiocy to say that she needs to continue her campaign in the event of him being incapacitated. She should have truncated her remark at the fact that Bill didn't wrap up the nomination 'til June which is dumb enough in itself. It's still better for the party for her to stop attacking Obama and giving the Republicans fodder for the fall.

I am so done with Hillary I don't think I could vote for her in the fall. This has gone from a very exciting election cycle for me- historic with a black man, a woman and a latino all in the hunt, to a time where I fear she'll steal the nomination and I'll have to choose between John McSame and Hillary the Cheater.

If that happens it'll be worse than the last time when I had to hold my nose and vote for Kerry simply because I couldn't stand four more years of Bush. Why are the Democrats so pitiful?!

rmkton said...

It is hard for me at this point to see much that is redeeming in Hillary Clinton's candidacy. I just get the feeling that she (and Bill) would do anything to win...and I mean anything!

I must say though that I would be incredibly disappointed if Obama chose her as his running mate. I think that would be really short-sighted on his part and I would lose much of my respect for him. Can't imagine Hill or Bill playing 2nd fiddle in the Whitehouse.

Rob said...

Wow, new valleys for Hillary. Good reading your blog out here in England, Julie! I survived Pakistan!

-- Rob