I wish I could say the same thing. To go with this angle after Obama defended her…well, I’m mystified. Even if the blame game strategy was deployed before Obama released his nicey nicey remarks to the press, Hillary should have anticipated that Obama would be gracious because that has been schtick since day one. If she hasn’t figured that out by now, she really shouldn’t be president.
I actually think this move, moreso than the RFK thing, has ruined her VP potential. It represents too much dumbassity for Obama to overlook. He’s probably looking at the Clintons and shaking his head, saying bless their hearts.
As Hillary outlines paths that she feels give her access to the Democratic nomination, evoking images of Bobby Kennedy’s murder is one she should just know to stay away from. I don’t for a second believe she thinks someone should kill Obama, but I do think she thinks, “things happen”. But one reason to stay in the race is NOT because Obama might be assasinated. That’s just a stupid and tasteless reference.
What is somewhat more offensive is that she apologized to the Kennedy’s but did not apologize to Obama.
OK, I was on Hillary’s side regarding her RFK comment (I didn’t see maliciousness behind the words, just carelessness). But her response to the hubub is making me reconsider the benefit of the doubt I’d given her.
Maybe Obama’s campaign really is trying to fan the flames. Maybe his nicey-nice in front of the camera is nothing but strategy, and behind the scenes he’s conniving and evil. But is to much to ask for Hillary to take the high road for ONCE in this race and not play the blame game? Not only does it never work, but it makes her look like a crybaby asshat. “Wah! I’m a VICTIM!!” I thought she’s supposed to be stronger against McCain. Does she think the Republicans are going to be softer on her than Obama’s campaign has been?
For someone who’s supposedly been tried, test, and “vetted”, she sure does a lot of whining.
It doesn’t matter elucidator. Have you never apologized even though you didn’t feel you were in the wrong? It’s just the right thing to do sometimes. Hillary did something that offended A LOT of people. Whether it was an accident or not is neither here nor there. Refusing to apologize to Obama is petty. He even made it easier for her. All she had to say was, “I also apologize to Senator Obama, I obviously don’t wish him any ill will.”
It’s just a nice gesture and something she should have done. The entire African American community is up in arms about this and she is doing nothing to help. If she ever had a good reason for the super-delegtes to choose her, she just blew it because AA voters won’t come out for her. Obama didn’t say that she didn’t insult him…
Here’s a quote from Axelrod
“As far as we’re concerned, this issue is done. It was an unfortunate statement, as we said, as she’s acknowledged. She has apologized. The apology, you know, is accepted. Let’s move forward.”
So what the fuck does Hillary do? She comes in and RETRACTS her apology. Obama never said that he wasn’t offended. How could you not be, honestly? Nobody likes anyone mentioning their possible death.
Look elucidator, this isn’t a simple thing. Even if it is a simple gaffe like you think it is, it doesn’t deserve some scrutiny. Hillary’s behavior afterward is also troubling. She can’t help but to pour salt on old wounds. This is while she’s trying to become his VP. Not a good move.
ETA: Seriously… All McCain has to do is label her a crybaby, and it will paint the picture perfectly. He won’t lose any of his votes either, unlike Obama would.
Those three or so guy who were sitting in, are they the alleged cream of the news crop in South Dakota?
Or could be they’re slow-on-the-draw, yokel news smiths who don’t know an outrageous statement when they hear it?
It bothered me when there wasn’t a gasp, or a “Holy fucking mackerel!” when her Big A stuff came out. But not you, of course.
About your previous question about how the story got out and ramped to fever pitch…
From there, the words and pics went out over the wire and on the Net (as far as I know) to be picked up by news orgs, blogs, etc., everywhere. Do you have a different take? An anti-Hillary Liberal/Conservative conspiracy?
You got a point there, here in Minnesota, it is widely understood that the average S Dakotan would lose a game of tic-tac-toe to a hammer.
Huh? What? You are definitely trying to imply something, but its a bit vague. Spit it out, lets have a look at it.
Yeah. Pretty much the point of my argument, I have a different take.
When I first heard about this, I was about half-pleased. OK, maybe she’s shot herself in the foot for good, maybe this is a way to ditch her that won’t look like a back-stab to her supporters (of whom I am* not*!) People will say “Well, she fucked up, too bad, but them’s the breaks, not Obama’s fault, but hers.” I would have been happy enough to believe it.
But it ain’t so. How did you find out? Did you read the Argus Leader without any previous knowledge, and say to yourself “Wow! Look at that, she clearly suggested that Obama might get whacked like Bobby! And she did it without even mentioning Obama’s name! Man, that’s some pretty crafty innuendoing.”
Or did you hear about it with the interpretation supplied in advance? Did somebody tell you what she said before you *read * what she said? I sure did, I didn’t know the Leader even existed. And, just as I said, I was ready to buy it, but I read the actual interview, and there isn’t any there there. Zip, zilch, none, nada damn thing but a wholesale return of innuendo with a zero investment of fact.
Here’s how simple it is. She didn’t say it. Simple enough?
Did you find many objective blogs/news orgs, etc., that agree with your take?
I don’t remember for sure when I first heard of the gaffe. Might well have been on MSNBC News, well before Matthews and Olbermann, because after my jaw got off the floor, I wondered how thoroughly they would skewer her.
Did you actually read or see what McAuliffe said? The Obama campaign circulated Olbermann’s rant after both Obama and Axelrod publicly stating that the comment was unfortunate and taking Clinton at her word that she meant no harm.
If it’s done, and it’s unfortunate, why circulate Olbermann’s commentary? Listen, don’t get me wrong - if I was an Obama staffer I’d want this story out there (I might take steps to ensure it wasn’t evident that it came from me, though). But it’s legitimate for Obama’s staff to want this story leading through the weekend, and it’s legitimate for Clinton’s folks to call foul on the doublespeak.
Explicitly stating that one of the reasons she’s staying in the race is that the other candidate might be assassinated (hint hint, wink wink) is about as low as you can go in my book.
No painful parsing needed. It’s what she said.
If either her fans or the ridiculously ‘fair’ posters want to pursue the innocuous comment venue, well, hot damn, go right ahead, but you’re only fooling yourselves.
OK, where? You do use the word “explicit”, so you should have no difficulty showing it to us. No painful parsing is needed when something is explicit, its only when you apply the tongs of innuendo and the lash of conjecture that words confess to crimes they didn’t commit.
She didn’t say it, its that damn simple. Said this…what, about five times now? And no one has stepped up with the quotation that explicitly states what you say it does. Why? Because it isn’t there. And if it is, you shouldn’t have any problem showing me where.