The Obama bloggers in South Dakota are off to the races after Hillary's comments to the Argus Leader's editorial board about RFK's assassination.
Though, speaking only for myself, I wish she wouldn't have said that, I would also strongly suggest that you're making something out of nothing.
Hillary Clinton stated two historical facts - first, that her husband did not clinch the presidential nomination in 1992 until June, and second, that RFK was murdered in June of 1968, while he was campaigning for the Democratic nomination. The point she was trying to make, Jon, was that primary contests have often gone through June in the past. Nothing more, nothing less.
To imply anything further from those comments is, frankly, not the most intelligent political analysis I've ever seen from Schaff or Epp. To suggest that she was saying that she should remain in the race because the eventual nominee may be assassinated is nothing short of lunacy. To further suggest, as Epp did, that Hillary Clinton would be behind the assassination of Barack Obama takes him into the stratosphere of illogial Hillary hate, to levels rarely seen outside of Rush Limbaugh's listening audience.
Hillary has actually made this comment previously, in a March, 2008 interview with Time. No uproar followed her comments then. I wonder why we would be making such an issue of this now?
Oh, wait. I know the answer. I bet you do too.
I'm especially disappointed to see Todd take a potshot at Hillary over this. You know, Todd, once we have a nominee, you're going to sound like kind of a hypocrite if you call for the media to move away from the BS gotcha coverage they've provided through most of this campaign - and Obama has made literally hundreds of gaffes, and downright offensive statements over the last fifteen months or so. You're buying into it right now because you think it benefits your candidate. Pretty soon, it won't.
Friday, May 23, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
People making something out of nothing in this primary race? Wow, that's a new one. I understand why you get annoyed, Anna, but then why do you contribute to it?
Let me try this over again.
The reason I posted about it is that a SD blogger who is also a Democrat suggested that Hillary Clinton, a Democrat, a former first lady, a two-term senator from New York, and the first woman candidate for president to ever win a primary, will assassinate Barack Obama. And he said this as the result of a media-manufactured scandal. They're going to be pulling this kind of crap with Obama very soon (his Weather Underground friends, probably his pastor again, those crazy Chicago liberals, etc, etc, etc).
You can't buy into this type of "journalism" when it's directed against that she-witch Hillary Clinton and then denounce it when it's directed against Obama, at least not without sounding silly. I think when it comes down to it, the role the media plays in this campaign needs to change.
It is telling to me that Ken Blanchard and I were the only people to see fit to comment on how completely ridiculous Todd's comment was.
You all better hope Obama has a long, healthy life after Hillary's idiot comments in Sioux Falls.
Her comments are indefensible and you both know it.
I have two words for you and your candidate: Vince Foster.
Epp
SD Watch http://www.southdakotawatch.net
I guess I'm missing where I was defending Hillary or her comments, Todd.
Stay classy, Todd...
Todd, come on. I'm really surprised to see you jumping on the Foster baloney bandwagon.
However, I do think that Hillary's comments reveal, at best, that her campaign is seriously out of touch with the needs and concerns of people of color in this country. I can understand that maybe someone came up with that idea as an example of how drastically such a contest can change at the last minute. What concerns me is that no one else caught what that comment would imply about the lucky possibility that Obama might be assassinated. Someone should have caught that, and of course, she should not have made the comment in the first place.
Further, primary season in '68 began in March, I believe, so noting that it ran until June is really not comparable to this year, when the primaries began in January.
And finally, I do think it is ludicrous for anyone to be suggesting that she should drop out. The discord among Democrats is not resulting from her simply being in the race. She is certainly contributing to the discord in a rather enormous way, but that's due to her consistently divisive comments and not to her simply running.
My brother was telling me this morning about a conversation he had with an African American friend who, until this latest gaffe, had been pretty neutral about the whole thing and was happy to support whoever won. Now, he's finished with her. Judging from the conversations I've been having lately, it's pretty clear to me that this comment is not "nothing". It is very definitely "something".
Forgot to say - I do agree with Anna that it's silly to think Hillary was making any kind of direct threat. That is not where the disgust I'm hearing about is coming from. It's more from the suggestion that Obama might be assassinated, so she'd better stay in, which is what she implied, whether or not she meant to.
OK, I'm serial commenting. One more thing: I'm not sure I want someone who puts her foot in it this often to be president. We have such a long history of that kind of presidential behavior already...
You know, the specter of assassination doesn't just hang over Obama. I've heard more than one person make ugly comments about what might happen to Hillary while I've been campaigning for her.
Furthermore, I think Obama has made as many gaffes that have been just as bad as the ones Hillary has made. I think both of them keep pretty grueling schedules and both of them misspeak and offend people.
However, I don't say that his comments make me feel that he's seriously out of touch with white working class Americans, rural people, religious people, women, etc. Sometimes people say dumb things. I've said dumb things that I regret, and I don't even have microphones and reporters following me everywhere I go every day for fifteen months.
You know, the specter of assassination doesn't just hang over Obama. I've heard more than one person make ugly comments about what might happen to Hillary while I've been campaigning for her.
Obama had to have security earlier than the other candidates because he got death threats, and because he is particularly at risk by virtue of being a Black man in a country that still hasn't stopped it's historical tradition of lynching. I don't see the threat to Hillary as being as great - esp. because her enemies are Republicans who see her candidacy as a boon to McCain's.
Furthermore, I think Obama has made as many gaffes that have been just as bad as the ones Hillary has made. I think both of them keep pretty grueling schedules and both of them misspeak and offend people.
I really don't see this as a gaffe. I see this as a serious misstep.
However, I don't say that his comments make me feel that he's seriously out of touch with white working class Americans, rural people, religious people, women, etc.
Well, I think people often show their true colors in dumb comments. So far, I can't think of anything Obama has said that has bothered me, save two comments he made about Hillary. On the other hand, Hillary has said quite a number of racist things, and the idea that she could bring up the specter of assassination - something that has been written about quite a bit as a major threat to Obama - in such a way, without being aware of the context into which she is bringing it, or that her staff wouldn't have recognized why the statement was a problem, is hard to believe. So *at best* she it out of touch, and at worst, she did it on purpose, to give voice to the concern that a lot of people feel, which is that Obama will be assassinated.
Hillary's had Secret Service protection since 1992, so that's not really a useful metric. I wasn't aware that there were actual threats against him, though. I stated from the start that I thought the RFK comment was a dumb thing to say, but with that in mind, it makes it even worse.
So far, I can't think of anything Obama has said that has bothered me, save two comments he made about Hillary.
I would suggest that might be because a lot of his negative comments haven't really been directed at you. My rural, religious, working class family members are sincerely troubled by the comments he made in San Francisco. A number of them have vowed not to vote for Obama in the general election, and these are lifelong Democrats.
Hillary's had Secret Service protection since 1992, so that's not really a useful metric. I wasn't aware that there were actual threats against him, though. I stated from the start that I thought the RFK comment was a dumb thing to say, but with that in mind, it makes it even worse.
The reason she had SS protection was not because she was a white woman running for office. It was because she was the First Lady. That is standard. It is not standard for a presidential candidate to have protection as early on as he did.
So far, I can't think of anything Obama has said that has bothered me, save two comments he made about Hillary.
I would suggest that might be because a lot of his negative comments haven't really been directed at you.
Perhaps. However, rural, religious, working class people have also weighed in since, echoing his comments, and saying that they don't see what the big deal is. I suspect that much of this has been driven by / invented by the media.
To read racism into Hillary Clinton's comment on the history of protracted races betrays history but does let Obama supporters continue to Mel-o-Creme his positions. Funny how he's The One who will 'transcend' America to its blissful place as papa of the world again yet he voted to spend another $165 BILLION in Iraq/Afghanistan days ago and all the media wants to do is spin with bad history.
The Kennedys, Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley - remember all those great black presidents of the past who were assassinated? Hmm.
The presidential race of '08 started not in January but A YEAR AGO JANUARY! Why? Because nobody knew who Obama was and starting that early let him not only define himself (but scream bloody murder if Clinton does that..) as he did with his fictitious autobioigraphies (or getting paid for psychotherapy, I call it) and more importantly, Daschle/Axelrod/Hildebrand Tewes could ramp up the money machine and morph the Daschle List into the Obama List. Argue with me if you like but don't be naive about all this.
Meanwhile, HT has had its clients like MoveOn and its own house-created orgs like Americans United Against whatever-issue-will-bring-HT-money-and-lists, all the while consulting for Obama, abdicate their functions as grassroots organizations we rely on to hold politicians feet to the fire.
Want more of the same woosy floundering the current Dem majority has wrought in DC? Obama's your guy and heaven help us all if Paul Tewes is the next DNC chair.
Now put down that Kool-Aid.
Post a Comment