I'm trying give Hillary the benefit of the doubt, but then she makes no sense whatsoever.

[Marnieworld]

I'm no fan of the Clintons now but I used to love them so I still try to imagine that they aren't as bad as they seem when they utter something that initially offends me. Yet, with the recent comments from her I just can't seem to do that.

I can't find the quote oddly enough, but by memory someone asked her why she hasn't dropped out of the race yet. She repeats what she said way back in March to Time magazine that Bill won California in June and RFK was assassinated in June.

Now if all she wanted to say was that the primary season lasted to June before she could have just sited Bill's win alone. Though that is misleading since he had it wrapped up before then by all accounts (sort of like Obama now). To mention the RFK primary is deceptive because the primary season of that year started later than the primary season started this year. It's the equivalent of a primary in August then so it's a misleading comparison.

So her main points, if you really want to take her word, are misleading and not valid counterarguements to the question of why are she is staying in the race so you have to wonder what her real point was. She is a brilliant woman and considering that she has been making this point in various ways for months one can't call it a simple mispeak or fatigue related gaffe. She said what she had planned and intended to say. I think she always does.

I can't help think that the point was to bring the word assassination into the campaign. At first listen all I heard was I'm sticking around in case he gets killed. Not June is not without precedent since her precedents aren't comparable. Anything can happen that's why I'm still here.

Her apology completely missed the point (it wasn't the Kennedy mention that was most offensive though the timing of the reference was in bad taste due to Ted's recent diagnosis)and actually reaffirmed the impression that she is being deceptive. She states that the Kennedy's have been on her mind recently, implying that Ted's recent illness in the news prompted the mention of RFK yet she has been mentioning RFK since March. That's clearly false and it taints any attempt to give her the benefit of the doubt about anything else. The controversy is that she implied that she's hoping that Obama gets assassinated and she wants to be ready in the wings if he does. He was not mentioned in her grocery store soliloquy. She apologized for what exactly? Bringing up RFK's death? As if the mention of it is a faux pas? We are about to commemorate the 40th anniversary of it. I sure hope people bring him up and honor him. Will they have to apologize for it too?

It was just so unnecessary to say anyway because clearly she'd be the replacement if something horrible did happen. I have to conclude that this is just another campaign tactic like "He's not a Muslim as far as I know." Or linking him to Ayers and Wright and saying white people won't vote for him. Just inserting into the conversation to Super Delegates that they should consider her more electable than him due to racism and his higher risk of assassination. The Clintons would be perfectly happy winning based on that and that is why I no longer like the Clintons. They either aren't now what I thought they were before or they never were those people ever. Disillusionment sucks.

[williesgirl]

1. Couldn't agree with you more. rec'd

[grantcart]

2. can you give an explanation of her IWR vote? Seems to be a pattern

[Marnieworld]

6. That is the explanation- the "pattern"

She has a pattern of saying and doing whatever she has to do to get elected regardless of the morality or consequences. I have been long disillusioned with her I assure you, but more recently it's happened with Bill. I used to love him, I remember losing sleep one night to watch him give a speech on C-Span. I used to savor any chance to hear him especially during the early days of Bush but not anymore. I could have gone to see him 15 minutes from my house in April and I chose to watch TV instead.

The pattern was also clear in the list of at least 18 things she has said and done that KO mentioned in his Special Comment last night, and that's since January. Each time I would try and see things in a positive light, but I never could. She has to be stopped soon. I'm hoping that this latest unspeakable mention of assassination is what makes the SDs rise up in protest to end this now.

[slinkerwink]

3. It's a completely indefensible statement, but others here still try to defend it.

[Marnieworld]

8. I'll never understand why they do.

My point is that I went into this wanting to believe people but I just couldn't when faced with the facts. In DU that was the culture here- a group of individuals who would like nothing more than to believe our government and media, but just couldn't when faced with the facts. It started with a rejection of the official story of the election of 2000 but we as a group could not accept that story.

GD-P has reminded me of the OJ trial in a way because of the entrenched opinions. No matter how much DNA evidence or probabilities you want to show, someone will always think that if Police are sometimes corrupt they are always corrupt and all evidence is nullified. My parents watch Fox news all day. I am familiar with unshakable minds. Just like those that can't let themselves accept that the media lies and the gov't can go to war by choice based on lies because it is too frightening and painful perhaps there are those that can't let go of the Clintons. If you have 16 years invested it's hard to let go. I try and have compassion for them too.

Yet how can you defend what she said when what she said in the best possible sense was just the same old bullshit. She compared her campaign with two others, Bill's was wrapped up by then and RFK's was a completely different season. Are they defending her now based on that she doesn't know what she's talking about? I mean that's all that's left right. I can't believe that because she really is a brilliant woman. It's implausible.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

4. Very well said.

Recommended.

[eleny]

5. "He's not a Muslim as far as I know."

Good point. I'd forgotten about that. Seems like there's a series of these statements plunked into interviews delivered with serious yet innocent demeanor.

I don't want this individual, Hillary Clinton, in charge of our image around the world while representing our Party.

[benddem]

7. besides the fact

that her point is completely moot. California has the largest no. of delegates. When the CA primary was held in June...candidates rarely had enough delegates. She's clearly grasping at straws and one more indication her campaign is a MESS.