Let's not forget Benazir Bhutto was assassinated while running for leadership of her country

[Johnny__Motown]

OK, are all the Clinton supporters properly outraged? Well if not you should be. The idea of anyone raising that event and implying that it may happen to Sen. Clinton is clearly unacceptable.


I am a nobody. I am one of the white working class males who is supposed to be a Clinton supporter, but isn't. When I make that statement on this board people are rightly offended.


Now consider if Sen. Obama had made that statement in an interview, on camera.

This is the closest parallel I can think of to what Sen. Clinton did he other day. Yes, we are offended and it is not simply "fake outrage".




P.S. I apologize for even bringing this up.

[ruby slippers]

1. don't apologize. Hillary called for this, remember???

http://youtube.com/watch?v=QGszl2_4Cts

She seems fixated with death lately....

[Johnny__Motown]

2. That does not give me permission to do the same thing. I feel an apology was called for

[ruby slippers]

5. wait a minute. I posted that to make the point that Hillary is

two faced. Calling for inquiries but at the same time making her own threat....it was not directed toward you or in defense of her. In fact, just the contrary....

[Johnny__Motown]

6. I know... I just feel bad that I brought it up.. and that an apology was called for

Thank you for your support on this but what if one of Bhutto's children check out DU now and then and find my offensive post?

I know the chances of that are astronomically tiny but still worth considering

[ruby slippers]

7. well, what if one of Obama's kids saw DU and Hillary's comments....don't

worry, be happy. I actually thought about a similar post like this when I came across the video about four hours before you posted it. I had done a search on Youtube for things and that was the first one that came up. It was put out by the official Hillary campaign....Ironic, huh?

[Johnny__Motown]

11. Irony abounds in this incident

the very idea that she creates a perfect example of why she should suspend her campaign, while explaining that she does not understand why she should suspend her campaign, is just mind boggling to me.

[Cha]

32. And that's it..isn't it?

hilary answered her own stupid question with one of her own stupid, lying, tragic answers.

[MADem]

3. Way to strip ALL CONTEXT out of an event. Benazir Bhutto was not running

her campaign like a US Presidential race. Benazir Bhutto wasn't in the unusual position, like Clinton, Kennedy and others, of heading towards a convention that wasn't "locked up" and battling a "presumptive nominee."

Strip away all meaning, all context, and all history -- and that is what people are doing because they DON'T KNOW their own history.

Wow, this guy is right: http://www.amazon.com/Dumbest-Generation-Stupefies-Americans-Jeopardizes/dp/1585426393/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1211718669&sr=8-1

This country IS fucked.

[Johnny__Motown]

4. I said it was the closest parallel I could think of. Over react much? Kinda looks like it

I never said it was the same thing.


If you can think of a closer parallel I will gladly edit my OP.

[MADem]

16. The closest parallel to what is happening now, in terms of the convention,

the contest, and the candidates, IS sixty eight.

Had not Kennedy been murdered, it would have been a floor fight. NO one was "assured" that nomination at the moment in time when RFK said "And it's on to Chicago..." right before he was murdered--that's where the contest would have been decided, AT the convention in Chicago. There was no nominee with enough votes to take the nom. That was the point that she was making, the SHE was, like the OTHER Senator from NY, in a position of butting up against the party machines that didn't want RFK, even though he was resonating with the voters. Of course, back then, most states did not hold primaries--the party bosses made the picks. But the states that did hold primaries liked what they saw.

[Johnny__Motown]

23. The implication was that Sen. Obama might be murdered. What statement could be made by Sen. Obama

that implied Sen. Clinton might be murdered?

That is the parallel I am talking about.

THE STATEMENT AND IT'S IMPLICATION is the focus of my post..... not the political parallels.









Please address the statement and not the inaccurate political situation.

You are beginning to sound like some sock puppet just trying to spin everything possible.

[MADem]

24. That was NOT the implication. The implication was that HRC=RFK.

Only people who think a woman cannot compare herself to a man and who are ignorant of history think otherwise.

[Johnny__Motown]

28. No, the implication was that the front runner was "removed" from the race in June, and Obama is the

front runner

She was clearly saying that she should stay in the race because something (like assassination) might happen to Sen. Obama.


Go watch the clip again... your devotion to your candidate has distorted your grasp on reality

[MADem]

30. Uh, Kennedy was the UPSTART. See, ignorance of history at play, here.

You have it all wrong, and backwards. Kennedy was the challenger to the PRESUMPTIVE nominee. A lot of antiwar activists were initially BULLSHIT at him, for "splitting the party." Sound FAMILIAR???

Here--a point everyone seems to be missing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1968


Hubert Humphrey 561
Robert F. Kennedy 393
Eugene McCarthy 258


He was a hundred and sixty eight delegates BEHIND the "presumptive nominee"--who didn't even campaign in the primaries, but used "favorite sons" to gather votes on his behalf.

Further, while the primary victories he won served to screw the guy bringing up the rear, McCarthy, that isn't how we PICKED 'em in the old days. When only thirteen states have primaries, you've gotta figure there's something else going on to make the decision. And there was.

Those primaries were just BEAUTY CONTESTS.

The picking happened at the State Pol level--all the party machine bosses in the individual states sat their asses down and decided where their state was going to put their money. And those guys were NOT backing RFK.

The presumptive nominee was initially LBJ. RFK had declared that he had NO INTENTION of running in 68. But then, LBJ almost--not quite, but almost--got his ass torn to shreds by McCarthy in NH, so he bowed the hell out. That left McCarthy as the upstart challenger to the presummptive nominee, who jumped in when Johnson said "Fuggedabout it." That presumptive nominee was HUBERT HORATIO HUMPHREY....Vice President of the United States.

Then RFK jumped in, and gummed up the works. There could only be ONE antiwar guy. The battles in the primaries were to decide if McCarthy or RFK would be "the antiwar guy" duking it out with HHH at the convention.

Man, doesn't ANYONE know their history anymore? We're entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts.

So, you see, if you look at her and HISTORY, she was comparing HERSELF, her campaign, to RFK's upstart effort. In this situation, OBAMA IS HUMPHREY. He isn't even Gene McCarthy, because it was RFK who screwed McCarthy out of his leadership role with the antiwar crowd. And even after RFK was shot, he was perceived as second best.

[Johnny__Motown]

33. Well at least you are now making sense.. thanks for that

But as you mentioned, there were only 13 primaries back then and the delegate count was not as important as your bold print seems to imply.

Yes, Kennedy was the upstart. Obama was also the upstart at the beginning of this battle. Humphrey was the establishment candidate, just as Clinton is the establishment candidate. Humphrey had what appeared to be a solid lead but the upstart was gaining popular support among the people. Just as Clinton had the lead before everyone started voting but now Obama has the popular support of the people. Don't forget Kennedy was only in the race for about 6 weeks before the assassination.


Clinton is not Kennedy, she is Humphrey....

Obama is Kennedy, not Humphrey (or McCarthy)


There can be no doubt that she was implying that she should stay in the race because something might happen to Obama (like an assassination).



Thanks again for taking a more rational approach to this discussion. Your first couple of posts were nothing but anger and venom.

[MADem]

34. Can you ever converse without starting off with a gratuitous insult?

AND ending with TWO?

I ALWAYS make sense. Where I fail is in thinking that anyone under fifty has had a decent education, particularly vis a vis the history of this nation in the Post World War 2 era.

AGAIN--you aren't GETTING IT. You don't hesitate to insult me THRICE, while you make incorrect assumptions and still do not know your OWN HISTORY.

That delegate count included ALL THE STATES. Sheesh!!

This is frustrating in the extreme to try to explain, how old are you? If you didn't live through this, didn't ANYONE teach you this in school?

Party BOSSES "assigned" delegates. It's not that the states without primaries did not have DELEGATES, they just didn't have to deal with the pesky "will of the people." It was like a caucus, only smaller. The party bosses, the movers and shakers, they get together and make their pick--we're throwing our votes to HHH, or some favorite son who will hand over his votes to HHH. THAT's how it worked.

You can parse all you want about who was the supposed upstart at the start, in the middle or whenever--but we're not talking about that, it's ancient history.

What we are talking about is the challenger to the presumptive nominee AT THE END, right before the primaries wrap up. IN JUNE.

And in that case, in THAT timeframe--CLINTON is the challenger to the presumptive nominee, OBAMA. It's Clinton playing RFK to Obama's HUMPHREY.


So if anyone needs to watch out, assuming you still want to play that lame "assasination" card, it's CLINTON.

But then, that whole truth about what REALLY happened in sixty eight interferes with "the story." And a story is what it is, of Fairy Tale proportions. It's why RFK Junior told Obama supporters that they were WRONG.

[Johnny__Motown]

37. It is kinda my style....

But your first post gave this link

http://www.amazon.com/Dumbest-Generation-Stupefies-Americans-Jeopardizes/dp/1585426393/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1211718669&sr=8-1


To imply that I am stupid for my views and also everyone else born within a generation must also be stupid because they do not agree with you.. clearly anger and venom


Also.. if you go back to my original post I admit that the comparison is not precise. I was simply looking for a statement that could be made by Sen. Obama that would be similar to the one made by Sen. Clinton.

You insist on focusing on my inaccurate example instead of the statement. You also refuse to suggest any alternative that would be more precise. Many other posters on this thread understand the point I was trying to make.. maybe you are not as smart as you think you are since you can't seem to grasp it.


As far as the Kennedy History is concerned... Yes I know the convention was where candidates were picked. I understand the math.

You seem to think that Kennedy was killed because he was sure to lose the nomination. That doesn't make sense to me. The Kennedy name was still very powerful in '68. RFK was only in the race for 6 weeks and was clearly doing very well. He may not have been the presumptive nominee but he was clearly a popular figure and had one hell of a good shot at winning the nomination. Yes Humphrey had better numbers at that point. It didn't matter. The convention battle would have (in all probability) been won by RFK.



Anyways none of that shit matters. It is clear Clinton was talking about something bad happening to a candidate and used the wrong example to express her point.


Now, just so I don't finish with a gratuitous insult I will answer your question.

I am 45, so I don't remember it well (being only 5), As far as learning it in school that was clearly a very very long time ago.

I'm sorry if I am getting some details wrong and don't mean to upset you. I just wish you would try to get the point I was making instead of picking apart the historical details and spinning them to your advantage.

[MADem]

40. If the shoe doesn't fit you, and I wasn't cramming it on YOUR foot, don't wear it.

If you actually read the details accompanying that book, the problem isn't stupidity--it's IGNORANCE. IQs are going up, but understanding is going down. That's the thesis in a brief nutshell. No one, apparently, is teaching the children.

That's not "anger and venom." That is genuine despair and real concern at plain and simple ignorance. And these ignorant theses are being repeated, again and again. Fact free commentary.

And now, you say "None of that shit matters." Of course it doesn't, to you, because it doesn't support your views. However, I think it DOES matter, because it supports mine, Clinton's and RFK Junior's. Adn most importantly, it supports what happened in sixty eight. That "shit" is pesky fact.

You aren't getting "some of the details wrong." You're missing the entire point. Just because you say something is clear does not make it so. And since you "clearly" are historically IGNORANT (not dumb, mind you, IGNORANT) of what happened in sixty eight, you aren't in a position to tell us "clearly" anything--except that you "clearly" have your facts wrong, again, and again, and again.

Obama is Humphrey in Clinton's RFK analogy. Presumptive nominee, ahead in the delegate count. Like Obama, Humphrey was endorsed by none other than the Mayor of Chicago, too... Clinton is RFK, taking her case to the floor, and fighting on through June.

Those are facts.

[Johnny__Motown]

41. Not the facts, just your spin on reality

Everyone reporting on her statement disagrees with you. EVERYONE.

She said she doesn't understand people who want her to drop out because RFK got killed in June. This implies that Obama could get killed in June too. That is her reasoning for not suspending her campaign. She has already said that "As a black man he could be shot at a gas station". This newest statement simply builds on what has already been said. She can't possibly be saying "I should not suspend my campaign because I might be killed in June". That doesn't make any sense at all, not even for Hillary.


Again, none of that shit matters because I was not trying to make a historical analogy, you are. I am simply trying to draw a parallel between her statement and what might be said from Sen. Obama that would be as offensive.


Again, you are unable to suggest a more accurate analogy.

Again, you dismiss my point and try to distract by pointing out the inaccuracy of my analogy

Again, you are presenting your opinion as fact, it isn't

Again, you are wrong

[MADem]

43. No, not everyone. Repeating a big fat lie incessantly doesn't make it true.

You have a nice day now.

[Johnny__Motown]

45. Then name one news outlet that agrees with you? not even FOX is trying that spin

[MADem]

46. Hey, we're done. I said "You have a nice day, now." And I meant it. NT

[Johnny__Motown]

49. Because you can't back up your statement.. EVERY news outlet disagrees with your assessment

[MADem]

51. The reason I don't want to talk with you is because I think you are deliberately obtuse.

And I find your behavior obnoxious.

Is that clear enough for you?

Again, have one of those nice days.

[Johnny__Motown]

53. You are the one who started out this discussion with a link to the dumbest generation

and then went on to call me ignorant.


You distorted everything and can't answer even the simplest of questions..



I said right off the bat, if you had a closer parallel I would be happy to edit my OP. You don't have one.

This all could of ended if you simply suggested a better analogy.

[TLM]

44. How soon you forget.... a few weeks ago the Hillary people were calling Obama the upstart...

the newbie, who was being so rude as to challenge the presumptive nominee, Hillary.

Remember back when Hillary said it would all be over by super Tuesday, and FL and MI wouldn't count but it didn't matter because she was going to win anyway. Have you forgotten her attempts to front load delegates before any voters even had a chance to vote?


RFK was the anti-war guy, just like Obama is the anti-war guy.

Obama was the upstart, the change candidate, the challenger to Hillary's presumptive establishment triangulation candidacy.


Hillary message was clear. It doesn't matter how popular you are, if you are winning or not... everything can change with a bullet, so she is staying in the race just in case that happens.


The only thing more disgusting than her saying it over and over, are her followers defending it.

If Obama said what hillary said, word for word... her followers would be calling for his arrest for threatening her life.

[MADem]

50. Sorry, that dog doesn't hunt. It hasn't since Obama's caucus strategy took off.

The flip happened not a few weeks ago, but a few MONTHS ago.

RFK wasn't a POLITICAL upstart. He'd been the fucking ATTORNEY GENERAL of the UNITED STATES, fachrissake. AND a US SENATOR from the Great State of New York. He was well-established on the political scene. He wasn't a "newbie" by any stretch, or any sense, of the word.


But he WAS the "upstart" in the campaign, because he was challenging the "presumptive nominee." RFK wasn't the choice of the SUPERDELEGATES (back then, they were called "party bosses" who picked their favorite and handed them all the delegate votes, in all but fifteen states).

Your deliberate refusal to see the plain analogy, or hear what she actually said, even when RFK Junior has told all the Obama supporters that they were W-R-O-N-G doesn't speak well for you.

[anigbrowl]

36. So why mention assassination? You are pathetically transparent.

[MADem]

52. As I have said elsewhere, he did not stub his fucking toe.

What? You like to sanitize history because it's inconvenient?

The people squawking about this shit, I notice, weren't even sentient when it happened.

Should we now say that Lincoln's Presidency ended due to a bad headache?

The ASSASSINATION is "the reason" that RFK didn't get to DO what Clinton wants to do--CHALLENGE the presumptive nominee for the nomination.

Clinton is in RFK's shoes. She wants to do what he was about to do. Instead of ON TO CHICAGO, she wants to go ON TO DENVER.

THAT was the plain meaning. Any twisting of the meaning is being done by a rather dispicable crew for political purposes. Even RFK Junior has said that "Obama supporters are WRONG" on this score.

History will remember those who pulled this ignorant stunt, and they won't be remembered kindly. This makes Swiftboating look genteel.

[Johnny__Motown]

8. I'm waiting.... any closer parallel you can think of?

[MADem]

17. Do you have OCD, or do you think your posts are so important that everyone should answer them in

real time? Snap, snap? Good grief.

You need to go to a chat room if you want that kind of interaction.

Sheesh.

:eyes:

[Johnny__Motown]

18. it seemed a reasonable time to wait... and I am still waiting.. any more accurate comparison

[MADem]

22. I gave you your answer, ya toe-tapper. If you don't like it, you'll just have to lump it.

The example that fits is SIXTY EIGHT.

How many times do I have to spell that out for you?

[anigbrowl]

35. There was nothing unusual about it: you're lying.

Presidential primaries were contested through June in 1992, 1988, 1984, 1980 and 976. It is not as if 1992 and 1968 are the only examples in recent memory. Once again, you FAIL when your arguments are compared with the truth.

[MADem]

54. I am not lying. But you haven't read the DU rules, I see.

Once again, you FAIL to make sense or conduct yourself appropriately. To say nothing of develop a concept of CONTEXT.

Too complex, perhaps?

Why am I not surprised?

You have a nice day.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MADem]

62. That post says so much about you. None of it good, either. NT

[Honeycombe8]

9. Well, it's not even that close a situation. That's not a democratic country, for one thing.

Assassinations are far more common there is another thing. That area of the world holds a particularly backward and demonizing view of women, for another thing.

But it's the closest we can come to, that I can think of, since women politicians haven't been assassinated in our country, that I'm aware of.

[Johnny__Motown]

10. Agreed...... but the comment would be equally offensive.. wouldn't it?

[Honeycombe8]

12. Oh, you bet. It would be ten times worse, if women were assassinated here in the past, & Obama made

a similar comment.

[Johnny__Motown]

13. Thank you... I was trying to focus on the comment. not my inaccurate comparison

[ruby slippers]

14. your comparison was well intended and appropriate. quit apologizing

:hug:

[Honeycombe8]

15. I was not criticizing him. I was pointing out there IS no true comparison, so his example

was as close as he could get to....since women leaders in our country are historically not assassinated.

It was not criticism. If it was taken as such, I APOLOGIZE to the poster!

[ruby slippers]

19. great, let's just quit assassinating each other then, PEACE to all

[Honeycombe8]

26. I think you misunderstood. I was ADDING to his argument. sheesh. nt

[ruby slippers]

27. it's late. Just fogedabout it.....I was just trying to help, too...

I hate controversy....

[chascarrillo]

31. If it's not democratic, then why were they holding elections?

[dcindian]

20. Don't apologize but don't expect them to understand.

No Democrat wants to picture Hillary with her head splattered all over the inside of a sunroof. And no true Democrat would use such an event for political gain. I doubt any republican presidential candidate would even consider it a topic of conversation in mixed company.

But for some reason Hillary felt the need to use another beloved Democrat's untimely death as an explanation of her candidacy. Most of America will remember the depths which Hillary fell in order to gain some sense of self justification for her continuing candidacy even in the face of extraordinary opposition to her tactics, and the mathematical elimination of her nomination.

Hillary has used words such as "obliterate and assassination" as a regular part of her campaign. Her get tough attitude and her continuation of aggressive use of death as a hammer to bludgeon her opponent are frighteningly crass and show a set of mores which do not favor the life of other human beings over self interest.

I can understand how Hillary started her adult life as a republican it seems to be right in line with the respect she shows others.

[Johnny__Motown]

21. I don't... but there were accusations of our outrage being fake

I was hoping that my offensive statement might show them that our outrage is real.

I also keep responding to every post to keep kicking this thread. It seems clear that there can be no real debate on this subject, so this is how I am keeping it up on the front page.




shameless self kicks.... what can I say?

[hokies4ever]

25. Hillary isn't half the lady that Benazir Bhutto was

:patriot:

[Pisces]

29. I can not forgive you the insult to Bhutto by comparing her to Hillary but your point is on the mark

[BlooInBloo]

39. Fucking sick.

[Johnny__Motown]

57. Exactly how we feel about what Hillary said concerning RFK

[moobu2]

42. This has absolutely nothing to do with anything

Besides showing how out of touch with reality most Obama supporters seem to be. Please keep it up.

[Johnny__Motown]

58. It is the same thing as what Hillary did, only it is worse when it comes from someone trying to be

President

[Hippo_Tron]

47. Benazir Bhutto didn't have Secret Service protection

And Bobby Kennedy didn't really either. Not the kind they have today, anyway. Just throwing it out there...

[Buzz Clik]

48. "P.S. I apologize for even bringing this up." Bullshit.

What a fucking hollow apology.

Piss off.

[Johnny__Motown]

56. Honestly.. I didn't want to bring up the assassination of someone just to try and make a point

my apology is genuine.

[Buzz Clik]

63. This keeps happening and I wish it would stop forever.

Don't wanna bring it up? Okay, don't bring it up.

It seems so simple to me.

[IsItJustMe]

55. Point well made.

[northzax]

59. why would such a statement of fact

offend anyone?

[Johnny__Motown]

60. Plenty find it offensive.. look up a few posts.. I think raising the issue is offensive.

But compared to what Hillary did my "indiscretion" pales in comparison.

[northzax]

61. plenty of people find a lot of things offensive

but no one can explain why?

[jenmito]

64. I mentioned her name here Friday:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=6096435#6096504
:hi:

[Beacool]

65. Oh please,

the world does not revolve around Obama. She never tried to imply that he might be assassinated. leave it to his fans and the pundits to have hysterical fits over her comments.

:eyes: