Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

First are you all surprised by Gotcha politics or something? the most common example is bittergate and the fact that certain diarists from that shameful period have the audacity to have rec'd diaries telling Obama supporters to give Hillary the benefit of the doubt? this single thing probably pisses me off the most, and I don't have to name names because we all know who they are. Those who GLEEFULLY jumped on his remarks, not to say well this is what he really meant, or when its in context, 3 of the worst offenders have all written give hillary a break diary, she should get the benefit of the doubt, thats nothing short of amazing, but thats another issue.

What Hillary made was a gaffe we all know it, just like we all know every reasonable person will easily know what she meant, but what i have seen yesterday reading through diaries is amazing. NOT only did Hillary make a dumb remark, but in calling for us Obama supporters to give her the benefit of the doubt you ATTACK Obama? I am flabbergasted at this strategy.

Obama made a bland generic comment and hasn't touched it since, Axlerod went on TV and defended her. please go back to the HRC Campaigns handling of Obama's bitter gaffe vs. BHO campaign's handling of this one and you will see the difference HIS CAMPAIGN IS GIVING HER THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT.

and yet dairy after diary HRC supporters are getting upset at Obama?

apparently some of you missed the memo, MyDD posters whether BHO or HRC supporters are NOT campaign surrogates, they in NO way speak for the BHO campaign, they are free to say whatever they want as long as it meets posting rules, but if you don't like what they say fine tell them, but to use it to attack Obama? say he doesn't represent a change in politics, because of what posters on the internet say? you've got to be kidding.

once again, internet posters are NOT campaign surrogates, you really want this to go away alot faster then the bitter gate comment? stop using her gaffe to attack Obama.

This is politics, Hillary is a politician she will take a few licks and finish the race. but using this to attack Obama does nothing to get her the benefit of the doubt. the MSM is NOT media, his campaign is ignoring basically defending her, the MSM gave us weeks of bittergate, a month of Wright, everything passes with time, so stop attacking Obama and his campaign because you are worried about what this gaffe might mean to her campaign.  

Tags: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton (all tags)

Comments

222 Comments

Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

attacking Obama and his campaign at the same time asking that she gets the benefit of the doubt is amazing to me.

random crazy internet posters are NOT campaign surrogates, he can't control them, stop using them to attack him or stop asking for her to get the benefit of the doubt.

because doing BOTH at the same time, in my opinion its hypocritical.

by TruthMatters 2008-05-24 04:10AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

You won't find me attacking Obama over this.

But I did read yesterday in a news source (not a blog) that his campaign started this whole thing over the assassination remark.

by Montague 2008-05-24 04:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

Considering that it went from the video feed straight to Drudge, I have a hard time believing that.

by rfahey22 2008-05-24 04:45AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

No it was live blogged by the NY post, and then straight to Drudge.  There is no evidence whatsoever that the Obama campaign pushed it.

by interestedbystander 2008-05-24 07:39AM | 0 recs
by Montague 2008-05-24 01:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama
Sad that anyone even reads The Post. It is not, and has never been a reliable source on anything. They are a tabloid with extensive sports coverage. I tried to make that point before this blew up into (nevermind).

But someone in the Obama camp did respond to it, in a purely perfunctory manner as any campaign should (I have no qualms with that) and then got word from those higher up and Obama himself that this was not to be made an issue, because it isn't an issue. I don't doubt that Obama's reason for speaking well of Clinton or saying what he has said is anything but good will, intelligence and a solid take on what actually does take place in America when people get whipped up into a frenzy and start acting like a mob. It's why Drudge traffics in the sewer he does.

I 'm still not seeing where anyone is implicating Obama, but maybe showing a willingness to listen to why some think so will help heal some shell shocked Obama supporters.

Except for a few people looking for vengeance, pay back,or a therapeutic release, everyone else really has appeared to have moved on. Thanks for helping that to happen.

And if anyone is interested Obama made two significant foreign policy speeches yesterday that are at his website. He gets my vote for calling Chavez the "demagogue" and tyrant that he is. He also reminds us that Iran is not a benign country whose actions can just be ignored (especially since the people of Iran are not running their own country) And he stomps on the current not speaking with Cuba policy that has hurt the Cuban people for so long.

by Jeter 2008-05-24 03:32PM | 0 recs
Get your facts straight

The Obama campaign did not get this out there. Unlike the Clinton campaign they are not trolling right wing smear sites looking for garbage to push to the mainstream press.

From the NY Times:

Mrs. Clinton's remarks were initially reported online by The New York Post, whose reporters were not traveling with the Clinton campaign but were instead watching a live video feed of the meeting with newspaper editors. Its report quickly jumped to the Drudge Report, then whipped around the Internet and on television, with outraged comments piling up on Web sites.

by hankg 2008-05-24 05:15AM | 0 recs
Re: Get your facts straight

No, I meant something that said that the Obama campaign sent messages around to the news, pointing to her comment and saying it was a Bad Thing (TM) for her to say.

by Montague 2008-05-24 05:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Get your facts straight

Unsubstantiated smears like this belong in the gutter. Post your sources. Either put up. Or shut up.

Supporters like you have done Hillary no end of harm. Do you think you persuade one Obama supporter to turn to Hillary with these baseless rumours? No. As time has shown, bloggers like you have actually turned Hillary supporters towards Obama. I've heard this said time and time again...

So well done for what you've achieved for your candidate. You deserve to slap yourself on the back. Or perhaps somewhere else.

by duende 2008-05-24 06:37AM | 0 recs
Re: Get your facts straight

seeing that "Unsubstantiated smears" are your specialty this post of yours is hilarious

by zerosumgame 2008-05-24 07:37AM | 0 recs
LIke Honey to bees...

You can't help falling into the hypocrisy trap. You must have heard my previous post calling, because you're exactly fitting the description: another Hillary supporter who has damaged her candidacy. For references on this, other readers should just check zerosumgame's unpleasant comment and trolling history.

To add irony to self revelation you have, just like the above poster, added your own unsubstantiated smear without sources (this time against me).

You're not hilarious. The joke is on you.

by duende 2008-05-24 08:46AM | 0 recs
Re: Get your facts straight

Calm down.  Jeez. Is EVERYTHING a damn emergency in your world?

I'm not trying to persuade you of anything.  I am not a blogger.  I am a mere commenter here and there upon these threads.  The Dem party is going to cave to Obamamania and lose the general election, so why would I waste my time on convincing the likes of you?

You are truly expending your venom in a baseless, useless way.  Not surprising, coming from you.  I don't hold supporters like you against Obama, because I'm fair-minded - I don't like him for his own policies.  But for others, you are helping to destroy his chances in the GE by your trollish behavior.

by Montague 2008-05-24 12:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Get your facts straight

I read in a news source (not a blog) that Hillary eats puppies. May not be true; I don't know--but I thought it was interesting. Don't overreact--I won't hold it against your candidate but others might.

by Brannon 2008-05-24 12:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Get your facts straight

Link, please.

Here's mine:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/05232008/new s/nationalnews/why_hill_wont_drop_out__b obby_kennedy_wa_112232.htm

After you look at it, particularly paragraph 3, go back up to my original comment and see if I exaggerated in any way.

by Montague 2008-05-24 12:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Get your facts straight

So this: "But I did read yesterday in a news source (not a blog) that his campaign started this whole thing over the assassination remark."

was based on this?:

'"Sen. Clinton's statement before the Argus Leader editorial board was unfortunate and has no place in this campaign," Obama campaign spokesman said in a statement.'

I'm curious, what response could Obama have made that would have resulted in you saying that this situation was not in any way his doing?

by Brannon 2008-05-24 08:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Get your facts straight

That was an official response once it blew up. You expect them to say nothing when asked a question about it?

by nwodtuhs 2008-05-24 06:46AM | 0 recs
Re: Get your facts straight

Actually the article claims that after Clinton said the comment, the Obama campaign "immediately" responded.  I gathered that happened before it blew up.

by Montague 2008-05-24 01:11PM | 0 recs
Without a link

this is trollable.

I am more than tired with claims based on no evidence.

by fladem 2008-05-24 08:18AM | 0 recs
Re: Get your facts straight

Their response was actually pretty calm and even for something as outrageous as this... They just said something like "It doesn't belong in our political debate."  Hardly adding fuel to the fire.

by leshrac55 2008-05-24 09:47AM | 0 recs
Re: Get your facts straight

Even making the statement that what Hillary said "has no place in our political debate" is to suggest that Hillary was implying anything other than that Democratic primaries in the past commonly went on until June -- for people who are old enough to remember RFK's assassination, the memory of a June primary calendar, because of the tragedy, is loud and clear. The Obama campaign statement suggests that Hillary was saying something far worse, that she was deliberately trying to invoke the specter of a possible assassination in this primary -- and of course, the OFB both here and in the MSM had a field day pushing this completely outlandish interpretation.

The entire tenor of this primary season has left the Democratic party fractured beyond repair. Once again, the former party of FDR appears to be on the verge of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. I hope you enjoy the bitter fruits that Obama's hardcore supporters (as well as Obama's own campaign staff) have sown.

by Inky 2008-05-24 12:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Get your facts straight

If you wanted, by the way, to tell me that the Obama campaign wasn't involved in getting it out there, fine.  But to follow that up with a smear on the Clinton campaign... well, you continue to do harm to your own candidate's side.

by Montague 2008-05-24 12:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

"Started the whole thing" -- what are you talking about?

Clinton said that Obama could be shot and killed.  Sounds to be like she's the one who started that line of conversation.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-24 06:19AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

She never said that. She stated a historical fact. What you are saying is pure Obama trash.

by Ga6thDem 2008-05-24 08:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

It's a historical fact.  Since Bobby Kennedy's campaign began only one month prior to his assassination it's also, what, should I say "pure Clinton trash"?  You would.

It's misleading.

by Jess81 2008-05-24 08:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

What does the starting date of the primary matter? The question is whether the party needs to consolidate behind a candidate before June, as Obama supporters constantly argue. Clinton also referenced her husband's 1992 campaign for the same reason -- there's no reason to believe that it's detrimental to not have a confirmed candidate at this time -- in fact, it's probably better for the nominee to be confimed later rather than earlier. The GOP can't really start attacking the nominee in a big way until after the nominee is chosen. I don't understand why we want to give them a chance to start attacking Obama sooner rather than later.

by Inky 2008-05-24 12:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

HR'd because this is absolutely not what she said.  You have to twist it to make that claim, and that's the typical abuse that I've grown weary of seeing this entire primary season from Obama supporters.  It's the key reason I am not a supporter of his.

by slynch 2008-05-24 12:20PM | 0 recs
I'd like the link for that

as I've read the exact opposite.  Here's the New York Times:

Mr. Obama learned about Mrs. Clinton's remarks as he rode in his motorcade from Miami to Sunrise, Fla., on Friday. He and his aides discussed the matter, but decided he would not address the comment when he arrived at an afternoon rally.

Instead, to an audience of 16,000 people who filled the Bank Atlantic Center arena, Mr. Obama praised the candidacy of Mrs. Clinton and assured Democrats that their party would be united after the long primary campaign ended.

by kellogg 2008-05-24 06:42AM | 0 recs
Re: I'd like the link for that

just out of curiosity?  why do you think that was reported?

by canadian gal 2008-05-24 07:28AM | 0 recs
Re: I'd like the link for that

Obviously it was reported because Obama secretly controls the media, including the New York Times, which had earlier cleverly endorsed Clinton as part of a stealth campaign controlled by David Axelrod and Michelle Obama.  In the words of Mr. Burns, "My plan is working perfectly!" [rubbing hands together maniacally]

/snark

by kellogg 2008-05-24 07:33AM | 0 recs
Re: I'd like the link for that

is this what i suggested?  i was wondering why a BO supporter thought they were reporting it... sheesh.

by canadian gal 2008-05-24 07:44AM | 0 recs
oh come on, that previous

post of yoru was imply galore.

by kindthoughts 2008-05-24 10:12AM | 0 recs
You forgot the "excellent." n/t

by nklein 2008-05-24 01:09PM | 0 recs
Re: I'd like the link for that

Perhaps because it is news?  What point are you making?

by interestedbystander 2008-05-24 07:41AM | 0 recs
Re: I'd like the link for that

That's easy: sexism and Hillary hate!

by yankeeinmemphis 2008-05-24 11:17AM | 0 recs
Re: I'd like the link for that

the missing word in that quote you posted was 'publicly'

by zerosumgame 2008-05-24 07:38AM | 0 recs
Re: I'd like the link for that

You know what?  I might have gone looking around for the link, but some of your fellow Obama folks TR'd me and told me to shut up and told me I was passing around gutter smears.

So no dice.  If someone had asked nicely, I would have looked around, and if I didn't find it, would have admitted that.  My memory's not perfect or I may have misread while scanning news sites in a hurry.

This place is turning into the Big Orange Satan. Thankfully the moderators are better than Markos, but the comments lately are just fucking over the top and massively offensive and totally divisive (ironic as that may be), which is how it got at DKos because I left for good months ago.  I am more convinced than ever that, with supporters like these, Obama's chances of winning a GE, already very low, have dropped to abysmal.

by Montague 2008-05-24 12:46PM | 0 recs
Here, take a long look into this abyss...

LA Times/KTLA Poll (5/24):

Obama 47%, McCain 40% (California)

Rasmussen (5/21):

Obama 48%, McCain 43% (New Hampshire)

Survey USA (5/16-18):

Obama 48%, MCCain 39% (Ohio)

SUSA (5/19):

Obama 48%, McCain 42% (Colorado)

SUSA (5/16-18):

Obama 40%, McCain 48% (Pennsylvania)

by CanuckinMA 2008-05-24 02:27PM | 0 recs
Polls... so useless... so contradictory...

by Montague 2008-05-24 04:20PM | 0 recs
"turning into the Big Orange Satan"

I'm pretty sure Satan isn't a Democrat.

by kellogg 2008-05-24 03:44PM | 0 recs
Re: "turning into the Big Orange Satan"

I'm not at all sure that the majority of the people at DKos are Democrats any longer.

I'm also quite sure that many, many conservative Rethugs would entirely disagree with your statement.  They do indeed believe Satan is a Democrat.

by Montague 2008-05-24 04:21PM | 0 recs
I bet the vast majority of Dkos folks

will vote for the Democratic nominee.  And I would like to think the same of MyDD folks.  

As for conservative Republicans, what can you expect?  They're possessed. Possessed, I say!  

by kellogg 2008-05-24 04:25PM | 0 recs
Re: I bet the vast majority of Dkos folks

Have you checked that place out lately?  My gawd, they think Clinton is the anti-Christ, almost literally.  How could one vote for someone one thinks is 100% vile?  

by Montague 2008-05-24 05:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

stop using it to swiftboat her and you might have a case, as it is every time you rec a stupid diary wailing about this kind of shit or up-rate a moronic post about it you, personally, are giving BHO's campaign a black-eye. bitch and moan about it all you want, that is what is happening.

by zerosumgame 2008-05-24 05:34AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

Haha, stupid diaries?  Oh, like fingergate?

by ProgressiveDL 2008-05-24 05:39AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

or trying to turn "kid" into "boy", or the ones calling anyone not supporting BHO a racist, or where the main point is that HRC has a vagina so she must be bad. Typical BHO diaries here and other blogs here.

by zerosumgame 2008-05-24 05:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

Are you just making stuff up now?

by rfahey22 2008-05-24 06:10AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

yes

by JDF 2008-05-24 06:24AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

I think the bigger point is how many Hillary supporters won't support Obama because he DOESN'T have a vagina.

by ProgressiveDL 2008-05-24 06:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

As far as we know...

by Rationalisto 2008-05-24 11:12AM | 0 recs
LOL!

by nklein 2008-05-24 01:17PM | 0 recs
quoting is not swiftboating n/t

by kellogg 2008-05-24 06:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

Please stop using sexist language like bitch and moan.

And by the way: It doesn't matter what you or I think of Clinton's remarks.  Her candidacy imploded yesterday and with it any bargaining power she had to force herself onto Obama's ticket.

We'll find out if I'm wrong as the next few weeks unfold and ultimately at the convention, when Obama names his running mate.  

If you're bent on proving that what Clinton said wasn't beyond the pale, go find some other presidential candidates who have cited political assassinations as their rationale for staying in the race.

by deminva 2008-05-24 07:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

it would be tough to do that, not because no other politician has done it, but because the media and opposition this cycle has done everything possible to monitor everything Clinton has said and twist it to make her look bad.  Never before has a candidate's words been so monitored.

by slynch 2008-05-24 12:36PM | 0 recs
All their words have gone through a meat-grinder..

it's not just Hillary's.

by nklein 2008-05-24 01:25PM | 0 recs
She cited June primary, not assassination!

Because the question was, "why do they want you to guit; why are they trying to push you out of the race before it is over"?  You folks REALLY don't anyone to hear THAT question so you turned it into"Why are you still in the race? Answer: He could get assassinated."

Her answer was that she did not know.  That primaries we remember have gone into June before.  Of course she remembers Bill's and every democrat her age remembers that RFK was killed in a primary in June.  

There were other examples in the party's recent history , but not as memorable.  When she said it in march in Time magazine why didn't they get outraged then instead of today? Maybe back them Obama didn't feel the need to show folks how to interpret the comments differently than they were obviously intended.

But still the real question is why? Why can't we know why he is so desperate to get Hillary out of the race before the votes are counted?  Once this deliberate smoke screen clears, we can ask him.

by itsadryheat 2008-05-24 10:30PM | 0 recs
This was not her first time

A "gaffe" is a mistake said once. A strategy is something said multiple times. Hillary first invoked RFK's assassination in March, and we left it alone as a gaffe, even though she was soon chomping away at "bittergate."

She has mentioned RFK's CA win many times since, and now again has raised the spectre of assassination. This is not a gaffe, she has not apologized to Obama, his supporters or his family, and it's not okay.

by rhetoricus 2008-05-24 07:08AM | 0 recs
It is a gaffe, as far as I know

by french imp 2008-05-24 04:19AM | 0 recs
Re: It is a gaffe, as far as I know

I'll take her word for it.

by parahammer 2008-05-24 04:21AM | 0 recs
Re: It is a gaffe, as far as I know

Take her word for it, if you want. But do you think for one second that the African American community, with it's long history of having it's leaders assassinated, MLK, Malcolm, et. al. will take her word for it? No, they won't. She as much as said she is staying in the race because Obama might get assassinated. Either she meant what she said,  or she is so incompetent in public that she is not qualified for the job she is applying for.

by awobbly 2008-05-24 07:51AM | 0 recs
Re: It is a gaffe, as far as I know

You didn't get the reference... it was a reference back to when Hillary was asked if Obama was a Muslim, and she answered, "As far as I know.  We'll have to take him at his word on that."

She's gone to prayer breakfasts with him, so she knows better, but it helped her campaign in Ohio, so she equivocated.

by LordMike 2008-05-24 09:39AM | 0 recs
Re: It is a gaffe, as far as I know

Troll rating for lying about what Clinton said.

by therealdeal 2008-05-24 02:12PM | 0 recs
Re: It is a gaffe, as far as I know

"doctrine" of assassination?

by catilinus 2008-05-24 12:21PM | 0 recs
It's not her first time.

She raised the specter of RFK's assassination first in March. This is not a gaffe, it is a strategy. And until she apologizes for the insult to Obama (not just to the Kennedys), it's not forgiven.

by rhetoricus 2008-05-24 07:09AM | 0 recs
Obvious Double Standard
Clinton and her supporters could have ignored the bitter remark as a mispoken gaffe.  Bit no, they jumped all over it.
At least Obama has the decency to this one.
by parahammer 2008-05-24 04:23AM | 0 recs
Re: Obvious Double Standard

to ignore this one.

by parahammer 2008-05-24 04:26AM | 0 recs
Re: Obvious Double Standard

I didn't jump on Obama about the bitter thing.

Nonetheless, calling a bunch of Americans bitter and saying they cling to religion and guns is actually stupider in a political sense and more offensive than anything Clinton said about RFK.  Obama literally described some Americans that way, while Clinton was NOT in any way, shape or form hinting at political violence.

I would certainly rather we all stop focusing on things like this, including Obama's gaffe where he thinks the U.S. has 57 states.

by Montague 2008-05-24 04:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Obvious Double Standard

The RFK comment is a true gaffe by a tired person making a totally different point, while the "bitter" remark is a complex thought that ostensibly came out after some reflection and mental deliberation.

These two statements, in my opinion, are apples and oranges.  Even Samantha Power "monster" remark is more vile than Hillary's RFK comment, because it's meant directly and unambiguously towards Hillary.  

For the RFK comment to be conceived as an attack or a threat to Obama, one has to jump through imagined hoops in logic for it to make sense.  Instead of giving Hillary the benefit of the doubt, Obama's campaign quickly jumped on it, declaring that such statements have no place in this campaign, etc. etc..  Who cares about party unity?  Sounds like Obama isn't ready to drop his fight against the Clintons just yet.

by Sieglinde 2008-05-24 05:27AM | 0 recs
Re: Obvious Double Standard

Raising the spector of assassintation does not require hoop-jumping.  I never thought she was threatening Obama or anything.  But at the beginning of this primary season there were people in the AA community and elsewhere specifically not voting for Obama because they thought he could get assassinated.  To raise that fear again, and to say that you are still in because it could happen is baffling.

I'll give her that it was a gaffe.  What concerns me is that these gaffes always have consequences for Obama.  Obama's "bitter" statement just affected him.  When Clinton talks about "hardworking whites" or raises the possibility of assassination it effects Obama.  It effects people's perceptions and can effect their voting decision.  SO then she gets to say "Oops, didn't mean it." but the damage is already done.

by proseandpromise 2008-05-24 06:05AM | 0 recs
Re: Obvious Double Standard

1. The assassination remark re: RFK was not the first time. She said it in March as well.

2. The person who said "monster" was fired.

by rhetoricus 2008-05-24 07:10AM | 0 recs
apparently you can read minds

by kindthoughts 2008-05-24 10:14AM | 0 recs
Imagine if a Republican

had made a similar reference.

I could win the race if something happened like happened to the Kennedy's.

If it wasn't a gaffe then Hilllary would never have apologized, er I mean regretted her statement.

by missliberties 2008-05-24 06:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Imagine if a Republican

perhaps because there is a real suspicion that the assassination was done at the behest of a republican cabal, might that be why it would not be appropriate for any of them to talk about it? Oh, wait, you probably still think she killed Vince Foster and pimps out their daughter...

by zerosumgame 2008-05-24 07:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Imagine if a Republican

oops, I mis-used the word think when I should have said knee-jerk

by zerosumgame 2008-05-24 07:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Imagine if a Republican

Still think?  can you point to any Obama supporters here who have ever made such claims?

by interestedbystander 2008-05-24 07:46AM | 0 recs
Re: Obvious Double Standard
You have no sense of humor it seems.  The 57 state remark was a joke riffing on the length of the campaign.
And guess what, many Americans are bitter.  Just look around here for example.  
by haystax calhoun 2008-05-24 07:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Obvious Double Standard

I agree, this site is full of bitter Obama supporters.

Prove to me that he was joking about 57 states.  I don't get that at all from the video.

by Montague 2008-05-24 01:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Obvious Double Standard

And the correct number should be 45-1/2, right?

by haystax calhoun 2008-05-24 02:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Obvious Double Standard

Did you and Obama attend the same school in first grade?

by Montague 2008-05-24 04:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Obvious Double Standard

This is a joke, right? Get some perspective, people!

by bethmydd 2008-05-24 06:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Obvious Double Standard

so you are calling RFK Jr what now?

by zerosumgame 2008-05-24 05:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Obvious Double Standard

Did you read my comment?  

by parahammer 2008-05-24 05:33AM | 0 recs
Re: Obvious Double Standard

do you read? do you pay attention when the news comes on? did you bother to see when RFK Jr. (obviously an HRC agent of something or other in you tiny mind) said there was nothing to be offended about in that statement?

by zerosumgame 2008-05-24 05:39AM | 0 recs
Re: Obvious Double Standard

He, like Clinton, acted as though it was just offensive to the Kennedy family.  That doesn't change that this raises fears once again in the AA community and elsewhere that a black candidate is at a higher risk of getting assassinated.  She did damage to Obama with her "gaffe."  That is something we can't lose in this.  I'll give her the benefit of the doubt and assume she meant no harm, but let's not pretend that no harm was done.

by proseandpromise 2008-05-24 06:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Obvious Double Standard

maybe RFK jr was not offended but many other people were.  You should lay off the personal attacks typical Clinton supporter.

by parahammer 2008-05-24 06:23AM | 0 recs
Re: Obvious Double Standard

Um. It might be offensive to the Obama family who are under death threats from white supremacists. But who cares about them right?

by heresjohnny 2008-05-24 06:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Obvious Double Standard

Well, she apologized to the wrong party.  I have no idea why Bobby Kennedy Jr. would be offended by referring to it as "a tragic day".

Which is probably why she apologized to them, and not to the actual aggreived party here.

by Jess81 2008-05-24 09:08AM | 0 recs
RFK Jr. endorsed Hillary.

Apparently, people who support her think it is okay to invoke the specter of asassination while people who support common decency think it is not okay.

by edg1 2008-05-24 09:35AM | 0 recs
Re: RFK Jr. endorsed Hillary.

HR'd for making nothing more than an unfounded negative attack.  "Clinton supporters" and "persons who support common decency" are not mutually exclusive groups, and it is just infuriating bullshit to say it.

by slynch 2008-05-24 12:45PM | 0 recs
RFK Jr. can be wrong

As he's also wrong that the 1992 race was "hard fought until June."  The race was effectively over when Paul Tsongas, not wanting to be a spoiler, dropped out in March.

by kellogg 2008-05-24 06:43AM | 0 recs
Another point

If she was using the '68 campaign (and I would say "if") as an example of how long the process can take, then it was a weak argument since the first primary in '68 took place in May.

I will give her the benefit of the doubt on her motivation, but she deserves no small amount of disdain for making a terrible analogy. We don't need any more leaders making stupid remarks on a regular basis.

by bookish 2008-05-24 06:57AM | 0 recs
Re: RFK Jr. can be wrong

I believe the calendar started later, too.

by mikeinsf 2008-05-24 11:11AM | 0 recs
Re: Obvious Double Standard

"He issued a statement denouncing it"

Were it better if he issued a statement in support of mentioning assassinations?"

by catilinus 2008-05-24 12:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

Neither campaign, or group of supporters, should use this incident to attack or further any agenda. It was a stupid thing to say by somebody who was exhausted. It should now go away thinks I.

by wasder 2008-05-24 04:26AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama
Exhausted???????
She is supposed to be ready on day 1 for the 3AM phonecall.
by parahammer 2008-05-24 04:27AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

hah.  I love that.  There needs to be a mashup of the commercial and then all the gaffes she has made that have been due to sleepiness.

by proseandpromise 2008-05-24 06:08AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

Yeah, ending with her fumbling for the phone before screaming into it "I'm trying to fucking sleep here!!"

by awobbly 2008-05-24 07:57AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

..which would be totally understandable if it was the first time she'd said it, and if she apologized toward Obama, not just the Kennedys. It was not the first time. Reference Olbermann's rant (which was too unkind by far), he gives the history of her "assassination" remarks.

by rhetoricus 2008-05-24 07:13AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

No one outside of MyDD or Hillarywas44.org is using this to attack Obama.  In fact, most of the press and public seem to be impressed with how gracious the Obama campaign has been (graces not afforded Obama by the Hillary campaign following lesser gaffes.)

There are Obama supporters on the blogs having some fun with this. : )  I beleive the word is "schadenfreude".  The blogs are not the real world and poorly represent the voting public.

by rf7777 2008-05-24 04:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

well as I posted this on MyDD, then I am obviously only talking to MyDD posters :-p

by TruthMatters 2008-05-24 04:46AM | 0 recs
or Talk Left or Taylor Marsh

Hillary makes questionable statement.

Blames Obama supporters.

I would presume to suggest that supporters of the women's movement should not blame others for if their candidate makes a mistake.

by missliberties 2008-05-24 06:57AM | 0 recs
God, is there no fact or reality

allowed here?

Look, here's what is reported to have been said by the Obama campaign:

Senator Clinton's statement before the Argus Leader editorial board was unfortunate and has no place in this campaign

So can we please stop the claim that the Obama campaign did not choose to jump on top of this? Maybe later they backed down, but their first instinct was obviously to gin up all the outrage they could about it. And, once that dog was let loose, it was easy for them to back away from the claim and let their vicious supporters do the dirty work while the campaign and Obama pretended to be above it all.

Sometimes the pure dishonesty of the claims being made on behalf of Obama supporters for their man is just breathtaking.

by frankly0 2008-05-24 05:53AM | 0 recs
Re: God, is there no fact or reality

Gin up all the outrage they could?  That comment really seems outraged to you?  Would you say that the comment was not unfortunate?  Would you say that it has a place in the campaign?  

There is a big difference between forgiving Clinton by agreeing that this was a mistake and saying that this comment was harmless. It was not.  Unintentional as it may have been, it was most certainly unfortunate and it does have no place in the campaign.

by proseandpromise 2008-05-24 06:11AM | 0 recs
There's a relatively small number

of Clinton supporters whose identity is tied so closely to their candidate's that they would defend her if she shot Obama herself. You're not going to be able to reason with them because they've lost the last vestige of reasonability already.

by bookish 2008-05-24 07:05AM | 0 recs
Re: God, is there no fact or reality

Please, don't act as if you just fell off the turnip truck, OK?

Look, the comment from the Obama campaign I quoted is exactly the sort of comment that campaigns issue when they want to indicate that there is a real problem with what a competitor has said, but they wish to leave the dirty work of trashing their competition to others.

Can you possibly be honest enough to admit that?

And as far Hillary's comment being something that she should be sorry for, and which was "unfortunate", can you kindly explain how it is that Hillary made essentially the identical comment in March to Time Magazine without a single word of protest by the Obama campaign or anyone else on the Obama side?

It is nothing but entirely fabricated outrage. And yet, as I said, the Obama campaign initially chose to jump on top of it, and act as if it were a real issue that Hillary and the media must address.

Just once it would be nice to get an honest answer out of you people, just to restore my faith in humanity.

by frankly0 2008-05-24 09:31PM | 0 recs
Re: God, is there no fact or reality

Here's a news bit about how Clinton handled bitter-gate, if you are convinced that Obama's handling of this situation was really mean-spirited and "outrageous."

For Clinton, whose once formidable lead in Pennsylvania had dwindled to just 6 percentage points in a Quinnipiac University poll last week, Obama's comments were a gift, and she pounced. The campaign has devoted more than half a dozen press releases to Obama's "bitter" comment, held a weekend conference call with five Pennsylvania mayors, and is responding to Obama's every word on the controversy in an effort to keep the story alive.

So you want to talk honesty?  How about honestly saying that the Obama camp's small and mild statement, followed by dismissals of the story by Obama and Axelrod, is incredible.  If the shoe was on the other foot it WOULD NOT have gone down this way.  Hillary would have made hay with this comment for sure.  So don't get outraged at Obama and PLEASE don't act like I'm the one with my head in the sand.

by proseandpromise 2008-05-25 11:30AM | 0 recs
Re: God, is there no fact or reality

They didn't "jump on top" of it.  They were asked a question and a member of the staff gave about as noncommital a statement as possible.  Axelrod later defended Clinton.  Nobody from the Obama campaign made appearances to "gin up outrage," either.  Give it a rest.

by rfahey22 2008-05-24 06:14AM | 0 recs
Re: God, is there no fact or reality

They are never going to give it a rest. The only thing they would have been happy with is Obama himself calling a press conference and announce he is dropping out of the race because her comments were so on the mark.

by JDF 2008-05-24 06:27AM | 0 recs
Re: God, is there no fact or reality

Brillian snark.

by catilinus 2008-05-24 12:31PM | 0 recs
Clinton is the perpetual victim

according to her supporters.

Even though she invokes an assasination as  a good reason to stay in the race.

Is this uniting or dividing the party.

by missliberties 2008-05-24 06:59AM | 0 recs
Re: God, is there no fact or reality

It is unfortunate and it has no place in the campaign. But that's all they said. They didn't go after her like she would have gone after him and when it got worse for her Axelrod defended her.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-24 06:36AM | 0 recs
Re: God, is there no fact or reality

That is not all they said. Have you seen the complete press release from Bill Burton, Obama's press secretary?

by souvarine 2008-05-24 06:38AM | 0 recs
Re: God, is there no fact or reality

No. That's all that's been reported in the press. Have a link?

by heresjohnny 2008-05-24 06:43AM | 0 recs
Re: God, is there no fact or reality

There was no press release, just a statement. From what I can gather, here is exactly what was said and by who:

Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton said, "Senator Clinton's statement before the Argus Leader editorial board was unfortunate and has no place in this campaign."

by edg1 2008-05-24 09:47AM | 0 recs
Re: God, is there no fact or reality

That's the only thing I saw too.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-24 01:34PM | 0 recs
Re: God, is there no fact or reality

That was a comment after the story had made news.  HRC's remark was unfortunate.  How were they supposed to respond: "Please keep saying that"?  

by kellogg 2008-05-24 06:45AM | 0 recs
Re: God, is there no fact or reality

They should have responded the way Axelrod did to Matthews later, any decent human being knows that.

The people here who know how campaign press works, or for that matter have worked in oppo shops, know how this went down. Obama responded immediately after the NY Post story, that tells you something.

by souvarine 2008-05-24 06:50AM | 0 recs
Please stop lying.

It's one thing to support your candidate. It's another thing altogether to lie.

Obama did not "respond immediately" after the NY Post story. His press spokesman Bill Burton gave a statement when ASKED by reporters about the NY Post story. Burton called it "unfortunate" and stated it "has no place in this campaign."

Stop lying. It does a disservice to your candidate. Any decent human being would know that.

by edg1 2008-05-24 09:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Please stop lying.

Burton was not asked, he emailed a statement and a link to the NY Post article according to ABC News:

When Clinton referenced RFK's assassination while discussing previous Democratic nomination fights which stretched into June, she was quickly scolded by the Obama campaign.

"Senator Clinton's statement before the Argus Leader editorial board was unfortunate and has no place in this campaign," wrote Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton in a missive to reporters.

Burton's e-mail included a link to a New York Post story which noted that Obama, who received a Secret Service detail early in the campaign, has been the subject of threats.

I'll assume you have posted in good faith and were just ignorant.

by souvarine 2008-05-24 10:08AM | 0 recs
That is an OPINION piece, not news.

There is a difference. In opinion you can do just that, state opinion. In news you are supposed to stick to facts.

by edg1 2008-05-24 10:35AM | 0 recs
Re: That is an OPINION piece, not news.

No, it was a reported piece, though it can be hard to tell these days. I take it from your response that you think ABC News is lying about having received an email from Bill Burton with his statement and a link to the NY Post article? And further that they are lying about the Obama campaign having sent this written missive around to reporters?

ABC News is not lying, if anything you have lost touch with the facts in your devotion to Obama.

by souvarine 2008-05-24 10:59AM | 0 recs
Is it possible that the Obama campaign were...

receiving press inquiries and decided to send out to all outlets their response?  The article does not mention whether their was any prior inquiry?  I mean the NY Post article was all over very quickly.  It was ABC that played up to absurdity the Rev. Wright buisness.

by nklein 2008-05-24 02:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Is it possible that the Obama campaign were...

Anything is possible. If they wanted to shut down the story they would have responded differently. The NY Post article was all over very quickly because the Obama campaign sent their email to so many reporter's blackberries.

by souvarine 2008-05-24 02:24PM | 0 recs
Is that right? It's not possible that Drudge's...

report prior to the Burton e-mail had alerted people to the statement?

by nklein 2008-05-24 05:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Is that right? It's not possible that Drudge's

It is possible, but you have to be familiar with two things. While Drudge may rule their world, Drudge alone is not an adequate source for a story, and even Drudge looks for a major source before he runs a story.  NY Post + Drudge + Obama press secretary on the record is adequate sourcing for TV.

by souvarine 2008-05-24 06:24PM | 0 recs
This was on TV, before there was any comment...

from Obama's campaign.  In fact, I didn't see a comment from Obama's campaign until an hour after I saw the story on MSNBC.  I think you might want to recheck the timeline.

by nklein 2008-05-25 10:36PM | 0 recs
Is it possible that the Obama campaign were...

receiving press inquiries and decided to send out to all outlets their response?  The article does not mention whether their was any prior inquiry.  I mean the NY Post article was all over very quickly.  It was ABC that played up to absurdity the Rev. Wright buisness.

by nklein 2008-05-24 02:11PM | 0 recs
Sorry for the repeat n/t

by nklein 2008-05-24 02:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Please stop lying.

You said there was more than that. Where is it?

by heresjohnny 2008-05-24 01:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Please stop lying.

No, the most complete report of Burton's email I've seen is from ABC News. I have not seen a complete reproduction of what Burton wrote.

by souvarine 2008-05-24 01:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Please stop lying.

So that's it? That's what I said I heard.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-24 02:27PM | 0 recs
Speaking of reality...

It WAS unfortunate and does NOT have any place in this campaign.  What the hell is there to disagree with about that?  

by Seeking Cincinnatus 2008-05-24 07:01AM | 0 recs
Re: Speaking of reality...

Some people appear to feel it DOES have a place in this campaign, as a "historical" marker, whatever that means.

by catilinus 2008-05-24 12:34PM | 0 recs
I wouldn't call a one-line statement

in reaction to news reports that doesn't even mention what she said "jump(ing) on top of this," though it probably justifies being jumped on.

by bookish 2008-05-24 07:09AM | 0 recs
Re: God, is there no fact or reality

You think that Burton's response is "jumping" on something.

You must not have followed many campaigns.

by emptythreatsfarm 2008-05-24 07:20AM | 0 recs
Re: God, is there no fact or reality

Unfortunate is a bad word? What were they supposed to say?  I thought they were pretty bland and boring with their initial statement made in the heat of the moment. It certainly didn't fire anybody up.  This was media driven- like all the rest of the BS we have to listen to everyday rather than the real issues. No Obama supporters think HRC is a murderer. Those folks are Republicans and Fox News remember? They are the ones driving this not us!

by Voxlisa999 2008-05-24 02:38PM | 0 recs
The gaffe was tone deaf and historically

inaccurate and another sign that she's imploding. Her "seating FL & MI is like the fight against slavery" was my first clear indication that she's lost it and can't handle the fact that it's over. This RFK comment simply shows more of the same. It's also historically inaccurate and is filled with the same kind of delusional thinking that her FL & MI argument is.

She has no reason to continue in this race and she's proved it a few times in the last week.  She doesn't even know why she's in any more.

Obama's camp defended her for the most part but generally they're ignoring her and letting her destroy herself. Rather than pile on like Clinton would do. That's Presidential.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-24 06:34AM | 0 recs
Re: The gaffe was tone deaf and historically

She does know why she's in the race, you know, just in case...assassination.  Don't believe me?  That's what she said in plain English.

"We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. You know I just, I don't understand it."

Like the lady says, she doesn't understand why people are telling her to leave the race, because anything could happen.

Understand this Hillary, don't mention Kennedy's assassination again for your reason in staying in the race.  It leaves a bad taste.

by hienmango 2008-05-24 09:27AM | 0 recs
More is coming out

The Obama campaign sent a press release linking Clinton's RFK remark to threats to Obama to make sure it got wide coverage:

When Clinton referenced RFK's assassination while discussing previous Democratic nomination fights which stretched into June, she was quickly scolded by the Obama campaign.

"Senator Clinton's statement before the Argus Leader editorial board was unfortunate and has no place in this campaign," wrote Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton in a missive to reporters.

Burton's e-mail included a link to a New York Post story which noted that Obama, who received a Secret Service detail early in the campaign, has been the subject of threats.

The Obama campaign's decision to target Clinton's RFK reference forced the former first lady to express regret for her remarks.

It also ensured that the dust-up would be covered on all three network newscasts.

This is a pattern we have seen over and over again from the Obama campaign. They seize on an innocent remark, twist it into a racial or worse attack on Obama, and blast that to the world. The race charges were bad enough, but with this latest episode, exploiting the assassination of RFK for political gain, Obama has gone way to far. Barack Obama and David Axelrod must disavow this press release and make amends to the children of Robert Kennedy.

by souvarine 2008-05-24 06:34AM | 0 recs
Re: More is coming out

Innocent? How about stupid and historically inaccurate. How about tone deaf considering Obama is a target of death threats. Those are better ways to describe the multiple comments.  

by heresjohnny 2008-05-24 06:38AM | 0 recs
Re: More is coming out

They are both targets of death threats. But Clinton doesn't use that fact to further her campaign.

by souvarine 2008-05-24 06:45AM | 0 recs
Re: More is coming out

Neither does Obama but I haven't seen anything like the following about Clinton. Perhaps you can show me.

or this kind of report.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-24 06:49AM | 0 recs
Re: More is coming out

Sorry, no, I have no interest in spreading right-wing attacks on Clinton. That's the point, she is not running that kind of campaign.

by souvarine 2008-05-24 06:55AM | 0 recs
Re: More is coming out

But you've seen similar things on the front page of a newspaper? You've seen similar reports?

by heresjohnny 2008-05-24 07:00AM | 0 recs
As far as she knows

Obama is not a muslim.

by missliberties 2008-05-24 07:01AM | 0 recs
by DaveOinSF 2008-05-24 07:18AM | 0 recs
Re: uhh...

Wow. You think that's the same? Ben Smith rolled around killing minorities. Did Keith Olbermann or his PA?

by heresjohnny 2008-05-24 07:21AM | 0 recs
I'm pretty sure the gaffe had been covered

plenty  by the time the Obama campaign responded.  They're not driving the story.

by kellogg 2008-05-24 06:46AM | 0 recs
Re: I'm pretty sure the gaffe had been covered

I suspect ABC News has a better idea of who drove this story than you do.

by souvarine 2008-05-24 06:51AM | 0 recs
Re: I'm pretty sure the gaffe had been covered

I saw the part about a press release not the part about Obama driving the story.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-24 07:01AM | 0 recs
Re: I'm pretty sure the gaffe had been covered

I wouldn't bet on it if I were you.  For example, CNN said that the VP rumor story was driven by sources within the Clinton campaign, which I am sure you would refute.  Shortly after, Clinton tried pointing to the Obama campaign as the source of the rumor.  By what measure is the media given the benefit of a doubt?

by haystax calhoun 2008-05-24 07:02AM | 0 recs
Re: I'm pretty sure the gaffe had been covered

The person "driving" this story is the candidate who has brought it up several times since March, until, at last, the media picked up on it.

by catilinus 2008-05-24 12:36PM | 0 recs
Re: More is coming out

That is not all they said. Have you seen the complete press release from Bill Burton, Obama's press secretary?

Um, according to your link that was all they [Burton] said. Yes, he included a link to the story. The press wasn't forced by the Obama camp to cover it.

This remark was unfortunate and didn't have any place in the campaign. First, it doesn't even prove the point she is trying to make. Enough people here have been pointing out the facts on that. Two, while I have no doubt that she meant to be focusing on the length of the campaign, it is very clear that these words do have the implication that anything could happen during the time left, even an assassination. She should have really apologized, not just to the Kennedy's but to the Obama's. Then it would be over and done with for me.

It continues to seem for some rabid Clinton supporters that Obama's very existence as a candidate in this race is an exploitation and attack against Hillary Clinton.

The unspoken thoughts of assassination have been very clear this campaign. Colin Powell will never run for president because his wife is afraid of assassination. You do a disservice to the history of the United States and to African-Americans when you ignore the terrible deaths of MLK and Malcolm X, as well as JFK and RFK.

by batgirl71 2008-05-24 07:12AM | 0 recs
It WAS unfortunate!

Please...  

"Senator Clinton's statement before the Argus Leader editorial board was unfortunate and has no place in this campaign,"

THIS IS EXACTLY CORRECT!  Senator Clinton should watch the way she phrases things like this.  She had many other examples she could've used and she chose this one.  That is UNFORTUNATE and her sloppy use of this example HAS NO PLACE IN THIS CAMPAIGN.  She's smarter than that and I don't accept the "she's just tired" excuse.  BS!

She should've done more than a non-apology apology as well.  The idea that they came out and did damage control doesn't give me a warm fuzzy.  She owed more than that.

Also, the FACTS don't support here.  The 1968 election not being decided until June worked against a Democrat.  Her husband's election wasn't still in doubt in June in 1992, it just wasn't perfected.  The timing of California's primary that year is all that makes her statement even close to true.  The truth is, however, Clinton was the presumptive nominee well before that primary occurred.

And nobody in 1992 was suggesting people ought to vote against her husband because he wasn't getting the white vote in West Virginia!  This isn't like 1992 and her comparison to that year and 1968, is disingenuous.

She she was wrong on the facts and she made a gaffe that some would rightly argue placed Mr. Obama and his family in more danger than they're already in.  I'd say that was a VERY BAD DAY for Senator Clinton.

by SpanishFly 2008-05-24 07:14AM | 0 recs
Re: More is coming out

this would have been a great comment if it had been the first time hillary referenced rfk's assassination.  but it's not.

you should admire, not admonish, the obama campaign for their rapid response to an exploding news story.  the primary is only a warm-up.  you and i absolutely agree that the obama campaign has been better at framing the news to their benefit.  that will make us more successful in the fall...

by bored now 2008-05-24 07:28AM | 0 recs
Re: More is coming out

Rapid response is good, but there is always the danger of going to far. When your response is that your opponent is hinting at your assassination you have become deranged. People don't vote for deranged candidates.

by souvarine 2008-05-24 07:40AM | 0 recs
hinting???

are you referring to this:

Burton's e-mail included a link to a New York Post story which noted that Obama, who received a Secret Service detail early in the campaign, has been the subject of threats.

what am i missing?

by bored now 2008-05-24 07:53AM | 0 recs
Re: hinting???

That and "has no place in this campaign." One of the Democratic primaries that ran through June sticks in our heads, the one where Bobby Kennedy was assassinated.

What has no place in this campaign is twisting a reference to that primary into some kind of threat to Obama. That is a sign of a campaign gone completely unhinged.

by souvarine 2008-05-24 08:07AM | 0 recs
you are looking at that more cynically than i...

i don't see that as hinting that they believe she's trying to make "some kind of threat to Obama."  i think they are trying to move the story off their plate.  'that's our comment, now go away,' is what i see there.

there is nothing about this story that helps obama.  even if it could be used to destroy one's opponent, it plays upon the very real fears that certain people in his family/campaign have and forces them to the forefront.  i see obama staffers walking on eggshells over this (and perhaps even barack himself) because they don't want to deal with this issue again.  so i'm not seeing what you are...

by bored now 2008-05-24 08:17AM | 0 recs
Re: you are looking at that more cynically than i.

I think if you compare Axelrod's comment later last night with Bill Burton's (which was more "go to the NY Post for our real spin" than "go away") then you might get my point. But you are correct, it was insane for Burton to promote this story to all of the news organizations, and Axelrod belatedly realized it.

It shows that the Obama campaign is little different from the foaming-at-the-mouth Republicans with regard to their hatred for Hillary Clinton.

by souvarine 2008-05-24 08:37AM | 0 recs
Re: you are looking at that more cynically than i.

Axelrod stood by Burton's remark.

When he defended Hillary Clinton, he was defending her from Charlie Rangel, who, as you know, supports Hillary Clinton.  Rangel also said that it was inappropriate.

I'd love to hear your theory on that one.

by Jess81 2008-05-24 09:05AM | 0 recs
Re: hinting???

Stop saying that people are saying that she's threatening Obama.  They aren't.  Attacking a strawman is a sign of an argument from someone who knows they're in the wrong.

Repeatedly raising the spectre of assassination IS inappropriate, and there's nothing wrong with saying so.

by Jess81 2008-05-24 08:22AM | 0 recs
Re: More is coming out

He could hardly have gone less far, he did not say that Hillary is hinting at assassination. He is clearly not deranged, and is surging in the polls. Apart from that, your comment was as truthful, factfilled and fair as usual.

by interestedbystander 2008-05-24 07:58AM | 0 recs
gimme a break...

people have a right to their perspectives.  we are partisans, and we fight for our guy or gal till the very end.  sniping at people who will vote for the democratic nominee isn't helpful...

by bored now 2008-05-24 08:05AM | 0 recs
So so so so so so true

And thanks for saying what is so obvious to any but the blind.

by maconblue 2008-05-24 06:39AM | 0 recs
Excellent Diary

I was going to post similar thoughts in one of the threads yesterday but held off because I didn't want to go to war with Hillary supporters over this.  Let's be honest, that'd be a waste of time.  You expressed the general thoughts I had on the matter perfectly.  Don't suggest ALL Obama supporters or that Obama himself believe Hillary meant this in the worst possible way, because we don't think that and Obama sent Axelrod out there yesterday to clear the air.  Yes, the campaign initial response was a "this has no place" type comment but as soon as they saw it in context the reversed course.  

As you suggest, compare this to how the Clinton Campaign handled all of the Obama missteps and you'll see a distinct and genuine difference in style.  Some may suggest he's only doing do because he's got this wrapped up but I think you can look at the last year and find evidence that Obama always meant for his team to be respectful.  Sure, they've made mistakes along the way that rubbed some people the wrong way.  Not one of those mistakes was nearly as bad as Clinton's outright pandering for white votes but that's just my opinion.

Again, I'll suggest that Clinton voters understand this in the larger context.  You keep saying she has every right to stay in this race and MANY OBAMA SUPPORTERS AGREE WITH YOU in principle.  But I, for one, hope you see the potential damage that can come from her doing so if she isn't a lot more careful than she was yesterday.  This is yet another case where the uneducated voters out there see the Democratic race as getting dirtier, they tune out, and we lose votes we might otherwise have had a shot at come November.  There is a price we're all paying for her continuing to hang in there.  I don't think it's irreversible damage but if the election is close, ALL damage is meaningful.

One last thing, ANY Clinton supporter on this site who suggests they'd vote for McCain over Obama ought to be banned.  I really mean that.  Maybe not today, as we sit here right now, since those comments are probably being made out of frustration and anger.  But if you still feel that way in a few weeks when the race is officially over, IMO, there's no place for you here.  Electing a pro-Life candidate just to spit in the face of some Obama supporter you didn't like on MyDD is stupid.  Continuing this war indefinitely and literally getting people killed because you're upset with how you felt, because your feeling were hurt by some faceless, nameless person on the internet, is completely childish.  You should be ashamed of yourself and frankly, you should go elsewhere.

Well, I've said my piece.  I'm going to continue to call them like I see them and hopefully there will be a coming together here and throughout the Left over ISSUES we care about rather than personalities.  Let the Right slam Obama on those things; we're supposed to be smarter than that.

Peace.

by SpanishFly 2008-05-24 06:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

According to ABC News, the entire brouhaha began when Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton released the following statement to the press:


Senator Clinton's statement before the Argus Leader editorial board was unfortunate and has no place in this campaign.

Burton's e-mail included a link to a New York Post story which noted that Obama, who received a Secret Service detail early in the campaign, has been the subject of threats.

The Obama campaign's decision to target Clinton's RFK reference forced the former first lady to express regret for her remarks.

It also ensured that the dust-up would be covered on all three network newscasts.

Link

Apparently, that tactic backfired almost immediately.  Shortly after Clinton's comments drew negative coverage on the network newscasts, the Argus Leader came to the former first lady's defense.  RFK also came out with a statement defending Senator Clinton.  The majority of Clinton supporters perceived it as another smear tactic to push Senator Clinton out of the race.

ABC News reporters TEDDY DAVIS and TALAL AL-KHATIB with ELOISE HARPER wrote the following critique entitled:

Obama Abandons 'Presumption of Good Faith'

Excerpt:


Ending the "smallness of our politics" is the stated mission of Barack Obama's White House run.

In "The Audacity of Hope," Obama recalls how he softened his website's harsh rhetoric on abortion in 2004 after he received an email from a pro-life doctor.

"[T]hat night, before I went to bed," wrote Obama, "I said a prayer of my own -- that I might extend the same presumption of good faith to others that the doctor had extended to me."

No such "presumption of good faith" was extended to Hillary Clinton on Friday.

Obama campaign and supporters have been back-peddling ever since.

by Hurdy Gurdy 2008-05-24 07:06AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

Clinton started it with her remarks.

You are dreaming if you think that in this age of people seeing everything on-line that this would have gone unnoticed.

If you do think that, I'd like to introduce you to presidential candidate George Allen of Virginia.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-24 07:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

She has made the same remarks several times before without this type of media brouhaha.

Last night's huge media response was triggered by Bill Burton's Press release.

by Hurdy Gurdy 2008-05-24 07:20AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

She never said it on video. That makes a huge difference. Ask George Allen.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-24 07:30AM | 0 recs
are you really that naive???

you're right, she's said this before.  but this time, there's video.

and that's the difference.  feel free to show that the video came out after the press release...

by bored now 2008-05-24 07:31AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

She could say it a million times and it doesn't excuse her reason for being in the race because her opponent could get assassinated.

I can't believe she actually said this before.  I thought this was her first time.

So if she said this many times before this means she's trying to drive home the point that she's staying in the race in case her opponents get assassinated.

Wow. Can't believe her campaign people didn't tell her that this was an inappropriate reason to list for staying in the race.  

I'm glad Obama never said this, because I would be offended too.

by hienmango 2008-05-24 09:11AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

RFK, Jr.released the following statement last night:

It Is A Mistake For People To Take Offense.


"It is clear from the context that Hillary was invoking a familiar political circumstance in order to support her decision to stay in the race through June.  I have heard her make this reference before, also citing her husband's 1992 race, both of which were hard fought through June.  I understand how highly charged the atmosphere is, but I think it is a mistake for people to take offense."

A statement from the Argus Leader, the South Dakota Newspaper where Hillary made her remarks:


The context of the question and answer with Sen. Clinton was whether her continued candidacy jeopardized party unity this close to the Democratic convention. Her reference to Mr. Kennedy's assassination appeared to focus on the timeline of his primary candidacy and not the assassination itself.

by Hurdy Gurdy 2008-05-24 10:08AM | 0 recs
But the ABC link you provided

includes text which states that the campaign referenced an extant article in the NY Post, which can only mean that the "gaffe" had already been publicized, so they didn't start the snowball - only responded to it.

by bookish 2008-05-24 07:15AM | 0 recs
Fuck off, troll

by bookish 2008-05-24 01:35PM | 0 recs
Holy shit...

did jj get banned? Or just her comment?

by bookish 2008-05-24 11:13PM | 0 recs
Oh, look...another troll has your back

Thank you souvarine...may I have another?

by bookish 2008-05-24 03:04PM | 0 recs
And another, please.

by bookish 2008-05-24 11:08PM | 0 recs
stop accusing

The "gaffe" would never have gotten the attention it did had not the Obama campaign issued a criticism of Hillary based on an erroneous interpretation of her remarks.  Obama is ultimately responsible for that.  Only after it had crescendoed and the CW turned toward how dumb it was to interpret Hillary's remarks in the manner in which people were doing so did Obama's campaign step back from the brink.

by DaveOinSF 2008-05-24 07:12AM | 0 recs
Re: stop accusing

That poor Hillary Clinton, always the victim, never responsible for her own words and actions.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-24 07:14AM | 0 recs
Re: stop accusing

And maybe you can tell us how sexist this dust-up is.  

by politicsmatters 2008-05-24 07:15AM | 0 recs
Re: stop accusing

In this matter, she did nothing wrong.

by DaveOinSF 2008-05-24 07:16AM | 0 recs
Re: stop accusing

It was up on Drudge long before the Obama camp reacted

by wrb 2008-05-24 08:13AM | 0 recs
Re: stop accusing

How long? Hours? Minutes?

Drudge is a clearing house for campaign pr. Obama has in the past sent press releases first to Drudge to ensure that they will get picked up by the big news organizations.

by souvarine 2008-05-24 08:31AM | 0 recs
Of course you're right...

He's so CLEVER. Leaking that picture of him in Kenyan/Somali gear, and the 'bitter' remark in SF, only so he can BLAME Hillary. I bet he made Bill say those things in South Carolina too. Maybe he also has a special microwave radio that transmits strange thoughts to some Hillary supporters, and makes them sound like raving lunatics. Yes, now I understand...

by duende 2008-05-24 09:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Of course you're right...

The Kenyan/Somali picture appears to have been rat f*cking, and Obama either fell for it or decided to build on it. Not for the first time, he fell for Bob Novak's rat f*cking with the looming scandal story, which turned out to be Obama's paying politicians with his PAC money during the primary.

Bill Burton clearly broadly promoted this NY Post story, regardless of whether the Obama campaign was the source of it. I think that was a mistake -- it makes the Obama campaign look unhinged -- hence Axelrod's attempt to walk the story back.

by souvarine 2008-05-24 09:11AM | 0 recs
Re: Of course you're right...

Why do you think Charles Rangel weighed in?  Is he unhinged to?

I know, he hates Hillary Clinton.

by Jess81 2008-05-24 09:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Of course you're right...

The only Rangel quote I've seen, "the dumbest thing you could have possibly said.", was weeks ago in reference to her comment about white working-class voters. I have not seen him weigh in on this smear, despite Jeff Bliss of Bloomberg's attempt to make it sound like he did.

Do you have a link?

by souvarine 2008-05-24 09:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Of course you're right...

Oh whoops, I got the two confused.

by Jess81 2008-05-24 10:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Of course you're right...

I can respect that.

by souvarine 2008-05-24 06:26PM | 0 recs
Here

"he speed at which the remarks were transmitted and reacted to illustrated the new reality candidates are grappling with in this year's campaign, in which Mr. Obama's own remarks about "bitter" small-town voters ricocheted around the Internet.

Mrs. Clinton's remarks were initially reported online by The New York Post, whose reporters were not traveling with the Clinton campaign but were instead watching a live video feed of the meeting with newspaper editors. Its report quickly jumped to the Drudge Report, then whipped around the Internet and on television, with outraged comments piling up on Web sites."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/24/us/pol itics/24clinton.html?em&ex=121177440 0&en=2e57cbb17f9ecd14&ei=5087%0A

by wrb 2008-05-24 03:07PM | 0 recs
Re: stop accusing

Drudge rules his world

by DaveOinSF 2008-05-24 09:36AM | 0 recs
Re: stop accusing

Not much to mis-interpret what Hillary said:  she said she's staying in the race because you never know what could happen, i.e. assassination.

by hienmango 2008-05-24 09:06AM | 0 recs
Re: stop accusing

You should seek help.

She said it was not unusual for primaries to go into June, the 1968 primary famously went into June.

by souvarine 2008-05-24 09:13AM | 0 recs
Re: stop accusing

You should seek out a history book.  In 1968 the first primary was in May.  As in, right now.

Bobby Kennedy's campaign lasted a month, not six.

by Jess81 2008-05-24 09:17AM | 0 recs
Re: stop accusing

And your point is?

Front loaded primaries are a relatively new innovation. The cries for Clinton to drop out now are unprecedented and absurd.

by souvarine 2008-05-24 09:42AM | 0 recs
Re: stop accusing

My point is that there's a difference between a campaign lasting one month, as Bobby Kennedy's did, and one lasting six months, as this one has.

The cries for Hillary Clinton to drop out are rare, but they're not unprecidented.  Just this year, Mike Huckabee faced the same thing before John McCain had clinched the nomination.  That's as recent as you can possibly get.

by Jess81 2008-05-24 10:09AM | 0 recs
Re: stop accusing

Sure, privately political figures might urge an opponent to drop out. But the only person I see who publicly called for Huckabee to drop out was Mitt Romney, right before Huckabee soundly beat him and forced him out of the race.

It's generally stupid for a front running campaign to try to force its opponents out of a primary, that just galvanizes the opponents supporters. Obama is doing it out of either weakness or because Hillary Clinton's supporters don't matter to him.

by souvarine 2008-05-24 10:18AM | 0 recs
Re: stop accusing

"AS FAR AS I KNOW, he is not a muslim."

You have absolutely no room to talk. None. Nada. Zip.

by Cochrane 2008-05-24 12:30PM | 0 recs
Re: stop accusing

This is the biggest farce I've ever heard. You are totally making this up. I can remember it exactly in my mind- Kroft said matter-of-factly after watching idiots say he's a Muslim- "You agree he's not a Muslim, right? (expecting a quick NO and then moving on)- except she said "I take him at his word that he's not a Muslim." Which freaked Kroft and the the rest of the country the f**k out!! He looked up as if he could't believe it and then asked her again for a definitive "No"- but he NEVER got one.  That is the TRUTH.

by Voxlisa999 2008-05-24 02:52PM | 0 recs
Re: stop accusing

Go watch the clip.  NOW.

You are extremely wrong.

by Montague 2008-05-24 07:02PM | 0 recs
Tired

Apparently, being exhausted is a fine excuse for Hillary. Apparently, she's the only one who can be tired in this primary season.

Let's not kid ourselves though, she has a brilliant mind and I'm positive she knew what she was about to say. She doesn't just babble...or does she?

by Archer2 2008-05-24 07:18AM | 0 recs
Hopefully....

we can move on to other issues today....

As a hillary supporter, I don't think attacking obama over this is helpful.

both candidates have made gaffes throughout this long campaign, both have had to make speeches and apologize, both have had surrogates "explain" or help out (in this case, RFK, jr).

I'm just hoping there will be more interesting diaries later on in the day.

by nikkid 2008-05-24 07:22AM | 0 recs
Color me surprised...

You don't want to talk about Obama's outrageous behavior in making Hillary say those things. Hmmm.

What shall we talk about now? How Hillary would make a good VP?

by duende 2008-05-24 09:02AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

What's particularly saddening is the way many Obama supporters seem happy with the application of "Clinton rules" -- the term a number of observers use for the way pundits and some news organizations treat any action or statement by the Clintons, no matter how innocuous, as proof of evil intent.

Paul Krugman, 2-11-2008

by kingsbridge77 2008-05-24 07:51AM | 0 recs
it's almost as if krugman was complete unaware...

that hillary had historically high negatives for a non-incumbent.  you'd almost have to wonder what he thought was meant by "hillary clinton unites the right and divides the left"...

by bored now 2008-05-24 07:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

I remember that article.  Paul Krugman referred to Obama supporters as a cult.  Couple of days later in his blog, when it was looking like Hillary Clinton was going to be routed out of the race, he writes "One of the things I'm worried about should Barack Obama win the nomination is the meme of his campaign as a cult."

What meme is that, Paul?  A cult?  Hey, did you hear some people are calling the Obama campaign a cult?  Like, for example, Paul Krugman just a few days prior.

Classic concern trolling.  I've stopped reading his political articles every since.  He doesn't seem to know what he's talking about.

by Jess81 2008-05-24 08:15AM | 0 recs
Well said.

It shows when someone tries to speak clearly and listen to others.

It shows when someone speaks only for a purpose, and uses words as arbitrary tools towards that end.

We can all tell the difference.

-chris

by chrisblask 2008-05-24 08:17AM | 0 recs
Obama's campaign capitalized on it
by sending a press relesase to all reporters, reminding them Obama is the subject of threats (his campaign seems to think the other candidates are not the subject of threats?)
The Obama campaign's decision to target Clinton's RFK reference forced the former first lady to express regret for her remarks.
by catfish2 2008-05-24 09:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's campaign capitalized on it

You're trivializing death threats?
Hillary mentions assassinations?

What kind of campaign message are you trying to get out?

by hienmango 2008-05-24 09:29AM | 0 recs
All candidates are subject to threats

And for his campaign to hear "RFK" and assume "it's all about our threatened candidate" is just sad.

by catfish2 2008-05-24 09:32AM | 0 recs
Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

Hillary said what she said.  It can't be taken back and you can't expect people not to cover it.  I don't believe she meant for harm to come to Obama with her statement, in my opinion she was trying to use it as reference for time.  However, both her examples weren't very accurate and had little bearing on this current race.  

Her comments about her husband were not right.  He had the race tied up for weeks by the time June rolled around, the primary lasted as long as it did on a technicality, b/c it turns out California was the last state to vote and it just happened to be in June.  However, his campaign didn't depend on it and it was over by the time that state rolled around.  1968 is not what we would call an appropriate example either b/c the race was only a month in by the time June rolled around and it was just kind of tasteless to use him as an example.

by venavena 2008-05-24 09:46AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

it's about leadership, what you say in a crisis, how you respond. You can go along with the flow, and not try to stop something ugly from unfolding, or you can try to stop it, or you can effectively stop it.  His unfortunate remark accepted the notion that she'd been bad and he wished she hadn't. Barack needs feedback on these things, he ought to have shown us how he can defuse an ugly situation and bring both sides together. He still has a chance, this won't be forgotten.  I'm sure the super's are now wondering why he doesn't mind Hillary's remark being seen as unfortunate rather than misunderstood, and what that means for unity and the possibility of bringing all sides together, after all, isn't that the point of him?  

by anna shane 2008-05-24 10:25AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

Whaaat?

He's the one who should be trying to undo the damage???

That's just crazy.

Where is Hillary's attempt to make clear to her nuttier supporters that she wasn't hinting.

Her damaged feelings constitute the harm you see having been done here?

Insanity

by wrb 2008-05-24 10:30AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

i'd say his damaged potential.  It's sad.  

by anna shane 2008-05-24 10:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

I'd say this terrible gaffe  increased the already high likelihood that he will be assassinated. The seed only has to take root in one unbalanced mind

It is truly tragic. If it occurs, no one wins. Much of the country will blame Hillary. Into what darkness will the country spin if she then became president? The flames and aftermath of '68 again?

by wrb 2008-05-24 10:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

this isn't good.  Like you I think the crazies would be more interested in taking him out than her, although they both get death threats, as much as high profile movie stars. That's why leadership was required, not amping up the volume.  I know his supporters think he needs to learn nothing, but I'm just a Democrat, I think they both need to learn.  She ought to have known, even though she'd made that comparison before and no one had taken it to mean more than she said before, that his supporters do think she's a monster and thinks the way to the white house is over his dead body. It's an ugly thing to think, but it's what some do, and so it's reality.  He ought to have also known that and where this kind of speculation could lead, for the sake of all of us. For him, he could have dampened the hate rhetoric by being a bigger person.  The truth is that our presidents are alive because of the secret service.  And our candidates probably too.  Here in the USA people get killed for being alive.  

by anna shane 2008-05-24 12:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

"I know his supporters think he needs to learn nothing"

Rather sweeping, don't you think? :=)

I find fascinating reading of the Obama supporters that exist in Hillary supporters' minds. They sound like remarkable creatures, I'd like to meet one.

In the case of this Obama supporter I didn't bother to sort out the candidates, they all seemed fine to me. I only developed a clear preference after McCain clinched it, and that I reasoned my way into mainly on the basis of electability- I thought of all possible match-ups McCain Hillary was the only one the pubs were likely to win & taking the risk would be silly.

My preference is clearer now but not because I've noticed any water-walking skills on Obama's part but because my regard for Hillary has eroded.

by wrb 2008-05-25 03:32AM | 0 recs
by obsessed 2008-05-24 12:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

The point is, no matter why it was said it doesn't benefit Obama to keep fanning this flame. We Obama supporters should let this go.

by wasder 2008-05-24 12:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama

comparing the spectre of assassination to anything said by rev wright is weak at best.

Hillary royally f'd up.  It has been over for a while, this week she will be asked to leave the race.  At the convention she'll be given a party whistle and asked to sit quietly in the corner with the other kids.

dumb dumb dumb remark from someone who claims to be so very smart.  She cannot blame this on sexism, at all.

by eeruck01 2008-05-24 01:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Gaffe, Stop using it to attack Obama
and yet dairy after diary HRC supporters are getting upset at Obama?

In all sincerity, would you point these out to me?

by Jeter 2008-05-24 03:34PM | 0 recs
by map 2008-05-24 04:58PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads