There a a lot of ways to say anything can happen. This really is beyond the pale. I think this is the one that will cause SDs to move to end this farce.

Her Husband didn't win the nod in June 1992 by overtaking Jerry Brown. Bill Clinton was the frontrunner from what I can tell, and he finished it by beating Brown in California.

So the only person who can really be compared to Bill winning it in June is Obama.

And the RFK comments are probably the most blatant gaffe of anything so far. Good lord, this is getting a bit sad.

I have nothing against going to June 3rd, but this is getting a bit embarassing for Clinton.

I linked the original content because I expected comments like yours.  

There is nothing that warrants what she said, she knows his security and the threats on his life caused the secret service to protect him earlier than any candidate in history.  

I'm sickened by her comments, which may have been a mistake and even more by anyone would defend such words.  

You do realize that she also mentioned that her husband didn't gain the nomination until 1992?

And had she stopped there, she wouldn't have made herself into a contemptible grotesque.

Had she voted against Bush's war, she'd be the nominee.

Had she not hired Mark "Dick Morris, Jr" Penn, she might be the nominee.

I realize counterfactuals are the only thing she has left, but this is going too far. She ought to be ashamed of herself (now there's a counterfactual), as should anyone who would defend this.

I don't think the fact that she said 2 things somehow changes the fact that one was horrible.  

is not making that case. It's offensive. "Anything can happen" is not an argument to continue a campaign since if "anything happened" the Democratic Party would be free to choose her in Denver.

the RFK assassination?

If she doesn't have the good judgment to avoid saying things that are highly offensive, won't this be a potential massive liability in November? Or does she know she's being offensive but she wants to be offensive?

C'mon, Alex, surely you can see that it's a bit of a poor choice of words to imply that her opponent could be killed by referencing Bobby Kennedy in a week where his little brother discovered he has brain cancer... right?  With regards to a candidate that said little brother has effectively coronated as the continuation of his family's life's work, no less.

It was insensitive at the very least.

Clinton could suspend her candidacy without totally dropping out and basically make the same statement without saying a word.

This person is temperamentally unfit to be President.  Seems like she's giving the supers every reason she can to end it now.

the RFK assassination thing was.  It's sort of like taking clips of a particular sermon and not the whole thing, because that's where the controversy lies.

And Bill's June 1992 victory didn't provide context either.  It's certainly true that an Obama scandal or incapacitation could happen, but it's not a reason to keep campaigning.  If god forbid that were to happen, she could always jump back in the race after suspending her campaign.

So, poor reasoning and invoking the possibility of a horrible trajedy that she would benefit from.  Not the best answer I've heard.

Don't try to sweep this under.  This was plain as daylight.  Good grief, I'm still in shock that this would come out of her mouth.

Translation:  "I'm staying in this thing just in case someone decides to take out the black guy."

Maybe she's thinking that after all that cheap beer she drank and all that bowling she did with those commoners one of them might like her enough to move her from second place to first.

Ugh.  I can't bring myself to believe that's what she meant but girlfriend had better come out with an explanation for this shit, and fast.

It's another media hit job on Clinton.  

They're ripping her quotes about campaigns lasting through June out of context.

They're disgusting pigs.

Good old VAAlex.  If you look up the definition of partisan, that guy is it!

These comments are deplorable.  

Period.

Hillary Clinton has continued to argue for her staying in this race based on the statement that her husband didn't win the dem nomination until June in 1992. While technically true (he didn't pass the delegate threshold) he did sew up the nomination months earlier.  According to Jake Tapper:

In his efforts to solicit patience from voters and Democratic officials alike, former president Bill Clinton constantly tells voters that the 1992 nomination race kept going until June.

   "All these people that tell you, 'Aw we oughta shut this thing down now the Democrats are so divided - that's a bunch of bull," he said today in  Kannapolis, North Carolina. "I didn't get enough votes to be nominated until June the 2nd, 1992."

   That is literally true. Bill Clinton did not secure enough delegates through the primary and caucus process until the California primary, June 2, 1992.

   But it is not politically true.

   Bill Clinton had sewn up the nomination long before then. Months before then.

Tapper also goes on to point out the contest started a month later than it did this year.

See article here: http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/ 2008/03/q-did-the-1992.html

in making that remark then explain why she just apologized on tv. I call BS on her even making the remark. You would have me think it's all innocent but as we have seen she is the ultimate calculating politico. She apologized to the effect of saying sorry if anyone took it wrong. You can defend that crap until your eyes fall out but if Obama had said anything remotely that stupid you all would be all over him.

Some lines just don't get crossed. There were far many more examples she could have used to justify her staying in the race.

VAAlex,

I respect your opinions, but this is truly unconscionable.  Sorry, she's completely dead to me after this.

She could have left it at her husband.  It's that simple.

she wasn't saying anything can happen, she was simply saying that the primary campaign was still going on in June.

Right. She was making the case that "anything can happen, including assassination."

Sorry, but this just proved, as if we still needed any proof, that Hillary is in it for Hillary... she cares about NOTHING else.

So your defense is that she won't suspend her campaign because she wants to be in the best position to capitalize on an assassination should one take place?  That's hardly going to cut it, Alex.  At best, she doesn't understand that you don't have to still be running to replace an assassinated candidate on the ticket.

there are a hundred different ways she could have mentioned Bobby Kennedy that DIDN'T use the word "assasination".

"We all remember Bobby Kennedy was still campaigning in California in June".

It wasn't that she mentioned Bobby Kenney that is the problem, is that she mentioned his ASSASINATION that is.  That was the offensive word.

You can't argue that Clinton is one of the single most accomplished and articulate politicians in this country (which I am willing to conceed she is) and argue at the same time this was just a harmless little gaffe.

She has been in politics for a long time and I can't understand how she could think this comment would go over well with anyone.

She basically said hey, things happen, people even get assassinated. And her argument is lame anyway. Sure Bill went to June, but the primary season didn't start right after Christmas, and waiting for California isn't the same as waiting for Montana.

She referenced assassination as a reason things could go longer for heaven's sake! What's it going to take! This needs to end. Now. If she doesn't withdraw the supers must end it. This week.

Yep... and just days after another Kennedy son gets diagnosed with what's sadly likely to be a mortal brain tumor.

Really bad timing - not that there's any such thing as "good" timing for a completely inappropriate comment like this.

In my WORST NIGHTMARES I think Hillary has been saying to superdelegates two things:

1. Americans won't vote for a black candidate
2. He will be assassinated.

I never believed this nightmare was true. But now I have my doubts. So many baby boomer democrats are deformed by the political violence of the 60s/70s. Their world view is coloured by All the President's Men, The Parallax View, and the Zapruder Curve.

Bizarrely, and unfortunately, this paranoid conspiracy infects many of my african american friends. They are terrified for Obama, and believe he will be killed.

To those in power I say:

Feeding fear makes you a fear monger. And acquiescing in the racism of others, is tantamount to being a passive racist

Sometimes I wonder if we ever really knew who she is and what she stood for. Every day that passes has me questioning the past more and more.

See the first post in this diary.

factually true.  And I'm sooooo sick of the sensitivities of those Kennedys.  When Obama lover Maria Shriver was cheering for her Bush loving husband, were you outraged at that?