Hillary's "gaffe"
"I don’t because, again, I’ve been around long enough. You know my husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in Califor-nia. You know, I just don’t understand it and there’s lot of specula-tion about why it is."
This comment was made in response to an interviewer's question about whether Clinton accepted the argument that she should drop out of the race soon for the sake of party unity; she was pointing out that earlier nomination contests have gone on until even later in the year. The fact that some Obama supporters have interpreted this statement as a wistful speculation that Obama might be assassinated tells us much more about how toxic the rhetorical atmosphere of this campaign has become -- and how deranged the demonization of Clinton has become -- than about what Clinton herself was thinking.
I have already seen a number of postings by pro-Obama bloggers, several of them laced with profanity -- some of these people are becoming seriously unhinged -- frothing that this-is-the-absolute-last-straw-and-she-should-drop-out. Most of them were already calling for her to drop out anyway, of course.
By contrast, here are the rational and sensible reactions of the two individuals most entitled to express an opinion:
"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."
"I have learned that when you are campaigning for as many months as Senator Clinton and I have been campaigning, some-times you get careless in terms of the statements that you make. And I think that is what happened here. Senator Clinton says that she did not intend any offense by it and I will take her at her word on that."
Any casual reference to assassination is potentially tasteless and offensive, but the Clinton-haters who are foaming at the mouth over this have lost touch with the real world.
Update: Worthwhile discussion here.
Hillary Clinton
This comment was made in response to an interviewer's question about whether Clinton accepted the argument that she should drop out of the race soon for the sake of party unity; she was pointing out that earlier nomination contests have gone on until even later in the year. The fact that some Obama supporters have interpreted this statement as a wistful speculation that Obama might be assassinated tells us much more about how toxic the rhetorical atmosphere of this campaign has become -- and how deranged the demonization of Clinton has become -- than about what Clinton herself was thinking.
I have already seen a number of postings by pro-Obama bloggers, several of them laced with profanity -- some of these people are becoming seriously unhinged -- frothing that this-is-the-absolute-last-straw-and-she-should-drop-out. Most of them were already calling for her to drop out anyway, of course.
By contrast, here are the rational and sensible reactions of the two individuals most entitled to express an opinion:
"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."
"I have learned that when you are campaigning for as many months as Senator Clinton and I have been campaigning, some-times you get careless in terms of the statements that you make. And I think that is what happened here. Senator Clinton says that she did not intend any offense by it and I will take her at her word on that."
Any casual reference to assassination is potentially tasteless and offensive, but the Clinton-haters who are foaming at the mouth over this have lost touch with the real world.
Update: Worthwhile discussion here.
Labels: Politics
posted by Infidel753 at 7:43 PM
2 Comments:
Greetings my friend.
It occurs to me as I type these words that I think I would rather be discussing my faith life with you, than this.
However, who am I to shirk back?
I am not a big Obama supporter at all. That said, I do support him over Hillary for a multitude of reasons.
To support her - from my perspective which is very different than your own - just because it appears that she can beat McCain and that Obama can't is not possible for me.
My dislike of her as a candidate stems from many things. I do think that she has by and large been an excellent senator (and she is my senator!).
I simply think her words, which I do not think were intentionally malicious or evil, revealed something about her that I know I do not like.
She is so certain that she is the right leader and she is insistent on letting us know that. I am tired of her scolding us over and over again with how right she is.
I wish she would shut up about it and actually start doing it, as she did in days gone by.
Even if she is the "right" leader for us, if so many people believe otherwise, then she can't be the right leader.
I agree that people are frothing over this in the wrong way and for the wrong reasons.
I had some idiotic super Obama guy stomp off my blog because a few people challenged his Hillary-hate speech that he spews 24/7 like an Obama's Karl Rove.
There is a lot of idiocy out there but I do defend my right to not want her as my candidate.
No I am not one of those who will not vote for her if she is the nominee, I will vote for her. However I would rather not have to.
This - sadly - like so many other things, gets so much ink and attention (and by my own hand as well) when the real issues of the world swirl on.
Oh - for the record I should add the primary reasons that I cannot support her:
-She is too tied up with AIPAC for my taste. All politicians are tied up with AIPAC, but she is in and in deep
-Her remarks about "obliterating Iran" are directly related to that; she is far too hawkish for my taste
-Too much corporate money -again a factor for all politicians, but some worse than others. How anyone with as much healthcare and pharma money as she has, can possibly do any meaningful health care reform is a mystery to me.
Shutting up now! I have faith based sh*t storms of my own over at my blog to work on!
Keith Olbermann went on a tirade over this one comment, the arsehole.
Post a Comment
<< Home