Hillary's RFK remark made earlier in March

[pathansen]

QUOTE FROM: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24470244
"She has said much the same thing before. In a March interview with Time magazine, she said: "Primary contests used to last a lot longer. We all remember the great tragedy of Bobby Kennedy being assassinated in June in L.A. My husband didn't wrap up the nomination in 1992 until June, also in California. Having a primary contest go through June is nothing particularly unusual." "

Maybe there are people who want to believe otherwise, but it is quite clear from the context of this what she was talking about.
The reason she must have referenced the RFK assassination is because it occurred same time when RFK won the Democratic primary election.

[hisownpetard]

1. But, but.. if THAT's true, then I guess she was lying when she said she made the remark because

"the Kennedys have been much on my mind lately."

Right?!?

[pathansen]

8. she was referring to Ted Kennedy's health issue

[CakeGrrl]

13. Which means she was lying this past week about the reason for making her statement in SD

She mentioned Bobby Kennedy several times well before Ted Kennedy's sudden diagnosis, so she lied about why she was moved to mention Bobby (yet again). Big giant red flag waving there. She had to reach for a plausible reason to bring up his name, the implication being that there is never a logical reason to invoke him, other than the specter of a candidacy cut short.

I agree with the poster who described it as a pattern of repetition designed to remind people that she's the 'safer' candidate compared to her rival. She's in the gutter yet again with that tactic.

[Bensthename]

2. And she told her Bosnia lie, I mean story several times also..

And again another story she should have just kept her hole shut on.. She is a loose cannon.

[havocmom]

3. One may want to revisit her Bosnia fable. Has the woman got snipers on the brain?

Her gaffe re Bosnia might be good to analyze in conjunction with the other topic.

[grannylib]

4. If all she was referencing was the time line, there was NO NEED

to mention the word "assassinated." She need only have said, "Bobby Kennedy wasn't nominated until June of 1968." The word "assassinate" is TOTALLY uncalled for and irrelevant. I understand the context; I do NOT understand the repeated references to assassination.

[papau]

5. IT REFERS TO CAL PRIMARY BEING IN JUNE - brains are obviously not required to be an Obama fan

[RaleighNCDUer]

6. And this year, California was in February.

There is NO correlation. Montana is NOT California.

[pathansen]

9. ?? Not sure what you mean

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

19. Except the 1992 campaign was over before June.

And the 1968 was primary campaign wasn't concluded until August, under completely different rules, and god forbid it should be repeated.

:shrug:

[sandnsea]

7. Same inference then, the anything can happen rationale

There's no reason to compare 1968 to 2008. We chose nominees through the convention process then. There were only 15 primaries. NH kicked it off on March 12. Kennedy got in after that. It wasn't drawn out for months until June, it was just a couple of months until June. Her entire premise is a lie.

So why'd she do that if not to inject assassination into the discussion?

[hulka38]

10. Raise the specter, cast the pall, increase the unease and dampen the enthusiasm and hope.

Then act indignant.

[Igel]

11. I read that, but thought it was backwards.

The point isn't that it wasn't settled within a few months of the start of the primary, but late in the year and not long before the convention. The number of primaries is a distraction; the start of the first primary is irrelevant.

If you take it wrt the start of the primary season, it's a lie--well, if we assume that she knew that the utterance was fraudulent. If you take it wrt the end of the season or the convention, it makes sense.

Now, when I read something or hear somebody, I first try to find the conditions under which what they say is true, because that's likely to be what the mean. Sometimes it means checking facts I hold to be true, verifying definitions, looking for context. Then, if I have doubts, I look for indications that I'm wrong--that they actually meant something that's wrong. It's the same for tossing around the word "lie": If I don't know the person knew something they said to be false, it's overreach, confusing mistakes, ignorance, and willful deceit. For the perfect there's no difference, but for us mere mortals, there's a stunning difference between the three.

Now, if I have a lot of ill will for somebody, or just don't want to be cooperative, I try to find conditions that make them wrong. Screw context, and if they use a word in meaning I don't know, they must be wrong.

But let's be clear: That's what I do when I want to be uncooperative, arrogant, and condescending, and I don't even try to delude myself into thinking that it counts as anything progressive. Cut-throat politics, sure. And when I do it, I certainly don't repeat others ill-will-laden sentences. That's being mean spirited on the cheap, mean-spiritedness for the lazy, and when I'm going to be mean spirited I prefer to actual exercise my spleen and not be a parrot.

[sandnsea]

12. So the man with the 165 IQ

and the woman with 35 years experience who is ready on day one, didn't know how we nominated candidats in 1968 - is that what you're trying to shovel off on me?

Of course it's relevant. We had a completely different system and different calendar. She knew. There's nothing comparable between 1968 and 2008, except the assassinations of MLK and RFK and Hillary's warnings that "anything can happen".

[hulka38]

14. I call it as I see it. If people agree with me so much the better.

I may learn something along the way too. My perspective in this case takes into account her character and motivation, both of which I believe I know something about after watching her closely for years. It takes into account the history of the Democratic primary process and the changes we've seen in the past 40 years. I factor in the angst among Washington insiders wrt the danger to Obama and that the politician he's always compared to is RFK. That fear and uncertainty are not generally compatible with hope and It takes into account that she isn't stupid, or ignorant and uninformed about the taboo of going there (you know where) repeatedly. Throw in her win at all costs mentality. Add a dash of desperation and voila! It all adds up to something I like to call insight.

[Flying Dream Blues]

15. Kicking again...

[indimuse]

16. The people who think OtherWise..ARE Demented!

and should seek help!

[Tellurian]

21. There is no help..

The words "anything can happen" can mean many things... The GOP's threat of publishing Michelle Obama's revealing video of her preaching from Wright's pulpit how "WHITEY" is EVIL" and all the her deranged BS that goes along with it!

Will certainly be a factor affecting Obama's electability when that little gem breaks. If people are turning away from Obama because of Wright's Revelations... This upcoming video, ought to be the fiasco of a lifetime for Obama.

[indimuse]

17. oh, yeah..

kikity kkik!

[bhikkhu]

18. And Obama didn't apologize that time either!

The nerve!

[dailykoff]

20. We know exacty what she's waiting for.

We've known since before she started yakking about it.