The facts are true, but the comparison between the situation in 1968 and 2008 are not close to being the same. Her trying to use this as a justification for staying in the race is misleading and dishonest because she knows better.

BTW, RFK's son can certainly speak as far as the Kennedy family being offended by her remarks, but you are wrong if you think he speaks for the nation in a more general sense.

Senator Clinton's assassination remarks are dangerous, because they put Senator Obama's life at risk. That is completely unacceptable in my opinion.

I think that RFK. Jr.'s remarks are reflective of the fact that the comments in no way put anyone's life "at risk", and in fact the comments do not have anything to do with Obama.

The problem Yossarian is that even if Senator Clinton didn't mean it that way -- and I don't think she did -- there is a chance that some crazy will interpret that way. There was absolutely no good reason to bring the assassination of RFK into the picture. There is a very real chance, in my opinion of course, that someone may interpret comments as a sign to take it upon themselves to help her pull ahead in June.

And if you don't think her comments have anything to do with Senator Obama, you're supporting her blindly and nothing I can say will make you understand. But you may be able to look back and "get it" in a few months after she loses the nomination.

If you don't think she meant it that way then you and I are saying the same thing. The comments were intended to be about the length of the campaign. That's why she mentioned her husband's campaign as well.

This is historically inaccurate.
New Hampshire was in March of '68.
Thus making the Primary less than 3 months old at the time of the '68 California Primary.

As far as 1992, Bill Clinton might have gotten the necessary delegate total for the nomination but it was well known he would be the nominee after Tsongas dropped out of the race.

The comment made by her was "We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California". It was not that Bobby Kennedy won the Primary in June, she SPECIFICALLY made the point that he was KILLED in June.

She's classless, disgusting, and will do ANYTHING to win.

Yos, your logic doesn't make sense and reflects an attitude of support for your candidate no matter what it takes. Why am I saying the same thing? I'm saying what Hillary said was dishonest in that I believe she knowingly made a comparison that was not valid. It has nothing to do with whether or not she intended to put Senator Obama's life in danger. That is an unintended consequence of her stupid statement, that may be factually correct, but nevertheless reckless.

"She's classless, disgusting, and will do ANYTHING to win."

Is this your feeling about RFK Jr. as well? As I recall you are one of the DINOs that said they would vote for McCain if their candidate didn't win. I will support Obama if he wins the nomination, of course, but Obama supporters like you make that more difficult.

I am voting for McCain, I have even volunteered to help with the campaingn and the RNC since I dontlive that far from Minneapolis

Would you mind explaining how you got to this conclusion? I truly just don't understand how you think what she said endangers BO. If anything, reminding people that a candidate was assasinated would endager all three candidates, herself included, don't you agree? There are nuts out there who hate each one of the candidates.

#1. I did say that I would consider voting for McCain if HRC was the nominee. But the more and more I thought about it, the more I realized that the needs of the country outweigh my hatred for HRC. I probably would've voted Nader if that were the case.

#2. Are you willing to support Obama or not? Stop floundering. You take a shot at me, yet you waffle on the support issue yourself.

#3. You have no answer for the historical inaccuracies or the fact that she SPECIFICALLY mentioned the murder of RFK.

Not to speak for Bugs, but the way she said it (without any consideration to the Kennedy family) made it seem like she is staying in because of the possibility Obama might be killed. It is very tasteless.

What on earth are you talking about????? Here is what I said "I will support Obama if he wins the nomination, of course". What do you think that means??? How is that waffling? I said that Obama supporters make it difficult when you take your cheap shots, but Obama and Clinton have almost identical positions on the issues and McCain would be too similar to Bush so I would never vote for him. I don't like either Obama or Clinton supporters saying they would vote for McCain just because they didn't get their first choice. I think most of them will reconsider when they look at the positions of the candidates.



There are no "inaccuracies". She said the campaigns of 1992 and 1968 continued into June and they did. It's true that they started later then, but she didn't say anything about that. That's just your counter-argument. And yes, she said Kennedy was assassinated because he was. That's what many people remember about 1968. But she said nothing about Obama, unlike Huckabee, for example.

And, speaking of having "no answer" I can't help but notice that you have no answer for RFK Jr. refuting the idea that this was anything more than pointing out that campaigns have continued into June in the past.

You are kidding me, right? I am no fan of HRC, but she was simply trying to point out (taste and bad timing aside) that RFK was still in the race in June. Period. Anyone that thinks she is staying in the race because Obama may be may be assassinated is crazy.

nah HIllary is the much bigger target.....

I'll give it a shot, Truf. Due to the fact that Senator Clinton refuses to withdraw from the race even though it is highly unlikely she will not win the nominatination, someone may could take her comments as a "call to action" and help her gain the nomination. This is why I think her comments put Senator Obama at risk.

Her remarks may be interpreted as saying that the reason she is staying in the race is to be ready in case "something happens" to Senator Obama. Her comparison of the 2008 race to the 1968 and 1992 races are simply clutching at straws to make some strange justification for her staying in the race.

Everyone is free to disagree, of course, but that's how I see it. I won't be saying any more on this topic.

BTW, just for the record, I have no animosity towards RFK and I think he would have made a great President. I was only 10 years old when he was killed and I lived in Los Angeles. I remember seeing the story on television and how sad it made me feel. I also have no animosity towards RFK's son.

As twisted as she is, I can't believe she would stoop to that level. She is still in the race because she was supposed to steamroll through the process, but the hopers and dreamers have put Obama on top. Its that simple. She can not believe she is behind, and she can't quit now, even though she should.

Ironically, this is another TOTY nominee.