Please, don't feed the trolls.

by the time olbermann said what he said, this story had more legs than dan rather's book of one liners.

Final acts of Kabuki theater.

and Keith's comments weren't for the press (the press is the news), Keith comments were for the general public including the Superdelegates to take notice.

Hillary has done her share to keep the story alive in the last 48 hours. Unapologetic apologies followed by unwarranted rebuttal op-eds.

It was VERY GRACIOUS of Obama and his staff to give Hillary a pass on her criminal encouragment of assassins.

That's all that you should be focussing on - not on circulation of opinion pieces.

Keep the focus on the criminal rather than the victim.

Three days now and TPM still hasn't offered a single editorial on Hillary's actual comment.

All they posted was the video and the apology with none of the usual editorializing. Since then, every take TPM's offered has addressed Obama's reaction, not Hillary's original remark.

According to TPM, the story is not the outrageous, ugly remark Hillary made, but what they perceive to be a disingenuous overreaction to it... the same angle that Hillary's surrogates took on the Sunday morning shows at roughly the same time as Greg posted his take.

In the bag for Hillary?

Oh, dear heavens, no!

steroidally outraged special comment

That was pretty good. By the time Olbermann finished, I half-expected him to add, "I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."

Let them circulate it, though. I don't think there's anything wrong with digging the knife in a little bit while trying to appear above it all. At least they haven't printed up stickers, yet.

Keith Olberman is doing everything he can to keep Clinton supporters angry, bitter and defensive.

The truth is he is far more interested in his salary as the consequence of ratings battle with Bill O'Reilly than in helping Democrats win.

But then again, every time you get paid to have an opinion in America you get a bad case of ego bloat.

Circulating Olbermann's rabid rant? Are you serious? I think I'm done. I try to tell myself that I'd be making a big mistake by voting third party, but I think I've got to give my vote to Nader. I cannot vote for the man whose campaign worked tirelessly to demonize my candidate of choice.

F*** Obama. The ultimate douchebag.

How dare the Obama campaign express shock that Hillary hopes someone will murder him.

Why are my posts being "held for approval"?

Is this happening to anyone else?

I am amazed at the willingness of George Stephanopoulos to carry water for Hillary Clinton. He spent a lot of years trying to be viewed as something more than a Clinton adminstration political hack. He wiped it all out with his amazing display of journalistic integrity, "Senator Obama, does Rev. Wright love America as much as you do?" It is not exactly surprising that George's outrage was not with Clinton's completely inappropriate assassination reference, but with whether someone on Obama's staff forwarded the Olbermann video.

people need to look up "reactionary"

I can't believe the TPM offices are open on Memorial Day. I hope Josh is at least springing for beer.

We must now scrub Hillary's "gaffe" from the historical record.

I have to admit that I feel jilted by TPM on this dust up. Josh did not post single editorial thought when he put the video up on the main page a few days ago. Greg has been running with this story as a “He said and She said” boxing match.

All of which of coarse means that the truth must be somewhere between the worst reading of Hillary’s gaff (She wants Obama dead so she can win nomination), and now it Greg seems to be pushing that Obama is somehow behind her gaff having any legs at all.

In case you didn’t notice there has been a couple of thousand comments in the posts on these issues. Many of them have been positively unhinged comments by both Hillary and the Obama partisans.

This brings me back to why I feel jilted. I think this is an important story, and neither Josh nor Greg appear to look at this story in the context for which it matters.

“We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June, in California.”

Think of what lies in that one little sentence. What a firecracker. Man that sucker is loaded.

~ In it you can see the ghosts of 1968. The ghosts of MLK, RFK and JFK. A moment that many Democrats believed was their greatest achievement where being met, then those dreams where snuffed out one hero at time.

~ In it you can see the future ghost of Teddy, who has just been diagnosed with a fatal brain tumor.

~ For many that in 1968 race the democratic dream died when Nixon became president, which brings us back to our current fears of GWB’s legacy living on in a McCain presidency.

~ And the fact that many Obama supporters see Obama as the spiritual continuation of the ideals held and fought for by MLK, RFK & JFK who where all snuffed out long before their greatest days where finished, this race is of the gravest importance. And the fear of him being hurt is palpable in some parts of Obama land.

Like I said, that one little sentence is LOADED. And here’s my point. Clinton knows all of that. She should have known better. For me, why this gaff is relevant is because says something real and important about her judgment. This was a stunningly stupid thing to say out loud, let alone in front of a camera.

I don’t believe for a moment that she wishes Obama dead. Nor that she is in the race hoping something evil happens to him. She’s trying to win, and keep her flagging campaign afloat. What I do know is that she is an uber smart, politico. And she should have known better.

What if (god forbid) something where to happen to Obama? Clinton can never take those words back. She will be seen forever as complicit. She would be reviled for those words until the end of her days. They are ugly, repugnant and utterly stupid, stupid, stupid words to say… She really should know better. SHE DOES KNOW BETTER!!!

And she will pay a high price for saying them.

I truly wish they had never been said. They make me feel sick. Not towards Clinton per say, but just sick. They make me deeply question her judgment.

And THIS I think is the point that has been missing in these posts at TPM. And it is the point that most of the enraged Obama supporters have failed to articulate. Furthermore, that is why this is not just a gaff, or slip of the tongue. It is a full blown story.

characaterized

That was almost Bushist -that accidental neologism!

LOL!

Obama's hacks caused this fake outrage and the gullible kool aid dinkers swallowed it to feed their hungry hatred.

There will be no unity but will be a fight on the convention floor.

Dirty politics Obama and his unity is bs like he is.

GFY.

I'm sort of disappointed that the Obama campaign circulated the Olbermann piece, but I understand it. The Clintons are clearly not going to go down without an ugly battle--McAuliffe said this weekend that they'd take the nomination to the convention--so Obama needs to quit playing nice. He's in a tough spot, because he's trying to bring the party together and at the same time, secure the nomination. I think Obama has made a serious tactical error in going easy on the Clintons. I think he should have tried to destroy her. Because she's clearly trying to destroy him.

Politics ain't beanbag, and a race against Hillary is no place for a gentleman. On the other hand, the Obama campaign hasn't done too badly so far...

Who in the Obama campaign circulated the Olbermann piece? Greg this is shoddy reporting indeed.

Was it just some lowly lackey that thought it was great stuff and cc'd it to everybody?

Or was it from the top?

It is hard to believe that it came from the top since they want to get away from the story (especially because pushing it puts Obama in even more danger)

My guess is it was some lower, but passionate, campaign worker. But I have to guess since Greg is not doing his job to detail where exactly the Olbermann commentary circulation came from and just leaves readers to the assumption that this was coordinated by the top itself. It is absurd and counter intuitive.

Ok, I am not a fox "news" sunday fan, but I watch it sometimes to see what the enemy is thinking. Well, wallace did a bang up job with clinton shill mcauliffe on Sunday concerning her outrageous assassination reference. Mcauliffe looked like the fool that he is and so did the clintons. Check out this transcript:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/05/terry_mcauliffe_on_fox_news_su.html

Now compare that to clinton stooge stephanopilis with axelrod. Give me a break. Wallace hit the point that the comment was offensive and completely unwarranted regardless of motive and many people were justifiably offended. Mcauliffe was pathetically spinning in the wind.

Let's just call it more hypocrisy from the Obama campaign, and move on.

What would be the purpose for Obama's campaign circulating Olbermann's remarks on Clinton? Greg's rational is lame; Obama' paid campaign staff has been near religious with their discipline. Clinton remarks and outrage about it was traveling at mach speed in all media, why would he or his campaign spend the energy? This appears to be a ploy to misdirect attention away from Clinton.

Hmm... I wonder if Lady MacBeth was the true pioneer of Triangulation?

Hillary's constant use of Triangulation with full intentional back-up by her surrogates has come full triangle and now firmly bit Hillary on her arse.

Sorry! Hillary, GS, nor Politico can dig her out of this one.

The idea that Obama's supporters need to bend over backwards to avoid offending Hillary's supporters is ridiculous. It's been a hard-fought campaign, but it's time to rally around the nominee. Do you want better health care or not? Do you want women to be able to control their own bodies or not? Do you want young Americans to stop being killed in a counterproductive (and criminal) war or not? Do you want to end a tax policy that soaks the rich while leaving working family out in the cold or not? Let's get real folks. It's been fun fighting, but it's time to focus on what is actually important.

This is, with all respect, very bad journalism on TPM's part. "The Obama campaign circulated the Olbermann piece" is a simply meaningless statement, without the necessary clarification. We don't know what you mean by "Campaign". We don't know what you mean by "circulated." Did I circulate the Olbermann piece when I sent a link to my friend? Do I need to apologize to Hillary?

You have, in effect, with this sloppiness, created a moral equivalence between the actions of the two campaigns here.

You have let the Clinton Campaign turn it into a he-said-she-said.

You have in effect, with this sloppiness, encouraged Hillary's supporters to emerge from the incident, thinking "F*ck, Obama."

You have shrugged your shoulders through this one.

Kinda sick.

I'm so sick of the holier-than-thou attitude from the Obama camp. So they accepted Hillary's apology. My, that's certainly big of them.

And Olbermann just goes to show how goofy many of Obama supports have become. Imagine if people that think like that are actually given governmental powers? HELP!!! It'll make the Bush administration look like Disneyland by comparison.

Something interesting about the video, Hillary's response was the long pause as she searched her memory banks for when her husband wrapped up the nomination in 1992. She paused so long that the interviewer volunteered June.

Now, if she was trying to come up with examples of "June", why would there be this very long pause?

Instead, this is her canned answer to "why not drop out of the race".

I'm willing to give Hillary the benefit of the doubt, but I think she could explain how she came up with this formulation several months ago. In other words, what was the original spark to use these two examples 1992 and 1968? What was significant about them, and why did Hillary think that she needed a complicated historical analysis to justify staying in the race?

The truth is that the problem with her staying in the race is that her justifications always seemed so strange. Like because Obama can't win in November, or she doesn't want to disenfranchise voters in West Virginia, Florida, etc., or that she has won the important states, the primary states, the swing states, the big states, etc.

The bottom line, her reason for staying in the race has always been about actively diminishing Obama. And just staying in the race because she can, well that doesn't diminish Obama at all, that would be conceding defeat. So she can't give a simple answer to a simple question. That wouldn't make the news, wouldn't rile up the opposition, wouldn't spark debate. Instead it would consign her to second place.

What apology McCitizen? ...Obama simply said he took her at her word...she never apologized she 'regrets' and these regrets were for the Kennedys whom she 'might' have offended. But who cares...it just 'words' anyway. What is outrageous is the fallout she has spawned. See below:

http://www.americablog.com/2008/05/liz-trotta-fox-news-analyst-laughed.html

"encouraging reporters sotto voce to believe the worst of their opponent."

Yikes, you must be kidding! The only one doing this is your girl, Greg.

If you think we are not ACTUALLY outraged, then you have not been paying attention.

Stephanopolis said that Obama's people issued a press release with Olbermann's remarks.

Does anyone have a copy of the press release? It's not on Obama's site.

Greg?

I have to admit that I feel jilted by TPM on this dust up. Josh did not post single editorial thought when he put the video up on the main page a few days ago. Greg has been running with this story as a “He said and She said” boxing match.

All of which of coarse means that the truth must be somewhere between the worst reading of Hillary’s gaff (She wants Obama dead so she can win nomination), and (Greg’s take) that Obama and KO are responsible for the gaffe having any legs at all. There have been a couple of thousand comments in the posts on these issues. And some editorial response is long overdue.

TPM did not weight in on this and I think it would have been very useful if it had. Many of the responses have been positively unhinged comments by both Hillary and the Obama partisans, which brings me back to why I feel jilted. I think this is an important story, and neither Josh nor Greg appears to look at this story in the context for which it matters.

Hillary R. Clinton: “We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June, in California.”

Yes, Hillary, we do… And Jesus, think of what lies in that one little sentence, that sucker is loaded.

~ In it you can see the ghosts of 1968. The ghosts of MLK, RFK and JFK. The civil rights movement, for democrats it was one of its greatest achievements, and June 1968 was the month we saw those dreams murdered forever, snuffed out one hero at time.

~ In it you can see the future ghost of Teddy, who has just been diagnosed with a fatal brain tumor.

~ For many in that 1968 race the our greatest dreams died for a generation when Nixon became president, and implemented the southern strategy.

~ And now we must worry about another potential ghost. Many Obama supporters see Barack as the spiritual continuation of the ideals held and fought for by MLK, RFK & JFK who where snuffed out long before their greatest days where finished. For those supporters this race is of the gravest importance. And their fear of him being hurt is palpable in many parts of Obama land.

Like I said, that one little sentence is LOADED. And here’s my point. Clinton knows all of that. She knows better. For me, why this gaff is relevant is because says something real and important about her judgment. This was a stunningly stupid thing to say out loud, let alone in front of a camera.

I don’t believe for a moment that she wishes Obama dead. Nor that she is in the race hoping something evil happens to him. She’s trying to win, and keep her flagging campaign afloat. Trying to “Make News” and stay “Above the Fold”. She is an uber smart politico, and for that reason she should never have said those words.

What if (god forbid) something where to happen to Obama? Clinton can never take those words back. She will be seen forever as complicit. She would be reviled for those words until the end of her days. They are ugly, repugnant and utterly stupid, stupid, stupid words to say… She really should know better. No… She does know better… And she will pay a high price for saying them.

I wish they had never been said. They make me feel sick. Not towards Clinton per say, but just sick. And they make me deeply question her judgment and motives for uttering them. All of us should.

And this I think is the point that has been missing in these posts at TPM. And it is the point that most of the enraged Obama supporters have failed to articulate. But it is the reason this is not just a gaffe or slip of the tongue. It is a full blown story. And we all need to think about it.

No mention of a press release in Greg's post on this yesterday.

When did the press release go out, Greg?

What's interesting is that when Hillary used these tactics, Greg was usually played an active part in it, reporting information directly from Hillary conference calls, thereby propagating the controversies in a way which Wolfson himself couldn't have planned any better.

Now that Obama is doing essentially the same thing, Greg seems to be overly concerned all of the sudden about the same media-driven process which he was deeply entrenched in before, shaking his head and tsk-tsking judgementally, saying, look at what those Obama people are doing...

It actually made me laugh out loud. Anyone else notice this?

I'm a strong Obama supporter; applaud the position he and Axelrod have taken; do not think there is any reasonable justification for the callousness of Hillary's remark, even if she's given the benefit of the doubt about intent/motive ..... BUT ....... I'm very sorry the Obama campaign circulated the Olbermann piece. Let her dig a hole and bury herself, but don't throw additional dirt into it.

(For the record, however, the transcript or link to Keith O's piece was NOT sent to supporters. According the the NYT article, a link was sent to reporters. As a supporter who gets all the campaign's e-mails, etc., I can confirm that it was not sent out to supporters.)

The beauty of Olbermann's riff was twofold: one, it had the bracing wind of truth behind it--it's been so long since anyone in the media has had the guts to call the Clintons on their B.S., and not to fold under the Clintonian crap about how tough the media is on poor little Hillary; and two, by listing the serial Hillary offenses all together, Olbermann showed just how much sewer-water has been pumping from the Billary Machine for the past several months. Indeed, when this nutcase finally is hauled off the stage, and the dust clears and people start looking back at the campaign, stomachs will turn when everyone realizes the sheer accumulation of lies, distortions, unprincipled attacks and more lies which have been piled up by Billary Clinton and their sleaze-infested pals like Penn, Blumenthal and Carville.

it's pretty standard political practice for campaigns in such situations to take a public high-road position while simultaneously encouraging reporters sotto voce to believe the worst of their opponent.

It's pretty standard with Bush and many Republicans, but I don't think it's been standard with Democrats until Obama. Hillary has been a pretty straightforward candidate and she's said a lot of things that Obama's supporters don't like. But she's never been so duplicitous as to put on an act of being reasonable and kind while she was taking Obama off at the knees with a lead pipe. I think Bill Clinton said it best - there is a certain cold-bloodedness about the way Obama and his team operates. It is very much like how Bush and Carl Rove operated, and it should worry anyone who wants a real change in the White House.

Not voting for Obama because of comments by people you have never met and have no idea of their lifestyle, mental state or agenda is an irresponsible and childish decision. If you are going to support a Bush3 administration, at least take personal responsibility for that decision by studying the candidates' stand on the issues. Blaming it on a few unknown people on the internet is just plain irresponsible.

Could I possibly be the only person who thinks Olbermann is an idiot?

Now, I essentially agree with his outrage over the Iraq War and Clinton's tacky reference. But his Special Comment segments are so self-serving, so over-the-top that he undermines all credibility.

It's like he's saying, "Hey, look at me. My indignation is greater than yours!!"

If he would firmly, but calmly, state his opinions, that would be fine. But his overly emotional outbursts do nothing but allow people to dismiss any legitimate point he might make as being biased and hysterical.