Hillary Hits Critics For Taking Her RFK Assassination Remarks "Out Of Context"
Via The Page, Hillary has written an exclusive Op-ed piece for Sunday's New York Daily News in which she discusses her comments about RFK's assassination and hits unnamed critics for taking her remarks out of context to twist their meaning.
"Almost immediately, some took my comments entirely out of context and interpreted them to mean something completely different -- and completely unthinkable," she wrote. "I want to set the record straight: I was making the simple point that given our history, the length of this year's primary contest is nothing unusual."
"I was deeply dismayed and disturbed that my comment would be construed in a way that flies in the face of everything I stand for -- and everything I am fighting for in this election," she continued.
Meanwhile, it appears that Barack Obama accepts the notion that she didn't intend the remarks as some have chosen to interpret them. Yesterday he said that he thought her comments were the result of the carelessness that inevitably sets in amid the rigors of extended campaigning, adding that he takes her "at her word" when she says that "she did not intend any offense."
With that in mind, it's worth taking a quick look at how the coverage of this unfolded. After her remarks were blared on Drudge on Friday afternoon, Obama spokesperson Bill Burton quickly put out a statement calling her remarks "unfortunate." Burton's initial statement didn't say whether the Obama camp believed she'd intended the worst by them, but that didn't matter: The simple act of offering any sort of criticism, however vague, ensured that this would become a major story.
Nor did anything change when, after the story blew up, Obama senior strategist David Axelrod explicitly stated that he didn't believe she'd meant the worst, claiming that he didn't think she was hoping that a "tragic, catastrophic event" would "intervene."...
Now Obama, too, has basically said the same, and that won't change the coverage of this in any material way, either. Outside observers will continue to insist that she meant the worst, without noting that the Obama campaign has said twice now that they don't think this.
Whatever you think of Hillary's intended meaning, this tells us something about how our gaffe-hungry political press and punditry works, and about how the constant insult-and-offense tennis match has played out in this primary. If Candidate A says something that could be interpreted as an out-of-bounds attack on Candidate B, it simply doesn't matter if Candidate B says he didn't take it as one. It's still a story anyway, because the simple fact that it could be interpreted as such makes it a "gaffe," and therefore news.
Once the comment in question has been deemed news, it simply doesn't matter at all what the aggrieved party says about it, and never will.
Both the Clinton and Obama camps know full well this is how our discourse functions. And both have used it to great effect throughout this campaign.
To be clear, I'm not saying that's necessarily what's happened this time. I'm trying to make a more general point: No matter what Hillary meant here, the pundits and opinion-makers on both sides who throughout this race have professed outrage at this or that slight while pretending that both campaigns don't know exactly how the insult-victim game works have been at best willfully naive, and at worst outright deceptive.
I think Barack's comments will take some of the wind out of the sails of this story. Hillary will still take heat, but it won't be as severe and prolonged.
May 25, 2008 9:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not the brightest move in a campaign where bright moves have been scarce to begin with.
On this one the best advice - SHUT THE F UP
May 25, 2008 11:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Remember Hillary's famed "cackle" and the Obama STFU moment in the Iowa debate last year? Well, it's interesting that she's doing it to herself now. Another point is that Senator Obama is essentially saying the same thing as he did in answering that debate question when answering the "will you consider Hillary your VP" question.
Memory lane:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhPxSm9Es0w
May 25, 2008 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Mr. Sargent, I knew I could count on you to start the Clinton work on blaiming the press as well as Sen. Obama's campaign for her statement... Have you any idea how angry to Afr. am. community is? And even taken in context, the commnets are jsut as wrong and offensive - plain dumb and insensitive. As Sen. CLinton said, this is a job interview. In my opionin, she failed - period. After pitching black v white, brown v black, workers v others, men v women - this great divider should move on, and allow us to do the same. As she stated in the CA debate, she will be fine - let's concentrate on the isses and make sure that the party and all the ones she claims to champion will be fine, too.
May 25, 2008 2:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well my god.
If this isn't a fine thing - if you can't find one excuse for her you make up another - now it's Drudge's fault.
No it isn't. It doesn't matter what she meant - it was the stupidest damn thing I've heard a candidate ever say and it was deeply offensive no matter what she meant - and who will ever know now? She lies.
She is a liar.
She has a hell of lot of nerve complaining.
May 25, 2008 9:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, it's Drudge and "the discourse" that's at fault. It couldn't be Hillary's responsibility for blowing her dog-whistle.
May 25, 2008 10:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly.
This might have damped down somewhat if she had just apologized for real and kept saying she was sorry if someone brought it up - but NO!
This is Hillary. She has to hit out at people when she's in trouble. That's how she deals with it.
May 25, 2008 10:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Of course, it's not her fault.
Nothing ever is.
May 25, 2008 2:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the pop analysis bullshit~ do you ever plan to land your own balloon sweetheart or is your never ending hyper shrill Hillary hating going to go on forever??? Give it a rest chick, you sound like something from the Onion or SNL. " Hillary is evil ...everything she says is lies .....she wants Barak dead .... she probably will kill him and eat him before the convention .... with a recipe she got from Martha Stewart ..... who is also such a bitch ... ooohhh I hate hate hate rich powerful women ....oops well I mean I love love love Barack and lookout Michelle I want him all for my own .... see Barak how I hate Hillary so much and love you so much don't you love me back ..... hate her ...love me... hate her ... love me ...... oooh TenaX is tired now ..... but must keep hating!!! AARRGGH!!! ....."
May 25, 2008 4:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
" Give it a rest chick..."
That's a little sexist, don't you think?
I'd be careful, I'd hate to find out what of all of your cohorts over at Hillaryis44 might do to you if they find out about this.
May 25, 2008 5:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
CHICK is the female equivalent of DUDE. It is best described as "casual affection" and you are best described as "complete PC asshole"
May 25, 2008 5:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Coming from a supporter of Hillary "those mean boys are out to get me" Clinton I find your response absolutely comical.
Whose camp freaked out at the use of the word "pimp"? Whose camp freaked out when Obama wiped at his shoulder? Whose camp freaked out when Olbermann talked about someone taking Hillary into a room to talk to her? Whose camp freaked out at the Hillary "Deathwatch" widget at Slate?
May 25, 2008 5:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
YOU are calling me out on "CHICK" and you think "PIMPING HER DAUGHTER" is OK!?! You are so far gone ......... more kool-aid???
May 25, 2008 6:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I didn't say it was okay....although it's become a bit of a colloquialism for today's youth, it's a term I would never use.
I just find it quite comical that someone from the Clinton camp has the unmitigated gall to accuse someone else of being, in your own ever-classy words, a "complete PC asshole".
May 25, 2008 6:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wait! I thought she loved SNL? Didn't she even quote a SNL skit at a debate? It seemed then that she believed the satire was right on - "Would Barack like another pillow?"
But ahhh, alas SNL has fallen into the Hillary Clinton "your either with me, or against me" media dustbin. They are joining a growing number.
In fact, I think only Fox News is still OK in Clinton's book.
Hillary Media Mantra: If you love her, you are Fair and Balanced - good media, good dog
If you criticize her in any way - bad media, vast sexist conspiracy, they are all out to get her.
May 26, 2008 7:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Greg is pretending that this is all a game that both sides play in the same way. He could not be more wrong. It is true that sometimes camp Obama pounces on an idiotic thing Hillary says or does, but it also has been a standard Obama campaign practice to retreat if the opponent offers a benign explanation of a controversial remark and to accept the explanation at face value and move on. Obama is willing to allow gaffes to become one or two day brouhahas IF the other side offers some explanation. Team Hillary will ride an Obama gaffe or slip up as long as humanly possible. Think: "Plagiarism-gate," "Bittergate," and saying to Scaife (of Wright) "well HE would never be MY pastor."
There's no moral equivalence, Greg, no matter how much it would soothe your conscience to see it that way.
May 25, 2008 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well said, Lincoln.
May 25, 2008 4:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lincoln, I think this is a key point. Compare Hillary's jumping on Bittergate to this case-- Obama and his people are all publically saying it's no big deal, they accept her explanation.
Meanwhile on the Sunday shows this morning, I heard Wolfson basically blame the OBAMA CAMP for the whole thing-- imply that it would be nothing if they weren't blowing it up.
Wow.
May 25, 2008 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
So now you're willing to give Drudge a blow job.
May 25, 2008 10:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
blow jobs and assholes- why is this idiot still allowed?
May 25, 2008 10:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Please, don't feed the trolls.
May 25, 2008 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Registered User" is such an a-hole bitter troll that his name might as well say "troll" and shows his level of debate capacity by his choice of words. You're an idiot, you troll.
May 25, 2008 11:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Opinions are like assholes - everybody's got one.
May 26, 2008 7:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am frustrated--I knew Greg Sargent wrote this post without checking the by-line. This post seems to imply that Obama played some game by denying she meant something untoward.
Seriously, is Sargent working for the Clinton campaign, or TPM?
May 25, 2008 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is Obama's seedy campaign that first jumped on this, and they have since milked it for all that it's worth. Bill Burton not only said it was "unfortunate," but he acted outraged and said that "it has no place in this campaign." They are the ones who originally put the worst possible spin on this and got the press fired up about it as if Hillary was threatening Obama's life, and as George Stephanapolis pointed out this morning, the seedy Obama campaign is still sending around copies of Keith Olbermann's searing attack on Hillary over this issue.
And so for you or anyone else to characterize Obama as being the "aggrieved party" is so spectacularly false and disingenuous, I can only believe that it must have much more to do with your liberal guilt than the facts in evidence. In your mind Obama will ALWAYS be the "aggrieved party," no matter how fanciful or low he sinks, simply because he is black.
This also reminds me of how the far right took some innocuous facts and eventually made a case that Hillary Clinton murdered Vince Foster. The exact same malevolent and paranoid mentality that drove the far right to accuse the Clintons of numerous fictional felonies is now driving the the cult of Obama. Very sad.
There is absolutely nothing in what Hillary said or did that had anything whatsoever to do with any implied threat towards Obama. And those who think otherwise are either very sick and paranoid individuals - or shamelessly ruthless. Any sane person listening to what she said knows that all she was referring to was the fact that there have been Democratic primaries that have not been over until June.
But in the exact same way that political scum on the far right grabbed onto anything that they could possibly use in their desperate effort to drive Bill Clinton from office, we have a situation where the same kind of paranoid and unethical political scum in the Obama camp that is using anything that they possibly can to drive Hillary from this race.
And I've just about had it. I always intended to vote for the Democratic candidate. But I can no longer see how I can, in good conscience, vote for a candidate who could sink this low. And I doubt that I'm the only one at this point.
Obama has proven himself to be not only the weaker candidate, but the candidate with absolutely no character or moral scruples.
May 25, 2008 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
WTF??? What has Obama had to do wih this disaster??? Please point out where Obama has done anything to take advantage of this situation. Where is it in his stump speech? Where has he condemned her in the media? He's actually come out and defended her. Holy crap. Please tell me you have something to back up this load of road apples.
May 25, 2008 4:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Either you can't read, or you're so far in denial about Obama that it doesn't penetrate, so I'll try again and see if you can get it this time:
It is Obama's seedy campaign that first jumped on this, and they are the ones who milked it for all that it's worth. Bill Burton not only first jumped on it and said it was "unfortunate," but he acted outraged and said that "it has no place in this campaign." They are the ones who originally put the worst possible spin on this and got the Obama-loving press all fired up about it as if Hillary was threatening Obama's life, and as George Stephanapolis pointed out this morning, the seedy Obama campaign is _still_ sending around copies of Keith Olbermann's searing attack on Hillary over this issue. Even Obama's two-faced "I'll take her at her word" was only a way of mocking Hillary when she said on 60 minutes that that "I'll take him at his word" that he was a Christian and not a Muslim. Obama has done everything that he possibly could to keep this story alive and to rub her face in it. He's a liar and shameless phony.
And so for you or anyone else to characterize Obama as being the "aggrieved party" is so spectacularly false and disingenuous, I can only believe that it must have much more to do with your liberal guilt than the facts in evidence. In your mind Obama will ALWAYS be the "aggrieved party," no matter how fanciful or low he sinks, simply because he is black.
This also reminds me of how the far right took some innocuous facts and eventually made a case that Hillary Clinton murdered Vince Foster. The exact same malevolent and paranoid mentality that drove the far right to accuse the Clintons of numerous fictional felonies is now driving the the cult of Obama. Very sad.
There is absolutely nothing in what Hillary said or did that had anything whatsoever to do with any implied threat towards Obama. And those who think otherwise are either very sick and paranoid individuals - or shamelessly ruthless. Any sane person listening to what she said knows that all she was referring to was the fact that there have been Democratic primaries that have not been over until June.
But in the exact same way that political scum on the far right grabbed onto anything that they could possibly use in their desperate effort to drive Bill Clinton from office, we have a situation where the same kind of paranoid and unethical political scum in the Obama camp that is using anything that they possibly can to drive Hillary from this race.
And I've just about had it. I always intended to vote for the Democratic candidate. But I can no longer see how I can, in good conscience, vote for a candidate who could sink this low. And I doubt that I'm the only one at this point.
Obama has proven himself to be not only the weaker candidate, but the candidate with absolutely no character or moral scruples.
May 25, 2008 4:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Typical response from a Clinton supporter -just keep repeating the same old shit long enough and eventually people might believe it.
May 25, 2008 5:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just pointing out the difference between the facts and the empty ad hominum attacks, because all that people like your ever do is respond with the latter.
Either you can't read, or you're so far in denial about Obama that it doesn't penetrate, so I'll try again and see if you can get it this time:
It is Obama's seedy campaign that first jumped on this, and they are the ones who have milked it for all that it's worth. Bill Burton not only first jumped on it and said it was "unfortunate," but he acted completely outraged and said that "it has no place in this campaign." They are the ones who originally put the worst possible spin on this and got the Obama-loving press all fired up about it as if Hillary was threatening Obama's life.
It's part and parcel of how the Obama campaign has perfected the art of playing the race card and taking offense at innocuous statements or gaffes. And as George Stephanapolis pointed out this morning, the Obama campaign is _still_ sending around copies of Keith Olbermann's searing attack on Hillary over this issue. Even Obama's two-faced "I'll take her at her word" was only a way of twisting the knife and mocking Hillary when she said on 60 minutes that that "I'll take him at his word" that Obama was a Christian and not a Muslim. Obama has done everything that he possibly could to keep this story alive and to rub her face in it. He's a liar and shameless phony.
And so for you or anyone else to characterize Obama as being the "aggrieved party" is so spectacularly false and disingenuous, I can only believe that it must have much more to do with your liberal guilt than the facts in evidence. In your minds Obama will ALWAYS be the "aggrieved party," simply because he is black.
This also reminds me of how the far right took some innocuous facts and eventually made a case that Hillary Clinton murdered Vince Foster. The exact same malevolent and paranoid mentality that drove the far right to accuse the Clintons of numerous fictional felonies is now driving the the cult of Obama. Very sad.
There is absolutely nothing in what Hillary said or did that had anything whatsoever to do with any implied threat towards Obama. And those who think otherwise are either very sick and paranoid individuals - or shamelessly ruthless. Any sane person listening to what she said knows that all she was referring to was the fact that there have been Democratic primaries that have not been over until June.
But in the exact same way that political scum on the far right grabbed onto anything that they could possibly use in their desperate effort to drive Bill Clinton from office, we have a situation where the same kind of paranoid and unethical political scum in the Obama camp that is using anything that they possibly can to drive Hillary from this race.
And I've just about had it. I always intended to vote for the Democratic candidate. But I can no longer see how I can, in good conscience, vote for a candidate who could sink this low. And I doubt that I'm the only one at this point.
Obama has proven himself to be not only the weaker candidate, but the candidate with absolutely no character or moral scruples.
May 25, 2008 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please state ONE example of Obama or someone from Obama's camp trying to drive Hillary out of the race. Just one, please.
May 25, 2008 5:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, please. Everything that Obama and his flunkies have done - including on this blog - is aimed at driving her from the race. Now he's acting like he's already the nominee, so in practice he already has pushed her out of the race. This latest underhanded attack is just the natural extension of that.
May 25, 2008 5:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not good enough...one specific example, please.
May 25, 2008 6:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I already gave you one example in the post you just replied to - ignoring her and acting as if He is already the nominee is just another way of trying to drive her from the race. Your real problem is that you like to have the last word after you've already lost the debate.
May 25, 2008 6:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Ignoring her" is driving her from the race? ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Awesome....maybe the same strategy will work with McCain. Why waste millions on overpaid political consultants? Just ignore your opponent! Brilliant!!!!
May 25, 2008 6:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is so damned Bushian. Rovian: Smear the opponent, wait for response, accuse them of whining, accuse them of pushing the story, make nice, smear the opponent, repeat as often as needed to solidify the smear and whiner meme.
May 25, 2008 6:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Repeat it often enough and maybe people will believe you. Sounds like Rove.
May 25, 2008 6:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I like you guy you are a cute little TROLL!!!Can I keep you????Now be a good little TROLL and get back in your Cage!!!
May 26, 2008 12:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
You are seriously, seriously nuts.
May 25, 2008 5:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Another ad hominum attack from someone who can't refute the facts.
May 25, 2008 5:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's a fact for you...
Obama is going to be your next president. Better start getting used to the white house going black because both of your white candidates are going down.
May 25, 2008 5:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your delusional predictions are not facts.
May 25, 2008 6:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
it's far more likely than Hillary becoming president. she'll be bowing out any day now
and mccain is going down like bob dole in '96, regardless
mark my words
you're delusional faith (pretend or not) in hillary having a shot is the most delusional thing in this entire thread
May 25, 2008 6:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whether you like it or not Hillary does have a shot since there will not be a nominee until August. I know you don't like that, but you really only make yourself more upset when you subscribe to some alternate view of reality that you believe everyone else must submit to.
May 25, 2008 7:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
delusional. straight up. hillary already lost. she'll be gone soon enough.
you just can't stand the idea of an african american president and it's obviously freaking you the fuck out (i.e your constant black, black, black comments). surely all whiteys will come around to your ol' time racist perspective, you just keep hopin' and prayin'. but it ain't gonna happen. you are a dinosaur and, well, we know what happened to the dinosaurs over time
May 25, 2008 8:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
What do you mean "she'll be gone soon enough."!? Are you making some sort of violent threat against Hillary's life? She's is in perfectly good health and she's not that old - so are you hoping that someone will assassinate her? Why are you calling for the assassination of a political candidate???
May 25, 2008 9:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
you're an idiot. but I guess you like arguing with yourself and your straw men more than you do in actual two-way discussions here.
you know exactly what I meant. she'll drop out of the race in two weeks.
then you can really explode into your racial tirades about "self-hating whites". I fear for those around you at that time
you know who else is into your line of thinking about race traitors? the folks at freerepublic.com. I think you'd be a lot happier there after obama ties up the nomination
May 25, 2008 10:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
How do I know what you meant when you start talking about getting rid of Hillary? Why can't I make the same assumptions that you made? You seem to hate Hillery enough to do violence. It seems to me that you are projecting your own hate onto her, and assuming that she feels the same way towards Obama. But she doesn't.
May 25, 2008 10:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
re: "getting rid of Hillary"
okay, you are obviously just a provocateur as nobody could be as stupid as you pretend to be
I said nothing about "getting rid of" Hillary. I said she'd be gone, and you know that
you are a very hateful and dishonest person. sad to boot.
May 26, 2008 12:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
She's not going anywhere unless one of you Hillary haters assassinate her. She is still going to be right in your face so get used to it. Either she will be president next year or she will be the Senate majority leader, leading the fight against President McCain. Obama is the only loser who will eventually fade into history. So get used to the idea.
May 26, 2008 3:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not to mention giving monkeys a bad name.
May 25, 2008 5:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
What do you mean "she'll be gone soon enough."!? Are you making some sort of violent threat against her life? Hillary is in perfectly good health and she's not that old - are you hoping that someone will assassinate her? Why are you calling for the assassination of a political candidate???
May 25, 2008 9:15 PM | Reply | Permalink