Comments on: Clinton staying in the race in case of…assassination! http://donutsandpolitics.gusweb.net/2008/05/23/clinton-staying-in-the-race-in-case-ofassassination/ Progressive thoughts from Michigan's West Coast Tue, 04 Nov 2008 23:49:46 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: enor http://donutsandpolitics.gusweb.net/2008/05/23/clinton-staying-in-the-race-in-case-ofassassination/comment-page-1/#comment-223 enor Tue, 27 May 2008 05:30:48 +0000 http://donutsandpolitics.gusweb.net/?p=141#comment-223 I don't care if she meant it the way that some people interpreted it. She has me thoroughly convinced she's just starving for power. Go away, Billary. I don’t care if she meant it the way that some people interpreted it. She has me thoroughly convinced she’s just starving for power.

Go away, Billary.

]]> By: wmw http://donutsandpolitics.gusweb.net/2008/05/23/clinton-staying-in-the-race-in-case-ofassassination/comment-page-1/#comment-222 wmw Sun, 25 May 2008 14:45:14 +0000 http://donutsandpolitics.gusweb.net/?p=141#comment-222 Okay, I'm feeling more charitable now---I don't think she meant to bring up assassination, I think she just meant June. I almost felt sorry for her for a second reading this: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/24/on-the-road-clintons-very-bad-day/ I did say almost. It was still really stupid. And it's still really stupid/rude to apologize to Kennedys and not Obamas. But he is taking the high road as usual, so...let's move on. To the next stupid tone-deaf self-serving consequences-be-damned thing she says. Okay, I’m feeling more charitable now—I don’t think she meant to bring up assassination, I think she just meant June. I almost felt sorry for her for a second reading this:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/24/on-the-road-clintons-very-bad-day/

I did say almost. It was still really stupid. And it’s still really stupid/rude to apologize to Kennedys and not Obamas. But he is taking the high road as usual, so…let’s move on. To the next stupid tone-deaf self-serving consequences-be-damned thing she says.

]]> By: wmw http://donutsandpolitics.gusweb.net/2008/05/23/clinton-staying-in-the-race-in-case-ofassassination/comment-page-1/#comment-216 wmw Sat, 24 May 2008 05:13:15 +0000 http://donutsandpolitics.gusweb.net/?p=141#comment-216 Okay...I am trying to be fair here...I do NOT think she WANTS something bad to happen. But it certainly raises the specter of something very scary to a lot of people (so much so that blacks initially were afraid to back Obama b/c of it). So either it was (1) unintentionally extremely stupid or (2) intentionally extremely stupid and evil. Even if it's #1, goodbye VP possibilities (thank goodness) b/c how can you have her a heartbeat from the presidency? Anything ever happened and the conspiracy theories would NEVER stop. My first reaction was WTF?! because it seemed dropped in there out of nowhere (like "Jesse Jackson won in 1988, not that anyone asked"). And she could have used other examples--like hello, just say TED Kennedy if you are thinking about him--and she has brought this up before, and also more vaguely "if something happened" kind of thing. When you make an argument more than once, it's not a mistake, it's a talking point. And it doesn't help for her to not address the implications people are discussing; if that's not what you meant, apologize to the man's wife that his kids might hear "Obama" and "assassination" on the news in the same sentence, and tell the world you find the thought reprehensible. I guess I think she did it half-intentionally, if that makes any sense: she didn't mean to say that, exactly, but it's basically what's left of her argument anyway. But it doesn't really matter because any way you look at it, it was DISQUALIFYINGLY STUPID. Forget cue the curtain---where's the big ol' HOOK? Okay…I am trying to be fair here…I do NOT think she WANTS something bad to happen. But it certainly raises the specter of something very scary to a lot of people (so much so that blacks initially were afraid to back Obama b/c of it). So either it was (1) unintentionally extremely stupid or (2) intentionally extremely stupid and evil. Even if it’s #1, goodbye VP possibilities (thank goodness) b/c how can you have her a heartbeat from the presidency? Anything ever happened and the conspiracy theories would NEVER stop.

My first reaction was WTF?! because it seemed dropped in there out of nowhere (like “Jesse Jackson won in 1988, not that anyone asked”). And she could have used other examples–like hello, just say TED Kennedy if you are thinking about him–and she has brought this up before, and also more vaguely “if something happened” kind of thing. When you make an argument more than once, it’s not a mistake, it’s a talking point.

And it doesn’t help for her to not address the implications people are discussing; if that’s not what you meant, apologize to the man’s wife that his kids might hear “Obama” and “assassination” on the news in the same sentence, and tell the world you find the thought reprehensible.

I guess I think she did it half-intentionally, if that makes any sense: she didn’t mean to say that, exactly, but it’s basically what’s left of her argument anyway. But it doesn’t really matter because any way you look at it, it was DISQUALIFYINGLY STUPID.

Forget cue the curtain—where’s the big ol’ HOOK?

]]>