The Gist

Hillary Clinton and the RFK Remark

Hillary Clinton is now in full damage control mode, both apologizing for her comments about RFK's June 1968 assassination -- in a piece she wrote for the New York Daily News -- while simultaneously blaming the Obama campaign for fanning the flames on what her campaign sees as an innocent gaffe.

We talked about this on the show late on Friday, just as the story was breaking, and it was the opinion of most callers -- including Obama supporters -- that Clinton was not really trying to claim Obama might get killed, and that this was an attempt, as she has explained, at emphasizing that there have been other nomination battles that weren't settled by June. Most agreed it was awkward or stupid, but not meant to do what some are accusing her of doing. The editors of the South Dakota paper with whom she was speaking also agree it's a non story and took it the way she has explained it. They didn't send it out or write it up: It was the Murdoch-owned New York Post, listening in to the interview, that ran it on it's web site with the headline, "Hillary Raises Assassination Issue ," and then it was on the Drudge Report. Soon, the Obama campaign was sending it around, and many of the Obama-supporting blogs went into overdrive attacking Clinton. Keith Olbermann eventually gave a scathing, angry "Special Comment,' vilifying Clinton.

Politco.com has an interesting analysis of the how the story moved, also noting that Clinton had said something similar weeks ago to Time magazine but none of the media had picked up on it. Were they not doing their job then? Were they now just looking for anything to whip up against Clinton? Was the Obama campaign more focused on it now? Obama has said that he accepts Clinton's explanation, but his campaign has been sending Olbermann's piece around, using it to stir the pot.

Did Clinton really mean the unthinkable here? Was she really trying to bring into view something horrific -- speaking in code to all those white working class voters? And if not, doesn't this at the very least, even if it was an innocent gaffe, show a lack of discipline, and something that should reflect on any decision to put her on the ticket? (There have been many such "gaffes," after all -- just last week was the "white Americans" remark, for which she also apologized.) Or has all of this been blown out of proportion by the Obama campaign, Obama's supporters and the media?

It was, for sure, stupid and unnecessary to be talking about anyone's assassination in the context of staying in the race. She only had to refer to RFK and the nomination not being wrapped up in June, without mentioning that he was killed, if she really was intent on using that specific example. Something else to add here, by the way: It's been pointed out that Bill Clinton had the nomination sewn up by March in '92 even if not officially until June, with California, so Clinton's using the example of her husband wasn't really applicable. But also, in both examples she uses (her husband and RFK), California was voting near the very end -- a huge number of delegates -- and so any close race would hinge on California. But this year, California was moved way up the schedule. As we all know, there's hardly anything left that will be decisive.