http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/23/clinton-calls-vp-chatter-completely-untrue/index.html?nl=pol&emc=pola1
All,
Since she can't possibly win the Democratic Party nomination at this point Billary, Inc. is clearly out to completely sabotage Obama's chances of winning against McCain in the general election in November. Race-baiting, lies, innuendo, gossip, fear mongering--they'll use ANYTHING to help the right wing destroy him. Venom, spite, and an intolerable/overweening sense of entitlement is, as always, Billary's major stock in trade. After Mike Huckabee's vicious racist "joke" a couple days ago the statement made by Billary today marks the second direct public reference this week by a white politician to the possibility of Obama's assassination. What does that tell you?
What an insufferable, monumental asshole! This woman is off the charts insane. She and everything she embodies and "represents" needs to be stopped NOW...
MSNBC's brilliant political journalist and news anchor Keith Olbermann's critical and incisive commentary on this heinous episode (and his on air interview with political historian and Rice University professor Douglas Brinkley), as well as the following two articles from the New York Times tells us in great detail all we need to know about just how insidious and contemptible Billary's ongoing political stunts really are...
Kofi
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/24798166#24798166
May 23, 2008
Clinton, Defending Nomination Battle, Cites R.F.K. Assassination
By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE
New York Times
SIOUX FALLS, S.D.– Senator Hillary Clinton referred to the assassination of Robert Kennedy in 1968 as a reason she should continue her battle with Senator Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination.
Mrs. Clinton’s remarks came during meeting with the Sioux Falls Argus Leader editorial board. She was responding to a question about calls for her to drop out of the race. The editorial board meeting, in advance of South Dakota’s primary on June 3, was carried live on the Argus Leader’s Web site.
“My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. I don’t understand it,” Mrs. Clinton said, dismissing the idea of dropping out.
Mr. Obama learned of the remark when he was traveling to a rally in South Florida. He was not expected to publicly discuss it, aides said. Instead, the campaign issued a one-line statement.
“Senator Clinton’s statement before the Argus Leader editorial board was unfortunate and has no place in this campaign,” said Bill Burton, a campaign spokesman.
But an aide to Mrs. Clinton said that she was simply using the Kennedy assassination as a benchmark to underscore that nomination fights can go a long time and that she was in no way implying anything else.
“She was simply referencing her husband in 1992 and Bobby Kennedy in 1968 as historical examples of the nominating process going well into the summer,” said Mo Elleithee, a spokesman for the Clinton campaign. “Any reading into it beyond that is outrageous.”
All,
Since she can't possibly win the Democratic Party nomination at this point Billary, Inc. is clearly out to completely sabotage Obama's chances of winning against McCain in the general election in November. Race-baiting, lies, innuendo, gossip, fear mongering--they'll use ANYTHING to help the right wing destroy him. Venom, spite, and an intolerable/overweening sense of entitlement is, as always, Billary's major stock in trade. After Mike Huckabee's vicious racist "joke" a couple days ago the statement made by Billary today marks the second direct public reference this week by a white politician to the possibility of Obama's assassination. What does that tell you?
What an insufferable, monumental asshole! This woman is off the charts insane. She and everything she embodies and "represents" needs to be stopped NOW...
MSNBC's brilliant political journalist and news anchor Keith Olbermann's critical and incisive commentary on this heinous episode (and his on air interview with political historian and Rice University professor Douglas Brinkley), as well as the following two articles from the New York Times tells us in great detail all we need to know about just how insidious and contemptible Billary's ongoing political stunts really are...
Kofi
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/24798166#24798166
May 23, 2008
Clinton, Defending Nomination Battle, Cites R.F.K. Assassination
By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE
New York Times
SIOUX FALLS, S.D.– Senator Hillary Clinton referred to the assassination of Robert Kennedy in 1968 as a reason she should continue her battle with Senator Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination.
Mrs. Clinton’s remarks came during meeting with the Sioux Falls Argus Leader editorial board. She was responding to a question about calls for her to drop out of the race. The editorial board meeting, in advance of South Dakota’s primary on June 3, was carried live on the Argus Leader’s Web site.
“My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. I don’t understand it,” Mrs. Clinton said, dismissing the idea of dropping out.
Mr. Obama learned of the remark when he was traveling to a rally in South Florida. He was not expected to publicly discuss it, aides said. Instead, the campaign issued a one-line statement.
“Senator Clinton’s statement before the Argus Leader editorial board was unfortunate and has no place in this campaign,” said Bill Burton, a campaign spokesman.
But an aide to Mrs. Clinton said that she was simply using the Kennedy assassination as a benchmark to underscore that nomination fights can go a long time and that she was in no way implying anything else.
“She was simply referencing her husband in 1992 and Bobby Kennedy in 1968 as historical examples of the nominating process going well into the summer,” said Mo Elleithee, a spokesman for the Clinton campaign. “Any reading into it beyond that is outrageous.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/22/us/politics/22florida.html?nl=pol&emc=pola1&pagewanted=print
May 22, 2008
Clinton Signals She May Carry Fight to Convention
By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE and JEFF ZELENY
New York Times
CORAL GABLES, Fla. — A day after Senator Barack Obama gathered a majority of pledged delegates in the Democratic presidential nominating contest, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton defiantly sent out new signals Wednesday that she might take her fight for the nomination all the way to the party’s convention in August.
Mrs. Clinton stumped across South Florida, scene of the 2000 election debacle, pressing her case for including delegates from Florida and Michigan in the final delegate tally. On the trail and in interviews, she raised a new battle cry of determination, likening her struggle for these delegates to the nation’s historic struggles to free the slaves and grant women the right to vote.
But behind the scenes, the campaigns were working with the Democratic National Committee to resolve the dispute over the delegates before May 31, when the party’s rules committee is to decide the matter. Mrs. Clinton has said she wants all delegates counted and apportioned based on the popular vote of the two candidates in both states, although Mr. Obama did not appear on the ballot in Michigan.
Mr. Obama has said he wants the delegates seated but has not said how or in what proportion. David Axelrod, his chief strategist, said in an interview Wednesday that the campaign was willing to go beyond halfway in the apportionment.
“If that means we have to make some sacrifices,” Mr. Axelrod said, “we are open to do so, within reason. Our sense is the folks in Florida and Michigan want to resolve this. They’re not looking to prolong this.”
The outcome on the Florida and Michigan delegates may be only symbolic anyway. Winning extra delegates, even under her rosiest scenario, would not help Mrs. Clinton catch Mr. Obama’s lead on that score.
Both need superdelegates to get over the finish line. But winning additional delegates from Florida and Michigan might be Mrs. Clinton’s last glimmer of hope in bolstering her case to superdelegates that she would be the stronger candidate in November. In her victory speech Tuesday in Kentucky, she noted that the primary race was one of the closest in history.
Florida and Michigan have emerged as central to Mrs. Clinton’s effort to keep her candidacy alive.
Both states jumped ahead in the primary calendar in January in violation of party rules. As punishment, the party stripped them of their delegates, leaving them excluded from a primary process that has galvanized the rest of the country.
Mrs. Clinton told The Associated Press on Wednesday that she would support those states if they had to carry their fight to the convention.
“Yes, I will,” she said. “I will, because I feel very strongly about this.”
And Geoff Garin, her pollster, told MSNBC that she could campaign beyond the primaries because “there are enough uncommitted delegates left for either candidate to earn a majority.”
Mr. Obama crossed the threshold of amassing a majority of pledged delegates on Tuesday with his victory in Oregon.
Mr. Garin added that at some point, one of the candidates would have enough total delegates to win the nomination, “but we have not reached that point yet; we probably won’t reach that point on June 3.” Mrs. Clinton has signaled that she intends to stay in the race at least through the final primaries on June 3.
Mr. Obama ignored Mrs. Clinton’s arguments about the delegates in an effort, his aides said, not to legitimize her point of view.
“I know there are some people worried about the Democratic Party being divided,” Mr. Obama said. “We will be united.”
That strategists are working behind the scenes on the matter raised the possibility that Mrs. Clinton’s newfound fervor was an effort to make sure her apportioning method prevails.
It also raised the possibility that her campaign was split over how to handle the end game of what some have admitted privately is a lost cause. Some Clinton aides said that she was well aware of her uphill climb and that she was making a symbolic point. They said she was hesitant about declaring that she could overcome Mr. Obama’s lead, but at the same time did not want to be seen as surrendering.
Her swing across South Florida on Wednesday seemed essentially to be a campaign-within-a-campaign, one that is about process and is directed chiefly at the party’s rules committee.
“I’ve heard some say that counting Florida and Michigan would be changing the rules,” Mrs. Clinton said. “I say that not counting Florida and Michigan is changing a central governing rule of this country.”
She also sought to whip up populist sentiment, telling voters in Boca Raton, where the 2000 election played out vividly, “You didn’t break a single rule, and you should not be punished for matters beyond your control.”
She argued with fervor that the nomination should be determined by popular vote. She has claimed to have the lead in the popular vote by including Florida and Michigan in her tally.
“The outcome of our elections should be determined by the will of the people, nothing more, nothing less,” Mrs. Clinton said. “And we believe the popular vote is the truest expression of your will.”
“The lesson of 2000 here in Florida is crystal clear,” she said. “If any votes aren’t counted, the will of the people isn’t realized and our democracy is diminished.”
She generally avoided mentioning Mr. Obama all day, but concluded a rally in Coral Gables on Wednesday by declaring: “Look at the states I’ve won. Look at the states I’m leading in. Look at the electoral map. It is clear I’m the stronger candidate.”
As her voice was drowned out with cheers, she added: “Stay with me. Let’s make history together.”
Katharine Q. Seelye reported from Coral Gables, and Jeff Zeleny from Tampa, Fla.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company
Clinton Signals She May Carry Fight to Convention
By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE and JEFF ZELENY
New York Times
CORAL GABLES, Fla. — A day after Senator Barack Obama gathered a majority of pledged delegates in the Democratic presidential nominating contest, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton defiantly sent out new signals Wednesday that she might take her fight for the nomination all the way to the party’s convention in August.
Mrs. Clinton stumped across South Florida, scene of the 2000 election debacle, pressing her case for including delegates from Florida and Michigan in the final delegate tally. On the trail and in interviews, she raised a new battle cry of determination, likening her struggle for these delegates to the nation’s historic struggles to free the slaves and grant women the right to vote.
But behind the scenes, the campaigns were working with the Democratic National Committee to resolve the dispute over the delegates before May 31, when the party’s rules committee is to decide the matter. Mrs. Clinton has said she wants all delegates counted and apportioned based on the popular vote of the two candidates in both states, although Mr. Obama did not appear on the ballot in Michigan.
Mr. Obama has said he wants the delegates seated but has not said how or in what proportion. David Axelrod, his chief strategist, said in an interview Wednesday that the campaign was willing to go beyond halfway in the apportionment.
“If that means we have to make some sacrifices,” Mr. Axelrod said, “we are open to do so, within reason. Our sense is the folks in Florida and Michigan want to resolve this. They’re not looking to prolong this.”
The outcome on the Florida and Michigan delegates may be only symbolic anyway. Winning extra delegates, even under her rosiest scenario, would not help Mrs. Clinton catch Mr. Obama’s lead on that score.
Both need superdelegates to get over the finish line. But winning additional delegates from Florida and Michigan might be Mrs. Clinton’s last glimmer of hope in bolstering her case to superdelegates that she would be the stronger candidate in November. In her victory speech Tuesday in Kentucky, she noted that the primary race was one of the closest in history.
Florida and Michigan have emerged as central to Mrs. Clinton’s effort to keep her candidacy alive.
Both states jumped ahead in the primary calendar in January in violation of party rules. As punishment, the party stripped them of their delegates, leaving them excluded from a primary process that has galvanized the rest of the country.
Mrs. Clinton told The Associated Press on Wednesday that she would support those states if they had to carry their fight to the convention.
“Yes, I will,” she said. “I will, because I feel very strongly about this.”
And Geoff Garin, her pollster, told MSNBC that she could campaign beyond the primaries because “there are enough uncommitted delegates left for either candidate to earn a majority.”
Mr. Obama crossed the threshold of amassing a majority of pledged delegates on Tuesday with his victory in Oregon.
Mr. Garin added that at some point, one of the candidates would have enough total delegates to win the nomination, “but we have not reached that point yet; we probably won’t reach that point on June 3.” Mrs. Clinton has signaled that she intends to stay in the race at least through the final primaries on June 3.
Mr. Obama ignored Mrs. Clinton’s arguments about the delegates in an effort, his aides said, not to legitimize her point of view.
“I know there are some people worried about the Democratic Party being divided,” Mr. Obama said. “We will be united.”
That strategists are working behind the scenes on the matter raised the possibility that Mrs. Clinton’s newfound fervor was an effort to make sure her apportioning method prevails.
It also raised the possibility that her campaign was split over how to handle the end game of what some have admitted privately is a lost cause. Some Clinton aides said that she was well aware of her uphill climb and that she was making a symbolic point. They said she was hesitant about declaring that she could overcome Mr. Obama’s lead, but at the same time did not want to be seen as surrendering.
Her swing across South Florida on Wednesday seemed essentially to be a campaign-within-a-campaign, one that is about process and is directed chiefly at the party’s rules committee.
“I’ve heard some say that counting Florida and Michigan would be changing the rules,” Mrs. Clinton said. “I say that not counting Florida and Michigan is changing a central governing rule of this country.”
She also sought to whip up populist sentiment, telling voters in Boca Raton, where the 2000 election played out vividly, “You didn’t break a single rule, and you should not be punished for matters beyond your control.”
She argued with fervor that the nomination should be determined by popular vote. She has claimed to have the lead in the popular vote by including Florida and Michigan in her tally.
“The outcome of our elections should be determined by the will of the people, nothing more, nothing less,” Mrs. Clinton said. “And we believe the popular vote is the truest expression of your will.”
“The lesson of 2000 here in Florida is crystal clear,” she said. “If any votes aren’t counted, the will of the people isn’t realized and our democracy is diminished.”
She generally avoided mentioning Mr. Obama all day, but concluded a rally in Coral Gables on Wednesday by declaring: “Look at the states I’ve won. Look at the states I’m leading in. Look at the electoral map. It is clear I’m the stronger candidate.”
As her voice was drowned out with cheers, she added: “Stay with me. Let’s make history together.”
Katharine Q. Seelye reported from Coral Gables, and Jeff Zeleny from Tampa, Fla.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company
