Team Clinton just sent this to reporters following her mention of Bobby Kennedy's assassination during an editorial board meeting with the South Dakota newspaper.
The Argus Leader's Executive Editor Randell Beck issued the following statement today:
"The context of the question and answer with Sen. Clinton was whether her continued candidacy jeopardized party unity this close to the Democratic convention. Her reference to Mr. Kennedy's assassination appeared to focus on the timeline of his primary candidacy and not the assassination itself."
— Christina Bellantoni, national political reporter, The Washington Times
Comments (4)
Wow,and you are the editor of a newspaper? there are a million reasons that Hillary could have given to stick around in this contest. (of course the mathimatical one's should definetly not be included) but if you honestly want to defend her vile (auto suggestive) comment/excuse for staying in this contest I do hope that when this is over and she finally does go get some help for her EXTREME sociopathic behavior that you are right beside on the therapist couch so that you may learn to understand the much deeper meaning behind some one's words.
The only thing out of context here is your defense of such inexcusable behavior.
Yours truly,
Steve (alive) from Pa.
Posted by Stephen c Hoffman | May 24, 2008 12:46 AM
this is rather unfortunate. At a pivotal time in this race Hilary goes and does it again! These are carefully worded comments - a message to someone out there that if you want to do this, get rid of this black man, June is the right time!!! im afraid i dont see it otherwise. Hilary is clever enough to know her comments will offend the Kennedy family - to make reference to the terrible assasination of one of their own when another prominent Kennedy has just been diagnosed with terminal cancer. How vile and evil can this woman get!!!!
Posted by Debbie Ariyo | May 24, 2008 3:51 AM
I really fail to see the problem with what she said. When in fact it was true. Everyone who is against Hillary will try and find anything that she says and morph it into what they think she is saying while not really listening to the total context of the discussion. These are the same people that will defend Obama's "gaffes" to the bitter end. If Obama's gaffes are misunderstood then why can't Hillary's be given the same due. And since when did one telling the truth indicate that one is a sociopath? Since Obama is about "change" in the way things are done, you would think that the truth would be refreshing. Wouldn't you?
Posted by Ellen Jones | May 24, 2008 8:33 AM
WOW. I am actually not too surprised that you would defend HRC's latest misspeak, or gaffe if you will. I've read some of the other "news" coverage on this site, and well... I'm not surprised.
I guess you have to be a responsible person, who honors your word, tells the truth, plays fair, is a good sport, follows the rules set forth, and maybe a little graceful; to see the problem.
I'm pretty much looking for the same qualities I try to instill in my children in a president- crazy right?? No, I'm not a woman-hater; I am one!!! But a gaffe, a misspeak??? That is not what Mrs. Clinton did; she lied (Bosnia), and spoke of someone's death like it was a political event (like a debate, or scandal) days before the anniversary of the event(not to mention Senator Kennedy's current condition ).
If you would like to support Mrs. Clinton that's great; but don't try to sell the rest of us that stuff they're selling you...we aren't buying. Be proud of your choice and stop making excuses.( this is classic Clinton, you knew the deal.)
Posted by Jania Fetter | May 26, 2008 2:11 AM