Clinton Apologizes After Invoking RFK Assassination To Stay In Race (UPDATED)

Democratic Senator Hillary Clinton has apologized after today perhaps inadvertently jumping the whale — more than jumping the shark — when she invoked the 1968 RFK assassination as a reason to stay in the race, and then apologized after it began triggering a mini-firestorm of protest and negative media coverage.

The largely unmentionable issue in American politics is this: when you get a highly-charismatic political leader who arouses great hopes and passions, that person is in danger of assassination. But mentioning the issue and throwing it out there as a reason to stay in a political race — even unintentionally — is seen by some as going over the line because all of the nuts out there.

It’s one of the most sensitive issues in American politics, but is clearly there (if not, why do all those Secret Service and security people surround and intensely follow candidates).

So, once again, Clinton is in the news not because of her ideas and stands, but because of something highly-controversial that is likely to be a slip of the tongue but will get some Americans very angry and another segment of them “tsk-tsking.”

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton quickly apologized Friday after citing the 1968 assassination of Robert F. Kennedy as a reason to remain in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination despite increasingly long odds.

“I regret that if my referencing that moment of trauma for our entire nation and in particular the Kennedy family was in any way offensive. I certainly had no intention of that whatsoever,” the former first lady said.

The episode occurred as Clinton campaigned in advance of the June 3 South Dakota primary.

Responding to a question from the Sioux Falls Argus Leader editorial board about calls for her to drop out of the race, she said: “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. You know I just, I don’t understand it,” she said, dismissing the idea of abandoning the race.

Clinton said she didn’t understand why, given this history, some Democrats were calling for her to quit.

Her remark about an assassination during a primary campaign drew a quick response from aides to Democratic presidential front-runner Barack Obama.

“Senator Clinton’s statement before the Argus Leader editorial board was unfortunate and has no place in this campaign,” said Obama spokesman Bill Burton.

Clinton spokesman Mo Elleithee said the senator was only referring to her husband and Kennedy “as historical examples of the nominating process going well into the summer and any reading into it beyond that would be inaccurate and outrageous.”

The problem: when most Americans hear “Robert Kennedy…June” and 1968, they don’t think of it meaning a long nomination process, they think of it meaning a candidate (who looked like he might get the nomination) was murdered and another candidate (Hubert Humphrey) got the nomination instead.

The Washington Post’s The Trail:

Her advisers later said she was using the historical reference to note that campaigns have stretched until the summer before, not to suggest that Obama might be assassinated. In the previous sentence, she had also noted that her husband’s campaign in 1992 lasted until June as well.

But in a campaign in which voters have voiced concerns about the safety of the first African American front-runner in history, it was a surprising choice of words by Clinton, whose best hope for seizing the nomination now would be a major setback for Obama. Clinton has already faced harsh criticism for allegedly exacerbating racial divisions in the nominating process.

Is this just a matter of the Obama campaign jumping on a statement to try and make an issue of it and picking on Clinton?

No.

When Mike Huckabee made his joke about Obama ducking because he heard a gunshot, he was widely-condemned and apologized by some pundits as well as talk show analysts saying it probably meant Republican presumptive nominee Senator John McCain would not pick him as Vice President because it showed a lack of judgment.

And in recent weeks, the Clinton camp (in stories not naming sources) listed a host of reasons why Clinton should stay in. One of them was some big unforeseen event (which we have noted here too). In fact, fear of assassination lingers for all candidates, but the charismatic leader who arouses great hopes — and also conversely generates great anger — among some has not always enjoyed longevity in American politics. Even so, to date, no candidate has ever raised it as a reason to stay in a race.

The press — and blogs, naturally — picked up on it immediately.

HILLARY RAISES ASSASSINATION ISSUE reads the New York Post’s, headline in the story that started it all..sparking copy-cat stories and the inevitable hail of blog stories with partisans from each side often putting their political spin on it (Clinton is shameless; Clinton is the victim and there’s nothing wrong with what she said).

And Newsday’s story noted that fears surrounding Obama HAVE been cited in the press — which makes the context even more delicate for Clinton:

Hillary Rodham Clinton invoked the June assassination of Robert F. Kennedy to defend her decision to remain in the race until the final primaries — sparking immediate condemnation by Barack Obama’s campaign.

At a later event in South Dakota, Clinton quickly apologized for the comment, saying she only brought up Kennedy’s assassination to make the point that past primary campaigns have stretched on longer than this one. She also said the Kennedy family has been on her mind recently because of news of Sen. Edward Kennedy’s brain tumor this week.

Clinton made no reference to Obama but the candidate’s wife Michelle Obama has said she is worried about the dangers he faces as a pioneering African-American candidate.

“Senator Clinton’s statement before the Argus Leader editorial board was unfortunate and has no place in this campaign,” said Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton.

UPDATE: Here’s the YouTube of her comments:

The bottom line? Raising the issue and having to come back and explain what she meant and apologize is unlikely to help Clinton in her drive to convince more superdelegates to back her in her in her effort to have them tilt to her against Obama.

It’s an unseemly and sensitive issue and most politicians don’t mention it. Having to explain it as a slip of the tongue won’t negate the potential negative fallout because — it’s one yet one more instance of something outrageous coming from the Clinton campaign during the primary season being shoved into the news cycle and then followed by a denial or apology. And even after an apology or denial, the outrageous statement is “out there.”

Inadvertent? Most likely. Unfortunate? Yes. Helpful to her candidacy or image? Most assuredly not.

Here’s a cross section of weblog opinion:

--Marc Ambinder:

For those who contend that Clinton was referring to competitive contests or example, why didn’t she bring up Ted Kennedy in 1980? Or Gary Hart in 1984? I think she was pointing to primary races where the eventual nominee was unknown at this point in the cycle…. But 1984 would apply more, her husband was the de-facto nominee at this point, and the compressed calender really renders such comparisons null and void. Even if her point is legitimate, surely she is aware of the sensitivity of the subject.

–Dartblog:

Mentioning the assassination of Bobby Kennedy is a particularly dirty move as assassination concerns have hounded Sen. Obama throughout the primary season. African Americans were hesitant to support Obama initially, in hopes of protecting him. He received Secret Service protection earlier than any other candidate at the request of Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Illinois), but fears linger. Banking on a successful assassination of her adversary is not a strategy I would recommend, but clearly Clinton is desperate. It is a tough time for her campaign as the remaining contests dwindle and she remains behind Obama.

…..I can only offer this advice to Ms. Clinton- if you are truly interested in the VP slot, then suggesting that your greatest opponent could find themselves assassinated by the end of the next month probably is not the best place to start.

–Top of the Ticket:

Gaffes like that don’t help you play catch up with the SuperDs.

–The Democratic Daily:

It’s been a long, drawn out primary election cycle. Everyone’s tired, many are frustrated and a lot of people just want it to be over. That’s understandable. Hillary sees reason to stay, and regrettably she worded that wrongly today. She has apologized.

Sadly, both of our two remaining candidates have said things that have been strewn around the media and blogosphere and blown out of context, as this is now.

–Power Line:

Certainly, it would have been better for Clinton to have said something like “Robert Kennedy and Eugene McCarthy were still campaigning in June 1968,” and left it at that. But for those of us who remember RFK’s assassination, it’s easy to understand why, speaking off-the-cuff, Clinton would refer to the event that made the 1968 California primary memorable.

In short, there’s nothing here, and the New York Post’s headline that “Clinton Raises Assassination Issue” is grossly misleading.

UPDATE: I fail to see how one can construe Clinton’s remark as a statement that she’s remaining in the race just in case Obama is assassinated. In that horrible event, the party would almost surely turn to Clinton whether she were still in the race or had withdrawn.

–Oliver Willis:

Seriously, who says this sort of thing? Your average person doesn’t say it, let alone somebody running for president. Hillary Clinton didn’t lose this race because she was a victim of sexism. She lost this race because people are tired of her clawing for power and running over everything to do it.

…Like the Bosnia story, Clinton is less than truthful here. She claims that this is because Kennedy is on her mind due to his illness, but Sen. Kennedy was not publicly ill back in March when she made similar comments.

–Wonkette:

She’s acting confused about why everyone is forcing her to leave the race, and uses the (stupid, but still) reasoning that it took Bill until mid-June to clinch the nomination. And then she sounds like she’s looking for another historical example people are familiar with — people remember when Kennedy was shot during primary season, she’s saying, but are forgetting that was all the way in June. Decide for yourself.

It’s not particularly fun getting so riled up about Hillary for using a certain sensitive word, especially since she’ll probably go to the convention (where Al Gore will become president) and we’ll have to deal with this nut for several more months.

–Hot Air’s Allahpundit:

MSNBC reminds us that she said something similar, albeit much more tactfully, after getting blown out in North Carolina. She’s trying to make the point that anything can happen but this is an exceedingly poor way to do so. Although not surprising: It’s typical of the incompetent way she’s managed her campaign that she wouldn’t have anticipated the reaction to this.

–Talk Left’s Big Tent Democrat:

I took a moment to watch some of the coverage and Hardball’s panel is actually going to do clinton a world of good, by blowing it out of proportion. the panel is E.J. Dionne, who should know better, Chris Cillizza, who knows about as much as you and I, and Michelle Bernard, who is an Obama supporter.

Bernard made the biggest mistake of all by making it racial. She flat out accused Clinton of saying that Clinton is staying in the race because Obama might be assassinated. It was offensive and gross. Indeed, Bernard has shamed herself in such a way that will make her hard to be considered as anything but a fool.

The problem for the Clinton haters is there really is not much more to be said about this. Clinton made a huge mistake. The mistake speaks for itself. She apologized for it. at this point saying much more about it is simply piling on.

–Michelle Malkin:

Stick a fork in her. She may, at long last, be done. Or will she“Exit question: Will the number of Democrats who want her out of the race still be in decline after this?”….

–Pajamas Media’s Rick Moran:

She’s tried everything else. Why not stoke the fears over Obama being assassinated?

..Suffice it to say, it’s been a touchy subject, and Hillary stepped right on it — as if slipping on a banana peel and doing a full backwards somersault landing right on her keister. And she’s got nowhere to hide.

This is the gaffe of gaffes, the Mother of all campaign faux pas. There’s no taking it back at this point. The statement is out there, hanging like a rapidly decomposing side of beef in the hot sun. To suggest that you should hang around and stay in the campaign “just in case” the unthinkable occurs is beyond anything yet seen in this campaign. And considering all the race and gender cards that have been flying around, the assassination card tops them all.

–Peter David:

Message to Hillary Clinton
Senator: When I express concern about Obama because I’m worried someone will take a shot at him, it doesn’t mean much of anything because I’m just some guy with a blog.

When YOU, on the other hand, say that anything can happen in June, and cite Bobby Kennedy’s assassination…not the same thing. That becomes problematic. That becomes a monumental case of foot-in-mouth. Dumb. Dumb dumb dumb…

–Comments From Left Field (Adult language on the linked post):

This is simply disgusting. DISGUSTING! Who does this? Who literally says, “Well, I should stay in the running because my opponent just might be assassinated, and if I dropped out before that… Where would be then, huh?”….Keith Olbermann is supposedly going to issue his second special comment to Senator Clinton during this primary, and her supporters, blinded by abject MADNESS, are going to decry him as a sexist, but no. She is getting what she deserves.

…I was supposed to take a nice long weekend here so I could rest up, enjoy my eleventh anniversary with my wife, and be ready to go come Tuesday of next week. I’m still going to do that. But this could not be allowed to pass. And I cannot allow myself to defend her anymore.

–Interesting Times:

Whether her comment about assassination was stupidity or perfidity, her mention of the topic has effectively killed any hope she had of being Obama’s Veep.

I was already hearing concern expressed by caller’s to Thom Hartmann’s show this morning that if she were the VP that that would open Obama up to additional threats of assassination. Whether you consider that paranoia or not, it is a real concern of a significant minority of Obama supporters. Putting Clinton in the VP slot after today’s stupidity would just exacerbate that concern.

–My DD’s Jonathan Singer:

I don’t mean to parse the statements of Senator Clinton too closely, but it’s hard for me to understand how, even if this was about illustrating that races previous years have lasted past this point, someone who has spent so long in the national spotlight, someone whose words have been so closely scrutinized, could so flippantly talk about the assassination of a presidential candidate — particularly at a time when the possibility remains of the first African-American or the first Woman being elected President in this country.

…. I don’t have any problem with Clinton remaining in this race at least through the end of voting early next month. But if this is the type of language that Clinton will be using for the duration of this primary process, I have a real problem with her continuing her campaign.

--Taylor Marsh:

Clinton’s statement today reveals our collective fatigue and was unbelievably unfortunate. Looking at her make her statement of regret you can see her pain and that she is devastated by what she said, which is clear in the statement below from the Clinton camp.

But anyone believing Clinton was suggesting that an assassination could vault her into… never mind, I can’t even finish the statement. It’s just too ludicrous. But that’s where we are today.

–Political Byline:

I am sorry, there is absolutely no excuse for this whatsoever. There is nothing that she could say, whatsoever to make up for this. She has jumped the shark here and I think, personally, that she should leave the race now.

..This is going to cost her a Vice President slot, any and all respect among the Black Community, among Liberals, and possibly amongst some of her own supporters.

–Scared Monkeys:

Geez Hillary, how to you really feel? Talk about wanting to win at all cost. This might be that Austin Powers moment when he was un-thawed and shouted out what he was thinking, not actually realizing that anyone heard his comment. That may actually be a better excuse for Hillary. Blame it on Cryogenics de-thawing.

I guess this it was we refer to in the political industry as a shot across the bow, literally. This may be the dumbest comment of the political season. With the Clintons, its all about the victory.

–Americablog has some videos and is calling on readers to contact superdelegates and ask them to decide now. Post must be viewed and read IN FULL.

–Newsweek blogger Andrew Romano:

But I’d give her the benefit of the doubt. As a Clinton aide told the New York Times this afternoon, “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.” That undoubtedly makes sense. Although Clinton would’ve been better served mentioning, say, Gary Hart. Or Ted Kennedy. Or even Ronald Reagan. All of them campaigned all the way to convention–longer than RFK, and more recently, too. Also, none of them were assassinated.

That said, Obama’s people aren’t being quite as generous. “Senator Clinton’s statement before the Argus Leader editorial board was unfortunate and has no place in this campaign,” said campaign spokesman Bill Burton. Something tells me that the candidate’s unofficial advocates will be slightly less restrained.

–The New Republic:

Clearly there’s no knowing for sure. But I myself find this interpretation only slightly more plausible than the idea that she was floating the idea of assassination as some kind of scare tactic to inflame doubts about Obama. After watching her remarks, I still don’t think she was doing either. It would be one thing if the context of her remarks had been a question like, “How can you still win?” But she was talking about the calendar in historical terms–not the uncertainty of the process.

Update: Turns out Hillary has said this before, back in early March. Which undermines the idea that some combination of stress and desperation finally made her snap, or blurt out some dark, secret thought.

–Andrew Sullivan:

This may finally kill talk of a fusion ticket. God forbid anything happen to Obama now.

–Glenn Reynolds:

I’m staying in the race in case somebody assassinates Obama! Okay, that’s how it’s being spun, but I don’t think she actually meant it that way. I think she was just pointing out that when Bobby Kennedy was shot the race was still alive, and that was June. Still, it’s a pretty impressive gaffe.

–Slog:

Is that why you’re staying in the race Clinton? Just in case Obama is gunned down? How very noble of you.

Man, your campaign just keeps getting uglier and uglier.

–Culture Kitchen:

Shameless.

Despicable.

Unfit to be President Of The United States.

–Don Surber:

Hillary said what? Medicate her.

–Political Machine:

I have long been an admirer of Hillary Clinton, as a leader, as a pioneer, as a role model for young women. I have taken frequent exception to the tactics employed by her campaign, but my personal admiration for her never wavered. I am afraid it has just been vaporized.

Before you try to defend the “pragmatism” of her statement, think for a minute about what would actually happen if she dropped out and Senator Obama was tragically cut down. She would most certainly become the nominee. This was as cynical and shameless a political act as I have ever seen, and I am heartsick over it.

Some more blog reaction can be found HERE.

UPDATE: A few more reactions:

–Jules Crittenden:

I’m looking at that vid and seeing tasteless stupidity. It appears to be very much about running into June and not about the regrettable opportunities a prolonged race might hold for the Clinton presidential franchise.

…But the big question is whether she continues past this. I say yes. Here are some other views. Caution: Some standard lefty political terminology intended to underscore the earnestness of sentiment may be offensive to some readers.

–The Huffington Post has this comment by Newsweek’s Howard Fineman on MSNBC:

She seems constitutionally incapable of just saying I screwed up and her lead footedness about this here is being observed by all the people who are still undecided about whom to back, the last 200 superdelegates here, they’ve got be looking at this and saying that this is a campaign that needs To Be Put Out Of Its Misery Real Soon.”

–Pam’s House Blend:

There was a lame apology - to the Kennedy family, but it in no way addresses the wholly inappropriate reference to assassination. She could have cited a host of other examples of primary races that ran through to the end; even worse, this isn’t even the first time she’s said exactly the same thing. So much for excuse that Ted Kennedy’s health was on her mind, since the last time she tossed around RFK’s slaying was two months ago.

–The Reaction’s Creature:

She’s waiting around in case Obama is assassinated. That’s it. I want to parse, but I can’t. I’m kind of dumbfounded.

I’ve now watched the apology too a few times and it’s equally baffling. She didn’t apologize, if anything she reinforced….And, if she intentionally raised the specter of Obama’s death–she had done it before, after all–then did she really think there would be no backlash? Is she trying to be outrageous just to stay in the news? Is she turning into Ann Coulter right before our eyes? Again, I’m dumbfounded.

UPDATE II: Ed Morrissey updates Allahpundit’s post with this:

Can Hillary recover from this? I don’t mean for the nomination; that’s dead. Can she salvage her career at all, or did she just kill the Clinton brand once and for all?

I know this: the Obama campaign will not, under any circumstances, put her on the ticket now. They won’t pay her campaign debt. She will finish her run in Puerto Rico, and then she will simply … go away.

MY UPDATED VIEW: I don’t think Clinton’s career is over by a longshot.

I think her nomination is deader than it was before — and it was a longshot as of a day ago.

The Clinton brand? She can bounce back but not in time to convince the Democratic bigwigs on May 30 to seat the Michigan and Florida delegations and get states’ popular votes.

What this does is GREATLY reduce her clout because she now comes across as someone who (a) is not professional enough to avoid a hideous gaffe, (b) can’t chose her words and say what she means OR (c) revealed what she really thinks.

It’s all boiling down to a massive case on the part of many Americans of Clinton fatigue. No. This isn’t woman-running-for-President fatigue or bigotry — but Clinton fatigue.

Just as many Americans have now had enough of the Bushes, many Democrats are feeling overdosed on the Clintons. Her comments haven’t made them clamor for more.

The Clinton brand isn’t dead. She can (if she wants) be a great leader in the Senate, focus on her Senate re-election and try to run for President again in 2012 if Obama loses or 2016 if he wins (she’d still be younger than John McCain and seniors keep extending their lifetimes and productivity time).

So…no. This isn’t the end for Hillary. But this will defuse what clout she has left for the May 30th meeting and more than ever she’ll be viewed by some party movers and shakers as someone who is now holding the Democratic party back from focusing totally on shoring up and support its presumptive nominee in his battle against the GOP’s presumptive nominee before the conventions vote the way everyone clearly expects.

P.S. If she said it just once, it could be explained away. But it’s clear now that she has said several versions of this comment and news agencies and cable stations are having a field day running what she has also said before. Not. Good. Imagery.