Now why would Hillary say something so stupid? As Candy Crowley, ever dogged in her role on the Clinton News Network said tonight, she had nothing to gain from the comment.
Oh really?
It's true, she had nothing to gain from the comment itself. Or, rather that part of the comment. But the key result for her is that every commentary focusing outrage over her despicable use of the image of RFK's assassination, has taken as a given that her point about the 1992 Democratic primary election was "decided" in June.
Bullshit.
While it is true that Bill Clinton clinched a majority of the delegates in June, much as Obama will, barring the mythical flood of superdelegate endoresements over the next week, his nomination was taken as a given in the MSM as early as mid-May, even though he did not yet have 50% +1 of the delegates committed to him. The math already confirmed the inevitability of his victory, and that was that. That was freaking that.
As early as May 4, 1992, the New York Times was referring to Bill Clinton as the likely nominee. And again, on May 10:
Already focusing on the general election campaign, Mr. Clinton, the likely Presidential nominee of the Democratic Party, tried to underline differences between himself and Mr. Bush.
As another example, take this column from William Safire (a truly loathsome individual, but still, reflective of the MSM) on May 14, 1992. The column was devoted to speculating on who the choice for VP would be:
The Democratic Convention in New York should be a livelier forum for a Veepstakes.
Conventional conventioneers think that Bill Clinton's choice will be Bill Bradley, but such double-billing is unlikely because Senator Bradley is a political Rip Van Winkle with his alarm clock set for the year 2000.
Bob Kerrey of Nebraska was media-vetted in the primaries, and can energize the old Gary Hart reformers...
And it goes on from there. There is no sense, whatsoever, that the nomination of Bill Clinton is in any doubt.
So don't think HRC has finally lost her marbles, or is finally, unintentionally, allowing her psychopathic nature to shine through via this odious reference to RFK. She has always known what she is doing; she has always been disciplined: the point of all this is to cement the lie that somehow the Democratic nomination in 1992 was up for grabs until June.
It most certainly was not. But the blogosphere has swallowed the assassination bait and left this most crucial lie unchallenged. A shame.