Yeah, I had seen that quote but I couldn't remember the time frame. But it was one that I took into account. Many times Clinton or her surrogates tried to plant the thought into peoples' minds that "He's a great guy, but if you elect him he'll get killed and I'll have to do the work anyway, so just elect me instead."

Sounds like a pretty safe bet, this time.

BLaws -

From January, a memo from the Obama camp on Clinton's tactics included the following, from an unnamed "introducer of Clinton." I didn't include it because (1) that's pretty thinly sourced, and (2) I wanted to focus on her remarks, and surrogates' remarks would have been a distraction. Anyway, here's the comment:

"If you look back, some people have been comparing one of the other candidates to JFK and he was a wonderful leader, he gave us a lot of hope but he was assassinated and Lyndon Baines Johnson actually did all his work and got the republicans to pass all those measures."

This seems to support what you're saying.

BuzzardBilly -

When I read that article (link above) from JANUARY, it reminded me that from the early part of the race right up until now, the provacative statements have changed over time, but the method has remained the same. This becomes even more pronounced when you look at how Clinton tried to use Obama's comments against him a la Karl Rove. Read the "Reagan/party of ideas" kerfluffle and see who is taking remarks out of context, and who is merely pointing out what was said.

I must admit, this wasn't really clear until I began reading Clinton's remarks from all of four months ago. "There's a pattern here..." I thought.

Thanks to all for commenting!

-CW

That's one very astute observation. I hadn't noticed it before, but you sure have a point.

Back in March she made the same statements to Time, in nearly identical phrasing. What hasn't been covered much that I've seen is that a few days before that interview a poll had be released showing that over half of those polled feared that Obama *would* be assassinated. For the next couple days the media had sidewalk interviews with people on the subject and I remember one elderly black woman who said that she couldn't vote for him because she feared he'd be killed. So she was going to vote for Hillary so that he wouldn't win and wouldn't get killed. Just a day or two later is when Clinton made those comments to Time.

I firmly believe she played in to those fears. Trying to get his supporters to not back him out of fear that he would be killed. The same undertone was there with the MLK and JFK comments. At the time a lot of people were comparing Obama to MLK or JFK, and I remember hearing her say those comments and thinking "she's trying to get people to think: "Hey these people were great men, but they got killed, you shouldn't vote for him because he'll get killed too".

There have been Clinton surrogates in the last few weeks pushing the same undertone. One was quoted as saying that "He should pick Clinton for his VP. If anything ever happened to him, she'd make a great President."

Now, a lot of people have died suspicously around the Clintons. So a part of me really has to wonder. But what I don't wonder about is that she is deliberately trying to poison the waters with doubt that she can take away the nomination. I wouldn't doubt one bit that her people are telling super delegates in private something very similar. Coded words to get that thought across their minds.

I am predicting that this latest remark will finally force Clinton out. Even her fanatical supporters over at TM are seeing the writing on the wall and Marsh herself has stated unequivocally that taking the fight to the convention would not be in Clinton's best interest.

I am guessing that Clinton will stay in until the 3rd just to save face. I am also guessing that the SDs will hold off until the 3rd to allow her to save face.

But then again, I am still bald from my last wager, so what do I know. :D

Michale