RFK-HRC Reax

Powerline excuses:

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.

PJM:

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.

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.

Ambers:

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.

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