The latest round of scandal features Hillary Clinton gratuitously mentioning Robert F. Kennedy’s assassination in June 1968 as a justification for continuing her hobbled campaign for the presidency into the summer.

The uproar over the Senator’s statement was swift and severe. Her detractors publicly wondered if she was actively hoping that harm might befall Barack Obama. Clinton’s supporters offered more benign explanations. The Kennedys were on Clinton’s mind because of the recent bad news regarding Ted Kennedy’s health. The Senator was exhausted from intense campaigning— gaffes will happen with any brain-weary candidate. Clinton was merely running through a list of historical examples in her head, and the election of 1968 just happens to be on the list.

Any of these explanations is plausible. Indeed, if the statement had been made by another individual, perhaps the public would be quick to believe any one of them. But with Clinton, it is difficult to let the story go. Her problem is that the event strikes at the heart of what much of the American public secretly believes about both of the Clintons, but especially Hillary.

Like her husband, Clinton possesses the ability to repeatedly rise like the phoenix from the ashes, reborn after this or that scandal. Yet the willingness of the American public to forgive masks a deeper feeling. Underneath it all, many (if not most) Americans have a sneaking suspicion that Clinton will say or do anything to obtain and retain power. There have been too many scandals. Too many allegations of foul play. Too much willingness to "stand by her man," despite transgressions that would make any rational woman run for the hills.

Hillary Clinton very badly wants to be President. She always has. And many Americans wonder if she would stoop to virtually any level to obtain her goal. The Senator had better hope that Obama makes it safely through the next few months.

It may be completely unfair for any American to suspect Clinton of aiding and abetting murder, simply to win the presidential nomination. This author, for one, doesn’t think that Clinton has any intention of promoting or participating in such a heinous crime. But unfortunately for the Senator, most Americans don’t know exactly where she draws the line between fair and foul play. And they worry that her tolerance level for (very) dirty politics is too high. If Obama were to be harmed, it’s quite predictable that Clinton would be viewed suspiciously by some. Vince Foster’s name and the suspicious circumstances surrounding his death would be brought up by someone, somewhere. Too many Americans will find themselves unable to be one hundred percent sure that she didn’t have a hand in it, even if only by the mere power of suggestion.

Clinton’s problem is that her statements on Friday bring all of these deep-seated, if partially hidden, fears about her intentions to the forefront. Thus this story will take some time to run its course.

Having said that, this author is never one to count a Clinton out. The Clintons have survived scandal after scandal. Inexplicably, the American public seems willing to forgive this couple of virtually anything. The Senator’s husband was not labeled the "Teflon President" for nothing. The question is not whether Clinton will survive this scandal to fight another day. She will. The question is more basic: How long will it take her to arise—again—from the ashes?

Comments (6)

Comment	smaller | bigger
Name
Write the displayed characters
Subscribe via email (Registered users only) I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage.
	Add Comment