Why couldn't a single U.S. politician acknowledge Kim Jong Il's death in a civilized humane fashion?

Question:

No one offered condolences to his family. No candidate, nor the president, said anything humane or sympathetic regarding his death. The man was a human being. I thought America was better than other countries? I thought America was a civilized state? I'm American and I consider myself to be quite civilized. Notwithstanding the aggression Kim Jong has had in the past, a death is a death. He was a head of state, not Bin Laden.

Answer:

North Korea isn't interested in hearing our condolences and the people would certainly not find out about it because news coverage is sanitized.

That being said, the following is taken from the link attributed:
"The Obama administration is in the process of making a decision on issuing a condolence message regarding the death of North Korea's leader.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did offer some comments when appearing in Washington with her Japanese counterpart after a previously scheduled meeting.

“We reiterate our hope for improved relations with the people of North Korea and remain deeply concerned about their well-being," Clinton said.

What is anticipated, senior administration officials tell CNN, is something similar to what the U.S. did in 1994 when Kim Jong Il's father died. At the time, the Clinton administration issued condolences to the Korean people for the death of Kim Il Sung.

"On behalf of the people of the United States, I extend sincere condolences to the people of North Korea on the death of President Kim Il Sung," the President Bill Clinton statement said. "We appreciate his leadership in resuming the talks between our governments. We hope they will continue as appropriate."

Apparently Bill Clinton offered condolences during his administration. Why Obama has not yet, is unclear.