Hillary Clinton defends link with Murdoch

[Placebo]

Hillary Clinton defended her warming relationship on Tuesday with Rupert Murdoch, the conservative media mogul. Commenting on Mr Murdoch's decision to host a fundraiser for her Senate-election campaign, Mrs Clinton said: "He's my constituent and I'm very gratified that he thinks I'm doing a good job."

Mr Murdoch's New York Post tabloid newspaper initially attacked the New York Democrat's decision to stand for the Senate, running front-page headlines pleading "Don't Run". Mrs Clinton is the leading Democratic candidate for president in 2008.

But one person involved in the event said Mr Murdoch's decision to support her reflected his opinion of her as a senator for New York rather than as a presidential candidate.

More...

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

1. will this finally wake people up

to the fact that she IS NOT LIBERAL?

[Triana]

2. You'd think it finally would wouldn't you?

I certainly hope this does away with the "liberal" moniker they keep trying to slap on her.

[Kailassa]

7. Who is?

If a senator is liberal, and opens his or her mouth, he/she will be ignored, ridiculed or demonised.

Any senator who is accepted by the others is either republican or silent.

[BooScout]

15. You do know Murdoch supports Liberals don't you?

He has supported and still supports Blair (a Liberal). Murdoch supports who he thinks will further his interests .......just like any voter.

BTW, my statement above in no way means I'm a Murdoch fan...it quite simply is being preceptive.

[Zhade]

19. Blair's a NEOliberal. Big difference.

NT!

[Radio_Guy]

22. Blair is no true liberal

A true liberal would not attack a defenseless country that was no threat to it.

[Freddie Stubbs]

24. Sounds good, we need more moderates in power

[anotherdrew]

28. or to the whole thing being rigged? both parties completely controlled

to hell with this, if she's the 'leading contender' for the democratic nomination, I'll eat my hat.

[asthmaticeog]

3. Her true colors couldn't be laid bare more plainly.

To hell with her.

[orwell]

4. The Machine...

...is just covering all the bases...

[Telly Savalas]

5. It's a logical decision by Murdoch

His viewership might get discouraged by the numerous failures of the Republicans and turn the channel to HGTV. If Senator Clinton were to be elected president, then FOX News could become a 24/7 Hillary-Hatefest channel, which would probably get much better ratings.

[Canuckistanian]

30. Just like Maureen Dodd or Arianna Huffington

They both made their fortunes viciously criticizing Bill Clinton.

It pays to be a cheerleader for anyone in power as well as being a critic of those in power.

Totally non-partisan pandering works, too.

[IndianaGreen]

6. Hillary is one of those politicians that love money

and she doesn't care where the money comes from. We have the best government that money can buy. I am sure that as President Hillary will throw a few crumbs our way and she won't be putting nazis on the federal bench, but when it comes to kow-towing to corporate Amerika, Hillary will know who butters her bread.

Let's compare Hillary's ambition and limitless greed to the other 2008 hopefuls.

[Knurled99]

8. So are we just accepting

as fact that Hillary is the "front-runner" for president now? We have heard it so much that no one bats an eyebrow at this assumption anymore. Almost as if the MSM/GOP think if they keep repeating it then it will just sorta become true.

[Maddy McCall]

10. The only people who think that are Republicans....

It's their pipe dream.

[Maddy McCall]

9. Could it be that he wants her to be the 2008 Pres candidate...

because that's the only Dem candidate that Republicans could defeat?

He's helping her enrich her coffers for 2008, possibly?

Of course, I don't think she has a snowball's chance in hell of winning the primary, but every Republican I know salivates at the thought.

[JI7]

11. it could also be insurance

when corporations and others give to those they don't really support just in case that person does end up winning. and hope their contribution will allow them to have some influence witht aht person and policy.

i don't really ahve a problem with her taking the money though. but i would look more at where she stands and what she does.

[Protagoras]

12. Nixon is kinda famous for picking his candidate

if I remember right..its not a new trick to support the opposition in the primaries so you can defeat them in the general election.

[Kenergy]

13. Could be. If she's the dem candidate, she'll lose and

she won't lose by a few points, it'll be a decisive trouncing.

[BlueStater]

14. If it's Hillary vs. McCain, it won't even be a choice

Pulling the lever for Hillary may be the most unenthusiastic decision I've ever had to make in my life.

No matter who wins, we all lose. I don't think I'd be able to tolerate Hillary for even a single term and certainly not that sellout McCain.

[ShortnFiery]

20. After all the sucking up ...

I would NOT ever pull the lever for Hillary Clinton - I'd do a write-in for Gore instead.

Her recent behavior is a disgrace ... when is she gonna hang out with Zell Miller?

[deacon]

16. No way she gets my support.....I've had it with her n/t

[Robbie Michaels]

17. She no liberal

And I blogged about this. I referred to her followers as "a new varietal of backwash". I don't know what else to call it.

[rman]

18. sure, he's just a constituent...

[flamingpie2500]

21. What is the old saying? "keep your friends close and your enemies closer"

Something to that effect.
If Hillary wins the Democratic Nomination I am moving to Canada!

[trogdor]

23. What would the Post's columnists do without HRC?

Follow the money. Without Hillary, most Post writers would be adrift. She's as much their greatest asset, deservedly or not, as George W. Bush is to late night comics.

[shadowknows69]

25. "Mrs Clinton is the leading Democratic candidate for president in 2008"

This infuriates me to no end. Could we the voters actually pick our candidate please?

[Placebo]

26. Well if another candidate was polling as well as Clinton is now...

they would be saying that person is the leading democratic candidate for president in 2008.

It's only fair.

Hell, they'll still be labeling whoever is doing well in the polls the day before the first primary the "leading contender" or whatever.

[shadowknows69]

31. You mean the polls the "Liberal" media runs

right after cramming Hilary down our throat for most of the hour? I didn't know squat about Dennis Kucinich until I saw him as the only candidate with any balls in the primary debates. That's when I decided the polls were as enabling as the lazy ass press. NOBODY I know wants Clinton as our candidate. These polls are being padded by GOPers who wants her to run.

[Tesha]

27. No. This has been proven.

The Democratic party machinery has NO, ZIP, ZILCH interest in
what *YOU* their voters want; you'll get the candidates they
choose and you'll vote for them because they're the ones with
the "D" after their name and, after all, we all know that "This
is the most important election *EVER*, so you've just *GOT* to
vote for the Democrat this time!"

Tesha

[ronnykmarshall]

29. Ooooo goody!

:popcorn:

Our daily Hil-bash.

[shadowknows69]

32. She just makes it so easy doesn't she?

That's my point. If she pisses off her party so much imagine what the Rovian (or whatever slug has the job after he's indicted) machine will do with her. She is the GOP's dream opponent. Why is that so hard to see.

[ronnykmarshall]

33. Yeah whatever.

She could step on an ant and this place would foam at the mouth about it.