Where are Hillary's Allegiances?

[Meldread]

I'm a bit confused. Murdoch and Hillary seem to have buried the hatchet and it even seems that Murdoch is supporting HER for President. Wait. Take a deep breath. Let that statement sink in... Murdoch seems to be giving support to Hillary, even to some degree shielding her from bad press.

I have to ask... why? What did Hillary promise Murdoch behind closed doors for his support? Did she sell HER soul or did she sell OUR collective souls as a nation? The man is evil incarnate and with his recent purchase of the Wall Street Journal for nearly twice its worth we have to really keep an eye on him.

I also have to wonder what actions Hillary will take if she actually becomes President? I believe investigations into the Bush Presidency is unavoidable when a Democrat walks into the White House, the political pressure will be there, but I have a gut feeling that Hillary will ultimately ensure that justice is not served. She might let a few lambs go off to slaughter, but if it ever comes down to dead-eyed Dick I can see a pardon being signed. The man belongs in prison for life, and I have to wonder if Hillary will protect former Bush Administration officials from prosecution or give them presidential pardons? Is she going to pull something out of her hat like Nancy, before she was even sworn in as speaker, saying, "Impeachment is off the table"? Will the Bush Administration get away with its crimes against this nation with Hillary as President?

Someone should get her on record saying that she will work to ensure that ANY crimes, no matter how big or small, are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

[autorank]

1. Murdoch has no permanent friends or enemies, just permanent interests.

Have his changed? That would be your answer.
------------------------


I'm working on an "anonymous" persona. I see anonymous is back at TPM but writing differently,
entirely different style.

Can I take this cryptic style on the road?

[Gloria]

2. Her allegiance is to power.

[Clintonista2]

3. My standard answer:

Murdoch loves Hillary, therefore, Hillary is evil.

Hitler loved animals, therefore, animals are evil.

[Meldread]

8. So your answer is to brush it under the rug?

Maybe you should put your fingers in your ears and pretend that it isn't happening.

If you go back and look at how things were going while the Clinton's were in power it was like the Jedi vs the Sith. Now suddenly they are friends? There has to be a reason behind it. Either Rupert has decided to change loyalties or Hillary has fallen to the Dark Side. I'm more inclined to think the former rather than the latter.

Of course, maybe you could come up with a good explanation.

To me I know Murdoch wouldn't give her support unless he was getting something in return. So what is he getting in return?

[Clintonista2]

11. My answer is, your OP is philosophically illogical.

I've heard the same thing over and over again, "fox loves Hillary, therefore Hillary is evil." Maybe your post doesn't come out and say this directly, like most of the other posts, but everyone knows what you're implying.

In philosophy, there is an exact term for your kind of arguement- it's called the Hitler fallacy, or, Reductio ad Hitlerum. If you have any sort of proof that would verify what you are saying, I would be happy to see it. Making baseless claims, and Reductio ad Hitlerum statements, you degrade everything progressives stand for.

[Meldread]

12. I have a mountain of proof.

I have every single article that Murdoch ever allowed to be published against Hillary in the past, and I have Murdoch's sworn allegiance to the right. Murdoch has zero reason to gravitate toward Hillary (of all people!) unless something was offered to him in return. I do not know what was offered, but statistically speaking we both know that something was placed on the table and accepted. And I am sure we can both agree whatever is good for Murdoch is not good for progressives or America.

[Clintonista2]

15. You have absolutely no proof that Hillary was OFFERED anything

Until you can prove that point, your claim is baseless, and you know it.

[Meldread]

18. I never said he offered Hillary anything, I said Hillary offered him something...

...after all he's in the position of power, not her, he has something she wants. Do you seriously believe that there wasn't some backroom deal there? Are you that blind/delusional?

Here is something from the rumor mill courtesy of the http://news.independent.co.uk/media/article2828948.ece">Independent, leaked proof that Murdoch is covering for Hillary.

"His East Coast pad plays host to more heavyweight guests from politics and business – Murdoch never fails to mix the two. He is a dramatic convert to the cause of Hillary Clinton's campaign for the White House, hosting a fund-raiser for the former First Lady and burying the hatchet after years when his papers castigated her and her husband. Since she was elected Senator for New York, he has been burying more than just the hatchet – stories on her marriage, too, if insiders at the New York Post are right."

[Maribelle]

20. So you're saying that Murdoch with all his money, and all his power can be bought?

This is even more crazy than the concept that Murdoch offered something to Hillary.

You cannot come up with even one tiny item of proof that Murdoch has ever been bought.

[Meldread]

26. I didn't say he was bought.

In fact, I don't believe that at all. You don't have to get along or even like someone in politics to have an understanding of "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours." That what I believe is taking place between Murdoch and Hillary. He is assisting her with his media empire and in exchange when she's president she'll probably look the other way when it comes to media consolidation laws. Who does that benefit in the long term? (Hint: Not the left or America.) IF Hillary wins in a general election and becomes President she'll be around for eight years at the most, but Murdoch's Empire will be alive long after he's dead and buried.

[Clintonista2]

29. Provide one shred of proof for your claim

Suspicion is NOT proof, neither is behaviour.

[FiveGoodMen]

31. We're not trying to convict her in court, we're trying to figure her out.

Suspicion definitely counts.

[tkmorris]

13. Your analogy is faulty

You see, I can imagine many reasons for Hitler to love animals that have nothing whatever to do with that part of him that makes him evil.

I can think of NO reason, none whatsoever, for Murdoch (or Fox for that matter) to love Hillary that does NOT stem from that which makes them evil. If Murdoch is partnering up with anyone you can bet the purpose is NOT the general welfare of United States citizens. What do you think would happen if the FCC under Clinton started looking at media ownership consolidation? Don't you think our old friend Rupert might just decide to make a phone call to someone that owes him a big favor? Someone who now occupies the White House?

This troubles me. I do not participate in the candidate flame wars around here in general, I think they're counterproductive and childish, but this does concern me. Are you really not worried that a future Democratic president might be beholden to Rupert freakin Murdoch?

[Clintonista2]

17. My analogy was MEANT to be faulty, I was showing an example of a logical fallacy

Things are not evil because Hitler likes them, Hitler is evil because of what he likes. By saying that Hillary is evil, because Murdoch "likes" her, is like saying animals are evil because Hitler likes them. Another baseless, illogical Hillary claim was made by the OP, and he has been unable to provide any solid proof to base his claim on.

[ima_sinnic]

38. your refusal to even consider the implications says it all

as said above, continue to run around with your ears closed singing la-la-la.

I can't figure out people who so stubbornly cling to an allegiance that they can't begin to question it. To be so firmly set in stone, unable to consider her more odious associations and the obviousness of her wishy-washiness, so far ahead of the primaries--makes one go hmmmm. I suppose one's world falls apart when one's "heroine" is exposed as a tool.

[lvx35]

4. That's what your getting with Hillary: compromise.

And the fact that she deals with so many of these hugely powerful players is the reason why she can actually HAVE the power to defeat Bush, and possibly make changes. Will she? That's the question. I know one thing, which is that Bill Clinton played a similar game and life under him was bearable.

My hope is that Hillary will deal with some of these sketchy interests and use the power to put her foot up the ass of the worst of them. My fear is that she will become addicted to the power itself and not accomplish anything useful.

[Meldread]

6. Why take a risk?

Compromise is important, you can't pass policies without it, however when you enter a negotiation you generally want to ensure that your side gets the better end of the deal. What side is Hillary on? I think her record and her actions speak louder than any words she could ever speak.

There are more choices other than Hillary, and while I haven't really solidified my choice for nomination, I know I'd feel more comfortable with any of them in charge.

[lvx35]

7. The question we have to ask is: How corrupt is everything?

I don't have any doubt that somebody like Obama or Edwards could win the general election in 2008 in a fair world. But we know the world is unfair, the question is, how much so? Hillary has what it takes to operate in it with corruption or without. She has muscle that goes far beyond popular appeal. The question is, is it needed? Am I being jaded for suggesting that may be what it takes to win? I honestly don't know the answer right now.

[Meldread]

9. I like to think of it this way...

Fair or unfair, what does it say about Hillary if she is willing to corrupt herself to obtain the most powerful office in the world? If she is willing to stoop so low in order to win, then is she really any better than another alternative? What does it say about her character?

Of course, we shouldn't over look the fact that if Hillary so much as manipulates a single vote you can ensure the right will be fuming. They will fight it in ways that the left never did and it could turn her into a lame duck president, nullifying any good that she may have actually accomplished. Of course, with Murdoch in her pocket she might be able to fend some of that off, and if that is the case it only makes the situation worse. It ultimately comes down to what Hillary promised Murdoch in exchange for his support.

[creeksneakers2]

33. I don't get what you are saying

Are you saying the because Murdoch threw a fundraiser for Hillary that the two of them are teamed up? Hollywood liberals give money to Hillary too. Is she teamed up with them? All kinds of people gave money to Hillary. How can she sell out to all of them? Or is it just Rupert Murdoch?

Hillary gets trashed pretty bad on Fox.

I think if you are going to make accusations you should have details about exactly what it is Hillary is doing for Murdoch, that it is tied to the support, and that whatever it is is also bad for the United States.

[illinoisprogressive]

5. her allegiance is to money, power and what benefits Hillary the most.

[emilyg]

10. You are such a turn-off for Obama.

Because of you and Ethel - am starting to doubt Obama.

[Ethelk2044]

19. You are a turn off for anyone. You were never for Obama so stop the BS

[emilyg]

23. As vp - certainly was.

My dream ticket would have been Clinton-Obama. Not so now.

[Solo_in_MD]

14. Thats true of all politicians when you get down to it

Gore, Hillary, Obama, etc are all no different in the final analysis. The real issue it how long they will resist moving in that direction

[bvar22]

24. NOT true for ALL politicians!!!!

There are some who can't be bought. There are some who will do the right thing even when it is not to their political or financial advantage. Dennis Kucinich, Maxine Waters, Barbara Lee, and of course Paul Wellstone come immediately to mind.
Please don't use a broad brush to smear ALL politicians just because your favorite is on the pad to Big Money.

"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans. I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans, family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."---Paul Wellstone


The Democratic Party Honor Roll
These Democrats should be remembered for their principled stand against the WAR Machine in spite of the Political disadvantage.

IWR

United States Senate

In the Senate, the 21 Democrats, one Republican and one Independent courageously voted their consciences in 2002 against the War in Iraq :

Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii)
Jeff Bingaman (D-New Mexico)
Barbara Boxer (D-California)
Robert Byrd (D-West Virginia)
Kent Conrad (D-North Dakota)
Jon Corzine (D-New Jersey)
Mark Dayton (D-Minnesota)
Dick Durbin (D-Illinois)
Russ Feingold (D-Wisconsin)
Bob Graham (D-Florida)
Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii)
Jim Jeffords (I-Vermont)
Ted Kennedy (D-Massachusetts)
Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont)
Carl Levin (D-Michigan)
Barbara Mikulski (D-Maryland)
Patty Murray (D-Washington)
Jack Reed (D-Rhode Island)
Paul Sarbanes (D-Maryland)
Debbie Stabenow (D-Michigan)
The late Paul Wellstone (D-Minnesota)
Ron Wyden (D-Oregon)

Lincoln Chaffee (R-Rhode Island)


United States House of Representatives

Six House Republicans and one independent joined 126 Democratic members of the House of Represenatives:

Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii)
Tom Allen (D-Maine)
Joe Baca (D-California)
Brian Baird (D-Washington DC)
John Baldacci (D-Maine, now governor of Maine)
Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisconsin)
Xavier Becerra (D-California)
Earl Blumenauer (D-Oregon)
David Bonior (D-Michigan, retired from office)
Robert Brady (D-Pennsylvania)
Corinne Brown (D-Florida)
Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)
Lois Capps (D-California)
Michael Capuano (D-Massachusetts)
Benjamin Cardin (D-Maryland)
Julia Carson (D-Indiana)
William Clay, Jr. (D-Missouri)
Eva Clayton (D-North Carolina, retired from office)
James Clyburn (D-South Carolina)
Gary Condit (D-California, retired from office)
John Conyers, Jr. (D-Michigan)
Jerry Costello (D-Illinois)
William Coyne (D-Pennsylvania, retired from office)
Elijah Cummings (D-Maryland)
Susan Davis (D-California)
Danny Davis (D-Illinois)
Peter DeFazio (D-Oregon)
Diana DeGette (D-Colorado)
Bill Delahunt (D-Massachusetts)
Rosa DeLauro (D-Connecticut)
John Dingell (D-Michigan)
Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas)
Mike Doyle (D-Pennsylvania)
Anna Eshoo (D-California)
Lane Evans (D-Illinois)
Sam Farr (D-California)
Chaka Fattah (D-Pennsylvania)
Bob Filner (D-California)
Barney Frank (D-Massachusetts)
Charles Gonzalez (D-Texas)
Luis Gutierrez (D-Illinois)
Alice Hastings (D-Florida)
Earl Hilliard (D-Alabama, retired from office)
Maurice Hinchey (D-New York)
Ruben Hinojosa (D-Texas)
Rush Holt (D-New Jersey)
Mike Honda (D-California)
Darlene Hooley (D-Oregon)
Inslee
Jackson (Il.)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Johnson, E.B.
Jones (OH)
Kaptur
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kleczka
Kucinich
LaFalce
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lofgren
Maloney (CT)
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McKinney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Millender-McDonald
Miller
Mollohan
Moran (Va)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pastor
Payne
Pelosi
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sabo
Sanchez
Sanders
Sawyer
Schakowsky
Scott
Serrano
Slaughter
Snyder
Solis
Stark
Strickland
Stupak
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Udall (NM)
Udall (CO)
Velazquez
Visclosky
Waters
Watson
Watt
Woolsey
Wu

[Solo_in_MD]

25. Get Real...Just because they were on your side on an issue does not guarantee that they are virtuous

in all respects.

[Maribelle]

22. If her allegiances were to money power and what benefits her...

she wouldn't be a U.S. senator - - - she would be running in the fast lane with her handsome, million dollar speaker, charismatic husband, perhaps acting like the brain-dead wife of the most corrupt president in this nation's history with merely a stupid smile painted on her face.

[Meldread]

27. Why would she EVER do that?

Why would Hillary play second fiddle to Bill when she can either make a serious attempt to out do him or at least be his equal?

[wyldwolf]

16. uh... care to back what you're saying with FACTS?

Murdoch and Hillary seem to have buried the hatchet and it even seems that Murdoch is supporting HER for President.

How so? He held a fundraiser for her during her Senate campaign because, get this: She's his senator!

Newscorp donated money to her in bundles but, get this: They've donated money to many Dems (like Howard Dean) and to the DNC. And, shocking, there are DEMOCRATS working at News Corp.

Murdoch seems to be giving support to Hillary, even to some degree shielding her from bad press.
Do you have ANY proof of this?

[oasis]

21. Hillary&Co. have the tools needed to repair the nation. Hillco, the best team to do the job.

Murdoch is a savvy guy.

[Meldread]

28. So you think it's okay to jump in bed with the enemy?

...even as that same enemy sets his sights on your "allies" (put in quotes for a reason)?

[oasis]

34. "Keep your friends close.....and your enemies closer"---H. Rodham Corleone.

;-)

[FiveGoodMen]

32. Being savvy doesn't mean he has good intentions.

You are aware of how Murdock's news channel has consistently and deliberately misled the American people for years, aren't you?

[oasis]

35. Murdouch realizes that America can't continue in her downward spiral. He's willing

to support a qualified administrator to take the helm. No more empty suit GOP dunces.

[Tellurian]

36. Murdock is a businessman first and foremost...

It's in his best interests to support someone that can't be bought by the GOP Neocons. Think Impeachment as a strong "why" reminder. HRC IS the strongest representative of the ideal choice for President. Someone capable of reversing the damage done by this administration to the economy and our good name throughout the World in double time.

The contrast between Hillary's qualifications and that of Obama are as day is to night. Can I say unequivocally Obama can't be bought by the Neocons? No, I can't.. Has he demonstrated any alliances with Neoconic interests? Yes, he has.

[defendandprotect]

30. ...to Walmart/Murdock and her own ambitions . . ..

[never cry wolf]

37. Beware the Trojan Horse

Murdoch is no Hillary convert, nor, do I believe, they have cut a deal. I'll warrant that almost all the money he has raised for her has been designated for the primaries, not the general election. Murdoch wants her as the Dem nominee, pure and simple. Here is why, IMHO:

1. He believes she is the most beatable by the pukes in the general.

2. She would be the most polarizing dem candidate, thus reenergizing their hateful base. (I realize this is based upon 15 years of RW demonizing, but it is there nonetheless.

3. It's good for business, he can use all his outlets to spread the lies. Besides, he's already done the research and and has the smear machine in place.

Mark my words, if she wins the nomination, ole Rupert is gonna drop her quicker than darth cheney can get to his undisclosed location.