Rupert Murdoch held a fundraiser for Hillary. Where was the outrage?

[jenmito]

Does Murdoch agree with ANYTHING we Dems. believe in (other than wanting her to be our nominee like Hillary supporters want)? I haven't seen Hillary speaking out against his views. She accepted all the money raised for her and it got almost NO coverage and NO outrage from her supporters! Why was that? :shrug:

[LakeSamish706]

1. And there in lies the problem with a Hillary Presidency... You just know if...

you have her indebted to people like Murdoch that we are going to have more of the same of this BS that now exists in the White House.

[saracat]

2. Because they is no parity in candidate accountability.Some think Hillary is not accountable for

anything.

[Selatius]

3. Rupert Murdoch is trying to buy her off. n/t

[sandnsea]

4. SC Co-chairs voted to ban gay marriage

John Matthews and Linda Short, they voted for the state constitutional amendment that banned gay marriage. Not a peep about it.

[Sick_of_Rethuggery]

57. Could you please post this over at DailyKos too?

They are going stark raving mad over there...

Thanks.

[robinlynne]

5. we aren't hillary supporters. we don't even understand hillary supporters.

they are simply choosing to be blind. why, I don't understand.

[joeybee12]

6. You Obama apologists still don't get it, do you?

I am not supporting any candidate right now; in fact, I might not even vote I'm so disgusted by their cowardice.

That said, what Obama did and allowed to happen strikes people at a very personal level. Would he have invited a white person on who said that blacks are inferior, that we need to have them stop "killing our children," that we need a "war" against them?

I doubt it, and I doubt he would have allowed a person to be associated with a person who said that about Jews or ANYONE ELSE EXCEPT gay people. Somehow, he thinks it's ok, and by covering for him, you think that's ok, too. After all, it's not bigotry of we're talking about second-class citizens, is it?

[jenmito]

10. If you're not a Hillary supporter, this is not about you.

Very puzzling that you'd think I singled YOU out. :shrug:

[rinsd]

18. Perhaps because Obama supporters are so desperate to portray this as a Clinton thing.

Which only serves to really piss off the many LGBT rights supporters on this forum who could care less about Hillary.

[jenmito]

20. Huh? Murdoch's fundraiser WAS a Clinton thing!

Hillary supporters kept asking if Mayberry, another bigot, held a fundraiser for her or helped her raise money. But MURDOCH did and if it's wrong to accept support from someone with opposing views, it's wrong in ALL cases.

[rinsd]

23. This is hilarious.

Hillary got shit for her Murdoch fundraiser, she still does.

Obama should get shit for this concert.

And Obama supporters? Well you guys as a group stepped in a pile of shit when you decided to make this about Hillary.

[kenfrequed]

59. You are right

Neither of them deserve the nomination.

There.

Done.

Tacitly supporting Homophobia is bad. So is taking money from the republican Pravda.

I honestly don't know which is worse. I mean, you might be able to claim ignorance about inviting a former gay singer/preacher with obvious religious-homophobic bias. Of course if you make that kind of mistake too often, or let him speak and spew his rubbish for an hour.



On the other hand we have someone that takes money from probably the most propagandous outlet in America. An organization that lies on a regular basis and whose mission is to convince people of complete falsehoods continually. An organization that is on the opposite side of the politcal fence from the democratic party and the American people. An organization that exists to attack progressive values and demean the democratic party that Hillary claims she wants to represent.

I mean taking money from Faux news is like letting your abusive boyfriend buy you flowers and warming up to him.

Again, neither of them are what I want in a leader for the Democratic party.

[FatDave]

61. Hear hear!

Fuck them both.

[Heywood J]

88. Damn right!

I'm beginning to trend towards "NOTA for President".

[ShortnFiery]

74. Ooh, there ya go making sense. intellectual honesty, IMO, would require a mia culpa on their side.

But don't hold your breath a waitin' no the pigs to fly by. ;) :hi:

[creeksneakers2]

76. The fundraiser was back in 2006 for Hillary's Senate campaign

Murdoch made if very clear at the time he was endorsing Hillary for Senate only. Big money always goes with a sure winner.

Murdoch doesn't endorse Hillary for president. Murdoch's network slimes Hillary non-stop and will continue to do so until Hillary makes a farewell speech.

As long as its legal, Hillary and every other candidate will probably accept money from just about anybody. Taking money by itself is not proof of a corrupt deal.

[ShortnFiery]

67. Because everything that rings true and negative about HRC is played down by the M$M ... for now.

All bets are off after the Democratic Nomination and I doubt that Rupert Murdoch is really playing on the "up and up." Oh, that figurative knife in the back (M$M turing on HRC) will CUT DEEP ... the worst betrayal - and oh, so, effective.

Truism: The right wing may play ball up to a point - but they do NOT ever forgive and forget. :evilgrin:

[cuke]

71. Yes, the media would never attack Clinton about her cleavage

her hair, etc until after she wins the nomination

[ShortnFiery]

73. Oh my cuke, that's mild ... you ain't seen nothing yet! ... and I hope we don't. n/t

[cuke]

75. I'm sure they would go easy on the other Dems

they way they were so gracious to Gore and Kerry

[ShortnFiery]

77. The attacks on Gore and Kerry will be a picnic in comparison to what

the right wing is cooking up now. Wait until it's unleashed? Then I'll try not to say, "I told you so." I promise that I'll try not be be harsh. ;)

[cuke]

78. I, too, am certain they held back against Gore and Kerry

[ronnykmarshall]

31. I think you're reading too much into your tea leafs.

Joey gave you an honest responce and the tin foil flew up on your head.

[cuke]

7. Did they promote homophobia at the fundraiser?

Did Hillary give the mic to someone who then told the audience that God can "Cure" homosexuality?

IIRC, what she did was take money from supporters

[jenmito]

13. Is Murdoch for gay rights?

Does he agree with ANY of our positions?

Yup, she sure DID take money from "supporters"-if you call Murdoch a real supporter and not someone who just wants her to be our nominee so the Repubs. can beat her in the general!

[cuke]

17. Did they promote homophobia at the fundraiser?

Did Hillary give the mic to someone who then told the audience that God can "Cure" homosexuality?

IIRC, what she did was take money from supporters

[ronnykmarshall]

32. My husband works for Direct TV

and they offer DP insurance.

I have yet to hear of ol' Ruf walking into his office and getting rid of all "the gay".

[cuke]

55. I believe Murdoch gives beneits to domestic partners

not sure about it though

[truedelphi]

60. Murdoch doesn't appear to be for

Gay rights
Single Payer Health Insurance
Decent mainstream media outlets tht are owned by the local community
Ending/Avoiding perpetual war
Spreading the truth about global warming and climate change
Keeping the mdidle class awre of the real issues
Etc

As far as I can tell, Hillary is not for any of those things either - except possibly the
Global Warming issue... But even the4re, she might well turn the task at hand into a weird anec onvoluted system of the polluting corporations paying for credits to offset their pollution

[jonnyblitz]

8. I have seen many threads of outrage over this. I have EVEN

seen a picture of Hillary with Murdoch both with smiles posted over and over again. Just because there isn't a thread TODAY or LATELY doesn't mean it hasn't happened. Of course we all know you are just YET ANOTHER Obama supporter who is trying to change the subject to Hillary in hopes to deflect attention from your candidate's ROYAL fuckup this weekend. You all look STUPID when you do this. GIVE IT UP, it wreaks of DESPERATION.

[jenmito]

19. So when you all keep posting "bigot" threads about Obama, we should just ignore them

and wait a while, and later just say "that was THEN"? I have apologized for saying it was "just a concert" when McClurkin started preaching about "being cured." I'm now asking why it's ok for Hillary supporters to act holier-than-thou when their candidate had a fundraiser GIVEN by a RWer!

[FredScuttle]

24. It. Ain't. Just. Hillary. Supporters.

While you Obama loyalists are engaged in your pissing match with the Hillary Brigade, you're losing signt of the fact that it's a hell of lot more than Hillary supporters who are outraged by this.

Your choice - Myopia or Clarity

[jenmito]

30. I. Know. That.

This is about her supporters, though.

[ronnykmarshall]

35. It's always about her supporters isn't it?

WE GET IT!

Everything thing evil is HILLARY'S FAULT!

FUCK. It's like a broken record.

[jenmito]

39. No. Only when it applies to her.

You don't have to reply to my thread. :shrug:

[ronnykmarshall]

42. Suuuuure it is!

What really amazes me is posters that spend 90% of their time attacking one candidate. That cuts ALL ways.

[FredScuttle]

36. Like I said, enjoy your pissing match with the Hillary brigade

while Obama's support among Democrats shrinks like a prick in the Arctic Sea.

[rinsd]

9. Ummm there was outrage here for the Murdoch fundraiser in 2006.

And hardly a day goes by where it isn't mentioned by someone somewhere on DU.

:shrug:

[wyldwolf]

11. there were tons of it.

[The Magistrate]

12. The Famous 'Murdoch Fund-Raiser', Ma'am

Was organized by office employees of the Fox headquarters in New York, most of whom, oddly enough, are registered Democrats. The thing has been chewed over here daily for months.

[ElizabethDC]

14. That's what I thought. I was wondering if there had been some more recent fundraiser

that I hadn't heard about. I noticed that the OP posted no link.

[jenmito]

22. Of course I'm talking about the one in 2006. Does the time matter? Does that mean

we should forget about what Obama did a year from now?

[ElizabethDC]

79. Well, since that's the one you're referring to, it should be noted that there was plenty of

outrage expressed on DU, and I still see it pop up all the time. But the outrage generally doesn't remain as constant. Do you expect there to be a page full of threads about the Obama/McClurkin thing a year from now?

It wouldn't have hurt to provide some specifics - like a link or something - about her fundraiser, anyway.

[Cameron27]

15. I didn't know that,

thanks for the info.

[rinsd]

16. Jenmito could be referring to the fundraiser Murdoch held in 2006 for her Senate campaign.

Doesn't matter as it received plenty of attention at the time.

The OP does like the heat and should probably leave the kitchen.

[jenmito]

28. Yes I am. And the REASON I mentioned it today was because Jesse Jackson mentioned it today

on MSNBC and I thought that was a good point, as it was in response to the McClurkin question. He made the point that Murdoch doesn't agree with Hillary's views, yet she accepted the fundraising $$$$$ from him and his buddies.

[rinsd]

33. You claimed there was no outrage which was not true.

Hillary still gets shit for it today.

And much like Jesse Jackson still has to hear about his Hymietown crack so too Obama will have to deal with fallout over this.

If your point is hypocrisy among candidate partisans, well welcome to politics.

[jenmito]

37. By Hillary supporters?

I didn't see it. JJ made the comment insulting Jews. BO spoke out AGAINST McClurkin's comments.

[rinsd]

45. Obama supporters are railing against this concert?

I see geek tragedy unequivocally saying this wrong.

Every other Obama supporter including yourself is bending over backward to defend or distract or claim moral equivalency about this action.

And in the heat of the firestorm you geniuses lashed out at DUers calling their outrage fake or selective or accused them of being Hillary supporters.

[jenmito]

47. Then you obviously missed this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3657796&mesg_id=3657871

[rinsd]

49. I did miss that.

:thumbsup:

[jenmito]

50. Thanks.

:)

[spotbird]

62. It was for her presidential campaign. nt

[ElizabethDC]

80. No, it wasn't. The fundraiser was in '06, and Hillary didn't start running for president until '07.

It was for her '06 reelection to the Senate.

[spotbird]

83. You are wrong. nt

[Perry Logan]

21. I think people have "Hillary outrage exhaustion."

It just gets hard hearing all these reasons for being outraged by Hillary--invariably offered up by people who would be outraged at Hillary no matter what she did.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ronnykmarshall]

38. Yawwwwwn!

Enjoy your stay.

That shit won't fly if Hillary's the nominee.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

26. Is Rupert Murdoch A Gay Basher?

DSB

[jenmito]

34. Do you think he SUPPORTS gay rights?

He owns Faux Noise, for god's sake! They have had many pieces on how J.K. Rowlings is "trying to push the gay agenda" on young, impressionable kids.

[ronnykmarshall]

40. See message #32

[jenmito]

41. I did. And?

[ronnykmarshall]

43. You can't see beyond your hate for Clinton.

Period.

[jenmito]

46. Yes I can.

IF she's our nominee, I'll support her.

[2rth2pwr]

27. Is that you saracat? nt

[ronnykmarshall]

29. Go back and look.

There was.

And it's constantly mentioned.

Your point?

[jenmito]

44. From Hillary supporters?

I've seen Obama supporters disappointed in Obama for having that guy on his tour.

[cuke]

48. Are you outraged by Obama's Gospel Tour?

[jenmito]

51. Like I said up-thread, I guess you missed this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3657796&mesg_id=3657871

[cuke]

53. That's it

You've spent more time attacking Clinton and her supporters over this, than you do on Obama (who you are supposedly outraged about)

[jenmito]

54. Is that a question, "That's it?"

How big of you. :eyes:

[NoPasaran]

52. Rupert never credited God with curing him of liberaliam. n/t

[jenmito]

56. That's because he's not pretending not to be a liberal...

and Hillary's fine with such a RW slime merchant raising money for her.

[ShortnFiery]

69. No, he just ORDERS non-stop broadcasts of fear-mongering & authoritarian-adoring FASCIST propaganda

from EVERY DAMN MEGA-NEWS CONGLOMERATION that he owns and rules. :crazy:

Yeah, Rupert Murdoch's just lovely. :eyes:

[cuke]

81. unlike those other liberal news shows

[Imagevision]

58. The majority of the M$M is controlled by the repugs so no wonder it's

promoting Hillary, Obama is much more difficult to smear, I'm quite positive repugs will bring out stuff against Hillary from Vince Foster that no-one has ever heard before swearing it's been out there all along but suppressed by the Clinton administration.

[Lone_Wolf]

63. Is Hillary supporting more media consolidation?

Smells like quid quo pro to me. Something has to be going on.

[ShortnFiery]

64. Oh, I'm way disappointed but I have yet to "perfect" my overt protestations and

hyped-up "moral indignation."

In my best Penelope Pittstop voice, "Well I never!?!" (but of course, we all have) :-) :hi:

[BootinUp]

65. I think the outrage is that

she picked up the contributions instead of one of the other Dem candidates.

[Catherine Vincent]

66. Murdoch had lunch with Al Gore before the 2004 election

but that doesn't mean he was supporting Al Gore to run for president.

Give it a rest.

[ShortnFiery]

68. Correct me if I'm wrong, but "having lunch" is not equal to "having a fundraiser for"?

Also, knowing how congenial Al Gore is (BTW he's really too honest and moral to be President) probably picked up the check. :evilgrin:

[Catherine Vincent]

72. If Murdoch is stupid enough to give a fundraiser for Hillary, then

that's a problem for the right wingers. You expect Hillary to turn him down?

[jenmito]

82. Please. Why ar you excusing this?

If Hillary had any integrity, she sure would've turned him down. You think he wants her to be president? NO! Why did he throw her a fundraiser? He doesn't want her to win. Think about it.

[Catherine Vincent]

86. I don't know why he gave her a fundraiser.

And you don't either.

[ShortnFiery]

85. Murdoch did not become a multi-billionaire by behaving stupid in ANY way ... he's an ideologue

but don't underestimate his ability to change this country through the insanity of media hyper-consolidation. I honestly believe that Murdoch will turn on HRC. It will be a sight to see and it will be tragic, not only for the Democratic Party but also for the entire country. :(

[Catherine Vincent]

87. You're right. He's not stupid.

If he turns on her fine. She and the liberal media can handle it (what little we do have). Besides, this man has tons of money. Maybe he just likes her. You can be on the other side of the fence and still like someone (for example Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton), yes even to give a fundraiser. Like I said he's loaded.

He liked Al Gore too.

[janx]

70. The only reason Murdoch held a fundraiser for Senator Clinton

is because he knows that her candidacy will make him money--LOTS OF IT.

It has nothing to do with ideology. I wish more people here were aware of how the media work.

Right wing media? Left wing media?

NO.

It's all about the $$$$$$$$$$.

It's ratings, viewers, and market share. It's about how much they can charge advertisers. Controversy is their bread and butter. Fear and disasters SELL. Lowest common denominator stories about "celebrities" SELL.

Wow, look at that chick with the big breasts and the bleached hair who got into a drug overdose! $$$$$$$$$$

Watch as people drown in New Orleans! $$$$$$$$

FIRE! FIRE! $$$$$$$$$$

Rumors SELL. Speculation SELLS.

[eridani]

84. I remember expressing outrage at the time

And I'm even more disgusted by Mark Penn than by by Rupert Murdoch.