What's in a Murdoch-Clinton Alliance? Something for Both Sides

[ProSense]

What's in a Murdoch-Clinton Alliance? Something for Both Sides

By ANNE E. KORNBLUT
Published: May 10, 2006

WASHINGTON, May 9 — Strengthening a pragmatic rapprochement, Rupert Murdoch has agreed to give a fund-raiser this summer for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, the latest sign of cooperation between the conservative media mogul and the Democratic lawmaker who has often been a prime target of his newspaper and television outlets.

Asked about her relationship with Mr. Murdoch, Mrs. Clinton described him as simply "my constituent," and she played down the significance of the fund-raiser. Both sides said that Mr. Murdoch and Mrs. Clinton were joining forces for the good of New York, where Mr. Murdoch's $6 billion News Corporation employs about 5,000 workers.

"I am very gratified that he thinks I am doing a good job," Mrs. Clinton said in the Capitol on Tuesday, according to a transcript made available by her office after word of the fund-raising event was first reported by The Financial Times.

Yet the developing relationship between Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Murdoch — who has built an empire in part on the strength of media outlets such as Fox News and The New York Post that delight in skewering the Clintons — has drawn special attention, perplexing some political analysts and infuriating some liberals already suspicious of Mrs. Clinton's centrist positioning. Although she is ostensibly raising money for her re-election to the Senate this year, she is widely considered to be laying the groundwork for a presidential bid in 2008.

"The brazenness of this move is almost too much to stomach," wrote David Sirota, a liberal commentator, on his blog. "Here you have a leading Democratic U.S. senator engaging in a 'mating ritual' with the head of the news network that has overtly worked to systematically destroy both the Democratic Party and her own husband's administration."

more...

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/10/nyregion/10hillary.html?ex=1304913600&en=ff6d1ba374427b83&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

[Richard Steele]

1. So, is it too early to start tossing the word "WHORE" around?

Or do I need to give it a few more days?

Just askin'.

[ContraBass Black]

7. Do you mean him or her?

[Richard Steele]

8. If you really need to ask...

...then it's still too soon.

Tomorrow, perhaps, or Thursday.

[Vogon_Glory]

2. Murdoch Trying To avoid The Music

Murdoch and Co. probably realizes that progressives are angry enough at him and his flunkies to institute anti-trust proceedings against the Fox empire, and is trying to head that off by making nice with the junior senator from New York state.

[Pierre Trudeau]

3. ick, she's licking the gnome

I'm puzzled by the widespread assumption that she will be the 2008 candidate. I've never been able to like her much myself, and she doesn't seem to have many fans here at DU and similar sites. ANY of the other front-runners seem preferable to me, and of course The Al is looking better all the time.

But I'm just some Canadian chiming in from the sidelines, so don't let me influence you.

[Tom Joad]

4. murdoch wants war. Hillary will give it to him.

[Blackthorn]

9. Word Mr Joad, Word.

[AllieB]

5. I don't trust Murdoch

Something smells.

[Zen Democrat]

6. This is a no-brainer. Murdoch is investing.

Hillary has little opposition and will coast to reelection in November. Murdoch, seeing the obvious, is having a fundraiser so that he'll have entre with her. I don't think he would give her a dime if the Republicans had a serious contender in the race.

Murdoch is killing two birds with this one -- knowing that in donating to Hillary's Senate campaign, he's hurting her chances in the '08 primaries.

What should Hill do? I think I'd tell Rupert "Thanks, but no thanks." However, Hillary may not mind taking some of those FoxNews profits.

[mwooldri]

10. I've seen it all before I'm afraid.

Happened this way back about in 1997 in the UK. The Sun, a staunchly conservative titilating (see Page 3 girl with no clothes on) newspaper was very pro-Thatcher and generally very dismissive of Labour. Then they backed Labour in the 1997 election - the Conservaties were in complete disarray under John Major, after a series of sexual affairs, financial irregularities, a failed policy of trying to align with the European currencies in the ECU, and other not nice things meant that Labour romped home with a massive majority.

I hate to say this but Murdoch is a businessman and he wants to be seen to be going after the winning team. If the American people wake up and "smell the coffee" (so to say), then they will go vote for the Democratic candidate... and Fox will at some point become more leftward leaning. Eventually it has to - because that is the way the country is going.

Mark.