Tuesday :: Aug 1, 2006

A Clinton Katharsis


by pessimist

Just as Katharine Harris recently experienced Katharsis, Hillary may well be about to - if she hasn't already.

It's no secret that Rupert Murdoch is on the prowl for top political talent, but is he trustworthy enough to be a supporter? The wise mind would say no, he's only going to use you - but that isn't stopping people like Hillary, whose ambition exceeds her wisdom.


Murdoch Takes Buying a Politician Global
by Miles Mogulescu
07.31.2006

It's common knowledge that big business often buys influence with politicians--whether by outright bribes (e.g Randy Cunningham) or more often through political contributions (e.g. just about the entire Congress, particularly Republicans.) Murdoch isn't just content to buy any old politician; not just congressmen, senators and members of parliament -- no, he's buying international heads of state. Recently Murdoch placed former Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar on the Board of New Corporation...

Murdoch is himself a Republican and a neocon, but recruits heads of state both to advance his own political views, and to advance his business interests. As Yale School of Management professor Jeffrey Sonnenfeld stated, "Murdoch is interested in influence as much as affluence." For example, Murdoch has been a strong supporter of Tony Blair. It is reported that Tony Blair meets with Murdoch two to three times a year, but goes to some lengths to keep their contacts secret.

British journalists who have tried
to get more information under the English Freedom of Information Act
have been stonewalled.

Yet ...

Murdoch is expected to offer Tony Blair a senior role in News Corporation when Blair steps down as Prime Minister of England. Murdoch is so brazen that he doesn't even wait until Blair is a private citizen, but promises Blair future financial rewards while Blair is still in office and in a position to influence policies which effect Murdoch's business and personal interests.

It doesn't stop there:

This past weekend, Blair was a participant in a management retreat for 250 top New Corp. executives in Pebble Beach, California. Other invitees included Bill Clinton and Israeli Vice-Premier Shimon Peres. Clinton even waived his normal $100,000 speaking fee to talk to, and socialize with, the News Corp. execs.

Could there be any relation to Murdoch's New York fundraiser last week for Hillary Clinton?

NNNNAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's really a payoff for Clinton's support for Joe Lieberman!

All public persona bets are off when Rupert comes to town! Der Gropinator was reportedly cruising around the Spanish Bay golf links in his miniature Hummer golf cart -- "not exactly a symbol for the fight against melting ice caps." Bono, Nicloe Kidman - and of course Hillary were also reportedly seen hanging about the gathering at the Carmel Mission, but no one confirms these sightings.

Also reported to be there were Al Gore, Newt Gingrich, John McCain, Oakland Athletics general manager Billy Beane (who "will talk about radical approaches to traditional business") and Los Angeles Police Chief William Bratton, will be joined on his panel about reforming institutions former Harvard University president Larry Summers. A.G. Lafley, chief executive of Procter & Gamble, will lecture on building brands.

To me, this sounds more like a 'synergy' conference than merely a gathering "to relax and have a great time in this beautiful area, and to go away with some fresh thoughts about the future," as News Corp. spokesman Andrew Butcher describes it for those not in on the secret:

Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy center at the University of Pennsylvania says it's for "Media influence and the potential for political contributions."

That sounds more like something that would attract Hillary's attention!

Hillary should be remembering what her husband's paramours went through just to be able to stand next to world power:

Murdoch said that if the 2008 presidential contest came down to a choice between Mrs Clinton and John McCain, he expects to support McCain. He called her "a very impressive, able woman" but said he remained uncertain of her political philosophy. "Has she suddenly become a moderate and a centrist in everything or is she the old Hillary Clinton? I don't know." Asked if he was keeping the door open to giving support to Mrs Clinton in 2008, Mr Murdoch said: "I'd be very surprised if I found myself doing that."

But he said Mr McCain "would be a fine president. I like him very much. I think he's a great natural hero, and I think he's talking a lot of sense," Mr Murdoch said. That praise was offered despite Mr McCain's support of an overhaul of the cable industry's pricing model that would allow for more customer choice.

"It would destroy the business and destroy so many channels," Mr Murdoch said.

I guess the prom is over, and Cinderella gets to return to cleaning out the ashes.

Personal to Michael Bloomberg: Don't bother applying for Hillary's position.

To drive home this point, Murdoch even mentioned this position on The Charlie Rose Show, stating "the fund-raiser was based on her performance as a senator".

One who, like Monica, performed on her knees - figuratively if not literally?


Hillary Clinton For Sale
July 19, 2006

For the right amount of money, the former First Lady is even willing to sleep with the (political) enemy as she proved during a recent fundraiser hosted by a well-known neoconservative who repeatedly attacks her and a group of his very wealthy, campaign-contributing friends.
It was a bit bizarre since the media mogul has spent years attacking Clinton, but money can change things.
Since Clinton didn't want to make this rather newsworthy event public, her loyal hometown cheerleading squad, the New York Times, limited the rather interesting liberal-conservative cash powwow to a sentence at the bottom of an unrelated story.

She also seems not to want to broadcast that she attended an event seen by political opponents as 'lefty liberal' - but I digress.

Making new friends, albeit out of old enemies, has paid off for Clinton whose latest financial reports show that she has raised $44 million during the election cycle and has $22 million available.

One columnist encourages the media to get a list of those who attended-and thus donated money-Murdoch's secretive fundraising breakfast.

He goes on to say that if elections are open and bribes are legal,
we should be able to find out the names of the bribers.

This sort of pandering just might come back and bite Hillary just like it has Joe Mental:


First Joe, Now Voters Ready to Reject Hillary Over War
by Jonathan Tasini
07.21.2006

[T]he July 19th Marist poll does underscore what I’ve been saying throughout this campaign: if Democratic primary voters actually knew where my opponent stood on the Iraq War, she could lose the race.
In the Marist poll, 70 percent of registered Democrats believe that the Iraq War should be a major campaign issue.
62 percent of the voters say they will vote for a candidate who is against the war and only 9 percent say they will vote for someone who supports the war. This poll confirms Hillary Clinton’s worst fear: while she is doing everything possible not to talk about the war, voters want to talk about the war—and the unnecessary deaths of thousands of Americans and Iraqis, the destruction of a country and the waste of hundreds of billions of dollars—and they overwhelmingly reject her position on the war, and, I believe, on other issues.

But, in the end, poll numbers are less important to me than what I am hearing out in the street. For many weeks, I and hundreds of other volunteers throughout the state have been engaging voters on the issues. We have heard a great desire for a progressive, authentic message—one that calls for an immediate end to the war, for single-payer health insurance and a determined stance against abusive corporate power. Those are the issues I am running on and I believe are resonating with voters.

There may be something to this despite all of Hillary's campaign cash:


Why I want Tasini in the U.S. Senate
by Will Fudeman
July 12, 2006

Jonathan Tasini embodies the best values of the Democratic Party. He has devoted his adult life to advocating for ordinary working people, not wealthy special interests. As president of the National Writers Union, his name became known as the lead plaintiff in a landmark case in the U.S. Supreme Court, Tasini vs. New York Times, which guaranteed electronic property rights to writers for their published work. His platform includes advocating for “Medicare for all” under a single payer health care plan, “fair trade” rather than NAFTA and CAFTA style trade agreements that hurt American workers, and a foreign policy based on effective diplomacy rather than initiating unnecessary wars.

Some people assume Tasini has no chance to win the Democratic primary, but if New York's Democrats took to heart the slogan of the Tasini campaign “Vote for what you believe in,” Tasini would defeat Clinton by a landslide.

Tasini's main reason for running is Mrs. Clinton's ongoing support for the Bush/Cheney war in Iraq. Tasini believes the war was based on lies and poor judgment of a Republican administration that was enabled by senators like Mrs. Clinton. Sen. Clinton's thinking about the war in Iraq seems clouded by her ambition to be elected the first woman president of the United States. She seems to think that a woman has to appear to be a hawk to be elected.

Looking at Sen. Clinton's record, her militarism isn't the only problem. When people learn that Mrs. Clinton has never favored single payer health care, that she is now being supported by billionaire media mogul Rupert Murdoch, and that she served for six years on the board of Wal-Mart, they start questioning whether she is representing us well in the Senate. The truth is, she's not.

I feel no reason to support her ambitions
if she will not recognize that Democrats need to stand
for the rights and interests of the people,
not the corporate elite.

Besides, Senator, just maybe Rupert isn't quite as smart and in control as he might like to think his money makes him:


WHY FOX NEWS IS LOSING VIEWERS
By Cliff Kincaid
July 1, 2006

FNC has lost viewers compared to last year. “I think many viewers are seeing a trend that they don't like,” noted one former FNC enthusiast who wrote to me earlier this year. Broadcasting & Cable reports that FNC chief Roger Ailes is upset about the decline and blames “complacency” at the network. It was reported that he believes that bookers are “relying too heavily on the same pool of faces and settling for authors or actors after they’ve already been on CNN or...gasp...MSNBC.”

The trouble is that some of these faces are on the FNC payroll.

Liberals, who are only about 20 percent of the electorate, seem to be getting more and more attention from FNC. In fact, one of the leaders of that 20 percent, Senator Hillary Clinton, will be benefiting from a fundraiser in July being hosted by Rupert Murdoch, chairman of News Corporation, parent company of FNC.

Another one of my columns, noting how FNC had given a platform to Howard Stern on the O’Reilly and Hannity & Colmes programs, prompted this response: “Thank you for the column about Fox drifting to the left. Actually, it is more of a lurch! I hope that Roger Ailes will take heed.” At AIM we have received hundreds of emails from conservatives over the last year expressing concern over the drift of the channel.

Just another example of why Hillary shouldn't rely upon commie liberals like Rupert - she might lose the wealthy conservative vote! And then all of her political whoring will have been for naught, just as Monica - and Katharine Harris - found out the hard way!

Copyrighted [©] source material contained in this article is presented under the provisions of Fair Use.


FAIR USE NOTICE


This article contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of democracy, economic, environmental, human rights, political, scientific, and social justice issues, among others. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material in this article is distributed without profit for research and educational purposes.

pessimist :: 3:51 AM :: Comments (2) :: TrackBack (0) :: Digg It!