Rupert, Hillary... WTF?

[quote=“Financial Times”]Murdoch to host fundraiser for Hillary Clinton campaign
By Caroline Daniel in Washington
Published: May 9 2006 03:00 | Last updated: May 9 2006 03:00

Rupert Murdoch, the conservative media mogul whose New York Post tabloid savaged Hillary Clinton’s initial aspirations to become a US senator for New York, has agreed to host a political fundraiser for her re-election campaign.

The decision underlines an incongruous thawing of relations between Mr Murdoch and Mrs Clinton, who in 1998 coined the phrase “vast rightwing conspiracy” to denounce critics of her husband, such as Fox News, the conservative cable channel owned by Mr Murdoch’s News Corporation.

Mr Murdoch will host the fundraiser, due to be held by July, on behalf of News Corp.

[/quote]

Either the world is upside down, or Hillary and Rupert aren’t as far apart as they’d both probably like us to reckon.

Well, again we see that when it comes to politics and business there isn’t really a rightwing and a leftwing, there is only a money-wing. People will say what they think the majority of the public wants to hear. I used to think republican meant conservative. The more I watch the news and follow politics I realize this isn’t true. They are merely oportunistic feeders, ready to say whatever is pleasing to the ears of the majority.

I am not really that shocked. She used to sit on the Board of Directors at Walmart in Arkansas, so it is not like there isn’t any precedent for her having some corporate chums. Both Clintons love glitter, the limelight, and wealth. To be viewed as a truly national candidate, Clinton is positioning herself in the middle, and mending ties with Murdoch probably suits this strategy. Remember, this is a cold, calculating, power-hungry woman that stayed in a marriage only because it was a direct route to power. Why should we be suprised that she is making friendly overtures to Murdoch? Blair did a similar thing in the UK. Hillary would play “marbles” on the devil’s taint if it suited her interests.

It’s a f@#$ing brilliant move for Hillary. The two major obstacles to her election are 1) the way that she riles up the rabid Clinton haters on the far right, who will turn out en masse to vote against her and 2) the lack of enthusiasm many rank and file Dems have for her.

Imagine the sort of cognitive dissonance the mouth-foaming VINCEFOSTERWASMURDERED types would experience if they turn on The O’Reilly Factor and they see that windbag talking up Hillary as the one candidate most willing to defend the homeland. If she plays it right, she could totally neutralize 1).

Now if she could actually find a couple of substantive issues that could both stoke the grassroots and have a centrist appeal, Hillary could win by a comfortable margin in 2008.

I agree. I guess I was more suprised Murdoch thought she was far enough to the right for him to host a fundraiser for her.

I agree. I guess I was more suprised Murdoch thought she was far enough to the right for him to host a fundraiser for her.[/quote]

She’s been in NY for a few years. It’s hard not to lean to the right, despite NYC. :smiley:

I agree. I guess I was more suprised Murdoch thought she was far enough to the right for him to host a fundraiser for her.[/quote]

None of us know what is in Murdoch’s mind, s.b. But personally, I doubt that he is very interested in the issues of school prayer or intelligent design or abortion or gay marriage. My guess (again – could be wrong-- don’t know the man) is that he’s interested in money and power that end, ultimately, with a grand legacy after he goes. Helping the rich and powerful achieve these goals in exchange for political support (i.e. $$$) has nothing to do with “right” or “left”. Any politician who wants to ‘succeed’ will be more than willing to oblige. They know, of course, that they can use the money they get in return to commission TV campaign ads telling their peon commoner supporters (of whichever party) how much they care for them, and how they intend to use the powers of their office --once elected-- to do right by them… And what would Murdoch care of that? He’ll get what he wants either way.

Nice, I never thought of it that way.