First, my own comments. Whatever one thinks of HRC, it’s to her credit that she, as her husband did last year, is able to walk into the lion’s den and begin to turn the opinion of a man who has done more to harrass the Clintons and all stripe of Democrat, liberal and progressive and who is the founder of rw think tanks and yappers which have blocked progressive policies for years.
Before bashing HRC, think about it. If we want more civility in politics, it’s imperative to co-opt people like Scaife. We will see if Barack Obama takes Scaife’s invitation to meet with the Trib editorial board and builds on what HRC started.
Does all this mean I’m ready to come out and recommend that our Democrat readers choose Sen. Clinton in Pennsylvania’s April 22 primary?No — not yet, anyway. In fairness, we at the Trib want to hear Sen. Barack Obama’s answers to some of the same questions and to others before we make that decision.
But it does mean that I have a very different impression of Hillary Clinton today than before last Tuesday’s meeting — and it’s a very favorable one indeed.
Call it a “counterintuitive” impression.
reassess again
Here is why you need to do another reassessment again of your views on Hillary.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboa…
Obama should talk to Scaife's employees instead
I would rather Obama go talk to real people, real voters.
Scaife, the man who Swift-boated John Kerry, represents Fox News journalism. To acknowledge Scaife is to imply that what he prints is actually news, and not what it really is: right-wing propaganda.
By meeting with Scaife, Hillary empowers him more, and puts pressure on Obama to do the same. It’s dumb. Hillary obviously is trying to make friends wherever she can, but this is one “friend” I would never trust.
The editorial board knows where Obama stands on the issues, they know his track record, and they can certainly judge him on that. I would much rather have Obama go talk to the guys who work the presses at Scaife’s newspapers than to talk to their editorial board.
R.M.Scaife: Hillary, reassessed; Minds boggle
You actually view HRC’s willingness to sit with Scaife’s people as making a “very favorable” impression on yourself?
Kindly do a bit of research and you will find that the Clintons were not only ready and willing to sit down with Republicans, but to make deals with them – even when the deal-making was damaging to the interests of the Democratic Party, as well as to U.S. workers and America’s poor.
Do you recall President Bill Clinton’s shameless TV “performance” with Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich, that allowed Gingrich to push his own rightwing agenda while the hapless Bill Clinton stood by his side?
Do you further recall the NAFTA initiative – where Bill Clinton ran to the Republican House members for votes he could not get from his own Democrats, while wife Hillary met with five separate womens’ groups pushing the same trade deal?
Listing all these cozy sitdowns would make too long a bill so perhaps you can at least still recall “Welfare Reform” another case of Clinton deal-making with rightwing Republicans that along with mental illness, has been a significant cause of the increase in America’s homeless people.
Rather than viewing this sitdown with Scaife’s Trib as favorable, I see it as something that should worry us.
Matt Thomas
Why does it worry you?
I’m not sure why it worries you – there is a whole half of this country who won’t vote for either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton. The Bushies have made an art out of ignoring Democrats – should we do the same simply out of spite, or should we govern in a way that sets our priorities first but allows the input and consultation of folks we might not agree with?
ignoring Scaife isn't ignoring Republicans
Scaife is as damaging to the middle-class Republicans as he is to middle class Democrats. And Clinton is pandering to this guy.
Like many right-winger power-brokers, Scaife likes to use race and gun rights and gay rights, etc., to divide the middle class. So long as voters are divided on race, they won’t pay attention to their crumbling bridges, the unfair tax structure, poor schools, greedy insurers, the war in Iraq, etc. They vote against their own best interests because Scaife appeals to their prejudices.
This is divide-and-conquer strategy, and few are bette at it than Scaife. If Clinton gave an interview to Scaife without pointing out the damage that he’s done to America, then she’s pandering to him.
It’s dumb for a Democrat to do that. Democrats should be out talking to middle class Republicans, not the big money guys who are ruining their lives.
Also, it worries me that she’s talking to Scaife because it makes me think that she gave him assurances that she won’t scrap the 1996 Telecommunications Act, a law that Bill Clinton signed that gives media owners like Scaife far too much power over deciding what’s news and what isn’t, and what’s true and what isn’t. Clinton has been friendly with Rupert Murdoch too. And that also worries me.
Obama, on the other hand, has one of the best telecommunications policies out there. Therefore he poses more of a threat to the power of these big media companies. As a blogger, I would think you’d be concerned about Clinton’s lack of clarity on this issue.
Interesting comment
Especially coming from someone who, presumbly, is an Obama supporter. Isn’t his campaign theme about Americans working and coming together? Or doesn’t that include people who don’t agree with you? Right now, Scaife and his allies are not only outside the tent and…, but trampling the tent after they’re done. Why doesn’t it make sense to try and co-opt those people on issues where there’s agreement? Did you notice Scaife also wants us out of Iraq?
Did Bill Clinton’s administration do some things that I didn’t like? Yes and I’d agree with you about welfare reform. But who also ultimately did Gringrich in by allowing him to shut down the federal gov’t in a fit of pique?
Of course, Scaife and his funding of the rw infrastructure has done enormous damage to the country, but that doesn’t mean he can’t evolve and we can’t miss chances to help him along that path.
pd
On Scaife "...we can’t miss chances to help him..."
Yes pd, I fully support Barrack Obama’s willingness to reach out to Republicans, but this is nowhere near the case here. Mr. Scaif and his allies are not simply Republicans. They are dogmatic ideologues…zealots if you will, who are seriously committed to the permanent elimination of the Democratic Party as an effective national political organization.
Has not our Party suffered enough at the hands of the self-obsessed Clintons and their Dick Morris dirty politics of triangulation that has since led us to a string of electoral defeats?
Matt Thomas
True, Scaife is a crazy...
But also keep in mind he’s a crazy who controls a lot of the media market in Western PA. Do we not want those voters to hear the Dem message? Would we rather they hear Scaife spout off about how much he hated the Clintons in the 90s? Honestly I’m happy to see this article come out, and to see a that a demagogue has taken the time to meet Hillary and perhaps shifted his opinion of her a bit.
Scaife should get no credibility
The fact that Clinton walked into his office and said what she did, shows how desperate she is. This guy is the very worst of media in this country right now, and showing him any recognition only perpetuates the problem. He does not deny using The Trib and his money for political purposes, why would you even consider giving him any recognition. He can’t be trusted and thinking you may be able to turn him is simply naive.
Hillary Claims Will Not Meet With Her Enemies!
Hillary often boasts that she would not meet with her enmies, however, in an attempt to divert attention away from Bosnia she sat down with Richard Mellon Scaife, her arch enemy and personal persecutor, the very same Richard Mellon Scaife, who during her White House years accused her of the murder of Vince Foster and said that Bill and she had committed 60 murders to hide their crimes, in an ill-advised and ill-timed manner to re-introduce the Rev. Wright issue — by the way, the very Rev. Wright that they Invited to the White House.
Then in a further attempt to divert attention away from Bosnia, they sent out Sen. McGovern to add more fuel to the Gender Fight, already started by Geraldine Ferraro, so now we have a racial and gender war/fight beginning to brew in their hopes to keep up the divisions they have already inflamed in the public discourse. That they are willing to divide the country back into a gender and racial war tells you much about thier character.
This fight could have possibly been over if it was not for Rush Limbaugh, and Bill’s visit to Rush during the Texas Primarys. Barack might have won Texas but for the 100,000 Republican votes casted for Hillary which put her slightly over the top. However, the Republicans who vote for Barack, genuinely like him, unlike the Republicans who vote for Hillary, as a way to “bloody” Barack up, edged on by Rush Limbaugh! As for her Tonya Harding, Tonya was sent packing in disgrace! As for Hillary’s scheme to make Barack look “unelectable”, it looks like due to her Bosnian Misadventure, the “Chickens are Coming Home to Roost”!
This is a sad debauchle on Ammerican history that the first woman with a serious chance to become President has had such disregard for her own Party and the country at large in the way she has conducted herself and campaign and for their reckless exhibition in tearing the country apart through both race and gender. Unfortunately, she has not exhibited a moral and ethical character and a genuine graciousness of spirit, which Protype would have been a a role model for all women to be proud of. This is not the type of “Sophia” or Mary to lead America to a better and more shining place and to that more perfect union which would enable us to measure up to the challenges of our time.
Worry about her stand against Terrorist-Look at History
I truly worry about her stand against Terrorists, especially here on US Soil. Read the Wall Street Journal article about the pardoning of terriorist that killed 6 us citizens in a Historic Manhattan reataurant. These terrorist didn’t even apply for clemoncy, they OFFERED IT!!!
I am not convinced that she will be strong against terrorists because of past history.
http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB12027…
no soul
the very fact that Sen Clinton would sit in the same room as Richard Mellon Scaife after he all but accused her of murdering Vince Foster – is the culmination of Sen and Pres Clinton working on these people for years in anticipation of her expected “coronation” Feb 5th
That didn’t happen and Hillary pandering to the Scaife people is an example of her desperation in this campaign
This has no relation at all to Obama’s appeal to other political parties. Obama has made it a practice not to demonize other people’s ideas – while not necessarily agreeing to them
Way too late for the Clinton’s to try and adopt a strategy like that
Really?
So forgive and forget isn’t a good thing? To not do so is very Bush-like. He started a war with a forgotten non-entity in the Middle East because he was mad that daddy didn’t go all the way.
You don't co-opt people like Scaiffe...
It’s just not possible. He is too rich and connected and manipulative. To think that you can turn this sow’s ear into a silk purse is ludicrous.
Pilt
Greg's point
I think Greg’s point is a good one – that HRC meeting with Scaife could well result in less biased coverage in the Trib and Scaife’s other media outlets. You know how it is, it’s much harder to hate someone after you’ve met them face-to-face and listened to them. Now it may not be a tactic that ultimately works, but it’s certainly a valid tactic and worth a try. I think Obama should take the Trib up on its offer to meet with them, too. It’d be a great double team effort.
pd
Hahaha.
What a joke. Yes, all our leaders should be pledging fealty to right-wing media moguls. This is precisely what I dislike about the Hillary campaign. Thanks for highlighting this. “Going into the lion’s den” – that should refer to a candidate that goes to talk voters who are not predisposed to supporting him/her. Obama goes to Johnstown and Altoona. Hillary goes to Scaife. Doesn’t that just say it all?
Please...
HRC did not pledge “fealty” to Scaife. She took him up on his invitation to meet with the Trib’s editorial board and apparently they had a good exchange. She didn’t change any of her positions to suit him and nowhere in the editorial does it say that.
pd
Conversions do happen
Two prominent examples are David Brock from being a key cog in the VRWC to an outspoken critic and David Horowitz from being a radical leftwinger to a radical rightwinger.
pd
Post new comment