By: Ben Smith
Feb 15, 2008 05:32 PM EST
Over the course of her six years as a New York senator and in the early days of her presidential campaign, Hillary Rodham Clinton cultivated an unlikely set of allies: the conservative media.
From Rupert Murdoch to David Brooks to Matt Drudge, her campaign courted them with every instrument at its disposal, including targeted leaks and Bill Clinton's legendary personal charm.
But when Sen. Clinton's campaign started to stumble, those hard-won friends were the first to go. Murdoch's pet tabloid, the New York Post, repudiated her and endorsed Sen. Barack Obama. The Drudge Report rode her decline as gleefully as it watched her rise. And the pundit class moved from its grudging respect for Clinton into an infatuation with Obama.
<...>
"Clinton's biggest breach with the liberal wing actually opened up later, in the fall of 2003. Most liberals went into full opposition, wanting to see Bush disgraced. Clinton — while an early critic of the troop levels, the postwar plans and all the rest — tried to stay constructive," David Brooks wrote in The New York Times last February.
"She wanted to see America and Iraq succeed, even if Bush was not disgraced," he wrote, reflecting a broader respect for Clinton as a principled centrist, a hawk — a president with whom, perhaps, conservatives could do business.
<...>
Ideology is one thing. Murdoch, the chairman of News Corp., which owns the Fox News Channel, the New York Post and The Wall Street Journal, was another matter. More businessman than ideologue, Murdoch has a storied history of putting his media resources to the service of politicians ranging from Ed Koch to Tony Blair, and extracting a price for his support.
His New York Post had done its best to derail Clinton's 2000 Senate bid, but after she was elected, and particularly after the terror attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, he — and his paper — turned a kinder eye toward her.
Murdoch and Sen. Clinton lunched together in News Corp.'s private dining room in 2002, and courting him soon became a special project of Bill Clinton's.
The courtship became public when the former president visited the New York Post's newsroom in January 2003, after which insulting caricatures of the former president largely disappeared from its pages. Later, Murdoch appeared at his annual conference, the Clinton Global Initiative, and Clinton spoke at a News Corp. gathering in Pebble Beach, Calif. They began speaking regularly on the telephone, people familiar with the conversations say. The Clinton Foundation even employed Murdoch's daughter-in-law as a consultant.
Fox News began treating Clinton with, if not consistent respect, something short of the loathing it had shown in the 1990s. Murdoch even hosted a fundraiser for Clinton's reelection campaign. And the alliance seemed to have been consummated when the conservative Post endorsed Clinton for reelection to the Senate, a move that would have been unthinkable years earlier.
"We think she's done such a good job these last six years that she'd do well to serve six more," the paper wrote, cheekily but not without sincerity.
The relationship seemed to be intact last year. Murdoch contributed the maximum, $2,300, to Clinton's White House bid. Clinton was the only one of the Democratic candidates not to attack Fox amid outrage that the right-leaning network would host a Democratic debate. (She did not, however, actually defend Fox.)
<...>
Ironically, it was Bill Clinton — who had worked so hard to woo Murdoch — who ultimately lost his endorsement.
"Bill Clinton's thuggishly self-centered campaign antics conjure so many bad, sad memories that it's hard to know where to begin. Suffice it to say that his Peck's-Bad-Boy smirk — the Clinton trademark — wore thin a very long time ago," the paper wrote.
moreIn January 2007, before
the paycheck, Taylor Marsh smacked down Hillary:
(be sure to check out the queen been image)
Read the
Raw Story piece. It dovetails nicely on
my piece last night. More on that story in a minute.
But seriously, this is getting pretty ridiculous very fast. Evidently, Clinton's people believe she can get elected by dissing progressive radio, while simultaneously sticking a finger in small business blogs. Hey, but when you're as big as Hillary you don't need your grass roots peeps. She can do it all by herself... with the help of those right-wing bloggers whose sites she advertised her live web chat.
Ed Schultz isn't taking this malarkey either.
Many of you have requested hearing from Hillary on progressive talk especially The Ed Schultz Show. I want you to know our producer James Holm tirelessly works the contacts and has repeatedly tried to connect with Clinton's people.
Cutting to the chase, Hillary's people treat us like "dirt." We are constantly disregarded, told things that aren't true, and given speculation an interview might happen someday.
Quite frankly, I'm sick of it. This morning I watched Hillary Clinton tell CNN she is accessible. What? To the TV cameras yes, to the base of loyal listeners on progressive talk radio, absolutely not!
Reaching over 2.5 million listeners who are engaged in changing the country I believe qualifies us for some attention. I realize Hillary is an international figure and star but this pattern of treatment to The Ed Schultz Show has been an on-going pattern which tells me all they care about is her mug on TV.
The conservatives have done wonders with audio continually talking to and solidifying their base. It's apparent to me radio is minor to the people surrounding this leading candidate. ...
Liberal talk show host trashes Clinton's staff, sends out photo with Obama emphasis addedEd, I feel your annoyance. It's fitting that the above story appears next to Clinton's web chat BlogAd, isn't it? (heh-he.)
I've been writing about this for years. The fact that the DC Democrats just don't understand progressive radio, nor do they care one whit about it. This story about Hillary treating Schultz like "dirt" is emblematic of her campaign so far, but symbolic of DC Democrats. Can you imagine anyone in the Republican Party treating their right-wing hosts like this? Not. Going. To. Happen.
I really had no feelings whatsoever about Hillary one way or the other from the start. I was excited she was the first woman with a chance to win who was actually running. But I have to tell you that after the last few days or so I've moved into the camp that is not impressed at all with Clinton and the team she has around her, who seem not only arrogant, but possessing a queen fetish.
My conversations with someone I always considered an ally didn't help either. Evidently, Hotline was interested in the small business post I did last night and called Clinton's office to check it out. Someone in that office told Hotline that my story was inaccurate. Leaving aside some of the judgments I made in the piece that could be construed as subjective, there is nothing inaccurate about my piece. In fact, Peter Daou, someone whom I have been friendly with and have good relations with because he has been very forthcoming with me and even generous once, said in a conversation I had with him this morning that he didn't care about the criticisms in my post, but that I needed to make a correction about the ad buy part of my post. A correction of what? I asked. That went nowhere. Then he told me in a long explanation that I was included in the ad buy but the ad was rejected because my ad strips were full. Excuse me and with all due respect to Peter, because the ad buy was supposedly placed through someone else in the Clinton camp, but that just isn't credible. However, I am checking it out (see update below).
It's time to move on from this ad buy bs. However, I'm filing it under PROGRESSIVES BEWARE. Radio hosts, fuhghettaboutit.
Call the Clinton camp anytime for a clarification if you need one, I was told. Well, I've got a phone and they can reach out to me as well. But they won't. Ask Ed Schultz. It's the Queen Bee syndrome. The people must go to Hillary's hive. Because she's not coming to us. Clinton's inevitability campaign has already gone to her head.
More from Marsh:
Blog P.I., Peter Daou and More HRC Ad Buy Bull More on the incident that ticked Marsh off:
"Why do people like HRC, no matter how often it becomes clear that wingnuts hate us, seek approval from wingnuts?" · Campaign staff use Drudge Report against poll rivals
· Internet journalist gentle with Democrat candidate
Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington
The Guardian,
Tuesday October 23 2007
A decade ago, the internet journalist Matt Drudge was very nearly Bill Clinton's ruin, after leaking the story of his affair with Monica Lewinsky. These days, Drudge is one of Hillary Clinton's best kept secrets.
During the presidential campaign, the Drudge Report, once known as the scourge of Democrats, has betrayed a surprisingly soft side for the woman previously viewed by diehard Republicans as the mother of all that is liberal and permissive in America. When Ms Clinton had a coughing fit during a speech in New Orleans last summer, Drudge reacted with genuine concern, telling listeners to his Miami radio show: "Hillary dear, take care of yourself. We need you," according to New York magazine.
On another occasion, he confessed: "I need Hillary Clinton. I need to be part of her world. That's my bank."
Yesterday, it emerged that the caring went two ways. The New York Times reported that the Clinton campaign had grown adept at using the Drudge Report to leak news that could steal the thunder from rivals, or to solidify her position as the frontrunner for the Democratic party's presidential nomination for next year.
Earlier this month, Ms Clinton's staff leaked campaign fundraising data to the website just as her rival for the nomination, Barack Obama, was to deliver a policy speech on Iraq - and a crucial 20 minutes before the official release of the information. The story on Ms Clinton's fundraising prowess dominated the news cycle.
The New York Times reported that the Clinton campaign had opened a direct line of communication to Drudge through a former Democratic national committee official, Tracy Sefl. Ms Sefl refused to comment yesterday, but the revelation was widely seen as a sign of Drudge's importance in the US media, despite his reclusive nature and a history of getting some stories spectacularly wrong.
The Drudge Report's influence goes beyond its average readership - the site claims 422 million log-ons in the past month - with television and radio producers scouring the site for potential scoops.
Some would argue that Ms Clinton owes her political career to Drudge. In 1998, the humiliation of her husband's affair with the White House intern led to an outpouring of sympathy for the first lady. Her approval ratings soared, the image of the calculating political spouse blurred. The idea of running for the Senate, which Ms Clinton had been pondering, seemed less of a long shot. She launched her campaign early the next year.
Aside from the bond with Drudge, however, her relationship with the media has remained frosty. In the early primary states of New Hampshire and Iowa, she has reportedly permitted just one unscripted press conference since announcing her campaign last January. Other candidates routinely have two or even three such media "availabilities" a day.
Ms Clinton's events typically also allow less time for questions from the audience than the other Republican and Democratic contenders. At an event in New Hampton, Iowa earlier this month, she was obliged to apologise to a man she accused of asking questions planted by her opponents.
"She is one of the most isolated candidates in modern American history. Everything is stage-managed," said Larry Sabato, a politics professor at the University of Virginia.
· This article was amended on Tuesday October 23 2007. In the article above we had the name of former Democratic national committee official as Tracey Sefl. The correct spelling is Tracy. This has been changed.
moreExpect fleas!
by Chris Bowers, Mon Jan 22, 2007 at 03:24:18 PM EST
This isn't cool:
But it was Penn who stated that no other Democrat is tough enough to beat back Sen. John McCain or former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani.
In a clear reference to Obama's lack of political experience on the national stage, Penn wrote: "Some of the commentators look at the ratings of people who have not yet been in the cross-fire, and say they might have a better chance. Recent history shows the opposite."
He then set his sights on Sen. John Kerry and former Vice President Al Gore, who also might run in 2008. "The last two Democratic presidential candidates started out with high favorable ratings and ended up on Election Day - and today - far more polarizing and disliked nationally," said the pollster, who cut his teeth on President Bill Clinton's 1996 re-election campaign.
Even though there is currently no candidate in the 2008 field who I back strongly enough to actually advocate on his or her behalf, there are still many things I would like to accomplish during the primary season. One of my goals is to help diffuse the Democratic obsession with electability, which
I believe is extremely damaging to the party around the country. It makes Democrats appear pandering (we will tell you what we think you want to hear in order to get elected), shiftless (we don't stand for anything except getting elected), out of touch (our ideas aren't good enough to get us elected--we have to change and move toward Republicans in order to achieve office) and dishonest (we can trick people into voting for someone based on his or her resume / demographic profile). In short, in the effort to make one Democrat look good, playing the electability card makes the whole party look bad, and more interested in power for the sake of power than power in order to do actual good.
It is sad to see the Clinton camp to play the electability card so early in the process, even if it isn't entirely surprisingly that it was DLC-nexus uber-pollster Mark Penn who did it. This is a guy who has made a name triangulating against Democrats and progressives, and whose firm has of late quite literally made a living by
shilling anti-Democratic messages for pharmaceutical companies without disclosure. This is the sort of shit that has to stop, and stop now. Democrats need to be made to feel strong incentives against this sort of behavior.
That goes for people in the netroots who echo the Republican line that Clinton isn't electable, too. Not only does proclaiming Clinton unelectable do the Republican Noise Machine's bidding, it is just doubly sad to see progressives use the same tactics against the DLC-nexus that have for so long been used to weaken us. We can't win an electability war against the DLC-nexus. I mean,
they invented the concept in order to destroy us. The netroots might as well try to win Democratic primaries by raking in more donations for corporate PACs as do DLC-nexus candidates. Not. Gonna. Happen.
Him again:
Hillary should have fired Mark Penn for consistently being wrong
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
