Hillary Clinton - A Deal With The Devil [Fox News & RW Media]?

[Median Democrat]

I have made a couple of satirical posts, which I thought were fairly obvious, and congrats to those who recognized humor with me post a big "sarcasm." However, more seriously, I have been pretty non-comittal about either candidate, since I thought that either Obama or Hillary would be far better than McCain. However, I am starting to wonder whether Hillary has worked out some sort of sweet heart deal with Rupert Murdoch. This is my attempt at a serious post:

First, News Corp has been on an acquistiion binge over the past few years, They have acquired or attempted to acquire Yahoo, Direct TV, and they would be a major beneficiary of the highly technical debates over the relaxation of media ownership rules by the FCC. The Bush administration has supported this while Democrats have opposed this. These acquisitions are worth hundreds of millions of dollars to News Corp. Here's a story about it that appeared in the NY Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/23/business/media/23ownership.html

Second, Fox News has been remarkably light on Hillary, while going incredibly negative on Barack Obama. Who can forget the 3 hour Ayers-a-thon before the Indiana primaries, which appeared to be designed to sway elections in Hillary's favor. Worse, you had Rush Limbaugh openly supporting Operation Chaos, and a visit to his website reveals that for the most part, he has also ignored Hillary, while attackimg Barack. Here's Fox's election coverage, which at the time of this post, is very light on anti-HIllary stuff:

http://elections.foxnews.com/

Third, and this is the kicker, is the sudden featured appearance of prominent Hillary surrogates such as Geraldine Ferraro and Lanny Davis who have been given a free podium to bash on Obama, and have recently complimented Fox for its fair and balanced coverage. The Huffington Post has commented extensively on Clinton campaign's active use of RW media channels to attack Obama:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-dreier/sidney-blumenthal-uses-fo_b_99695.html

What gives? My speculation is as follows:

1. Hillary is holding out for the long shot chance that she main gain the nomination in 2008, but she is mainly trying to hurt Obama so that he will lose, which will set up a 2012 run for Hillary. Given Hillary's age, she cannot realistically wait until 2016, the end of an Obama presidency.

2. Hillary is promising something to Fox in return. I recall that Rupert Murdoch hosted a fundraiser for Hillary in 2006. My thought is what does Rupert get out of it? I think he mainly gets a McCain victory in 2008 (a win for him), which is mostly notable because this will help his acquisition agenda. Also, a Democratic in the white house is deferred for another 4 years in which anything can happen.

In short, Hillary is engaging in a classic game of an enemy of my enemy is my friend. However, in doing this, she is throwing the Democratic Party under the bus. I am almost getting to the point of simply sitting out a McCain v. Clinton campaign, because Hillary's tactics so closely resemble the government by propaganda tactics of the Bush administration.

Also, if the Democrats should lose in 2008, then I will vote and support anyone but Hillary Clinton. At one time, I would have been happy to have her as President, but she has now sold her soul.

Seriously, if you are a Democrat, and you are sitting on Fox News enjoying their hospitality, then you should ask yourself whether you are on the right side. Have you sacrificed your principles for power? I think Hillary has done so irrevocably. She has sold her soul.

[cliffordu]

1. She really has become a DINO. Is there any way to kick her out of the party?

I ain't playin', either.

[LSparkle]

2. I wish she'd go Lieberman and start the "Clintons for America Party"

and, like you, I'm totally SERIES about that.

[DJ13]

3. Clintons Reuniting America Party

CRAP

[LSparkle]

5. Like I've posted before, maybe Traitorous Arkies Who Broke The Dem Party

:eyes:

[Median Democrat]

8. I Actually Spoofed Her So-Called Coalition As Well . . .

Again, most folks got the joke, though towards the end, some folks still thought I was serious even after I added the graphics of the Three Stooges:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6165838&mesg_id=6165838

Hillary's coalition is also fictional an internally inconsistent. A coalition of right wing activists, uneducated working class whites, and hispanics? Where is the common thread here? Am I missing something? If Hillary were to secure the nomination, her coalition will largely fall-apart, particularly among the RW dittoheads.

[Indenturedebtor]

12. The Benedict Arnold Party. No joke n/t

[Median Democrat]

4. What Is Hillary's Agenda Besides I Am More Electable?

I wrote a satire post on this point, and thanks to most of the folks who got it:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6160094&mesg_id=6160094

The point I was trying to make, which I will spell out now, is that Hillary's electability argument is fool's gold. At this point, the focus of the Obama campaign is McCain. As noted above, the RW media is almost trying to help her, which is epitomized by Rush Limbaugh's Operation Chaos routine. If Hillary's was the Democratic frontrunner, how long will that supposed lead of McCain in the polls last?

First, the dirt that you don't here about, gets aired such as Marc Rich and Bill Clinton's involvment in foreign oil deals.

Second, Hillary can't really attack McCain on the Iraq war as her silence on the Scott McClennan book illustrates.

Third, Hillary can't really insist on rule of law in reference to Bush's reliance on the John Yoo torture memos, because her ends justify the means approach to the Florida/Michigan delegates will get thrown in her face, since Ickles voted to strip these states in August 2007, and now she is trying to reinstate them.

Fourth, can Hillary really take John McCain on the mortgage front, since Hillary did not even vote against the bankruptcy reform bill, which was sponsored by the major banks in NY.

Fifth, Hillary says that experience is the most important asset, and McCain cleans her clock on this front.

The bottom line is that Hillary's lead in the electoral maps is based on a fiction that she is the target of all the RW attacks that Obama is getting. Even the Hillary supporters must understand the types of attacks the RW could make, but isn't. Afterall, there's Davis and Ferrero enjoying the hospitality of Fox News to make their attacks on Obama. Fox would not be nearly as hospitable if Hillary was the Democratic nominee.

[cliffordu]

6. What you said. Nice work.

[LSparkle]

7. She's asking for the nod even though she didn't win ...

The closest analogy I can think of is when they gave Michelle
Kwan a slot on the Olympic skating team, even though she didn't
compete in the Nationals -- because she'd obviously be a
stronger competitor at the Olympics than any of the medalists
at the Nationals. But even that isn't exactly analogous,
because in that case, Kwan was INJURED and couldn't compete --
and the USOC gave her the slot because they surmised if she
HAD competed, she would have won (or placed). In this case,
HRC HAS competed ... AND LOST! No "byes" for her!

[ErinBerin84]

9. oh god. Don't mention Michelle Kwan to me!

I was so upset when she got the silver...and then when she got the bronze. I was actually watching her bronze Olympics performance (the one where Sarah Hughes won the gold) that I had taped yesterday, and it's so sad. She looks so upset with herself during the medal ceremony, but when it's time for her to get onto the ice to accept her bronze, she bites her lip really hard to keep herself from crying more, and smiles. And the announcers go all "But just as she was gracious when she got the silver, she can accept defeat now with grace, with tears in her eyes. She's a true champion. Even though she will perhaps best be known for the medal that she never received. Many people thought it was her turn, but she goes to the Olympics for the second time, only to be beaten by a teenager...again" And then she had to point to Sarah Hughes the correct way to get up to the top of the podium. Oh yes. I like when people can accept defeat with some element of grace and dignity.

(Ok, I've outed myself as a complete fucking dork, but yeah, I'd rather discuss the Kwan ice skating political metaphor than the Tonya Harding ice skating political metaphor)

[LSparkle]

13. Hey, fellow dork here! I have tapes of all those Olympics too ...

and they still make me feel TERRIBLE for Michelle. Now
there's a situation where I can truly say, "SHE WAS
ROBBED!" Every time I watch those tapes, there's a tiny
part of me that's hoping that, just maybe, her losses
(especially to Sarah Hughes, strangely enough) were
just nightmares and that she'll come out on top ...

[99th_Monkey]

10. Interesting that recently Murdoch & Carville have both said "Barack can win the GE". Coincidence?

I know Murdoch has been a HIllary supporter, but damn .. with supporters so close to her coming
out like this is telling. I think this thing will be wrapped up by June 4th easily at this rate.

[papapi]

11. I think Obama can win, with or without her support. She has become the...

...laughing stock of the nation and what she has done to the feminist cause is disgraceful. She cannot pull away, she doesn't have any money left to run against Obama and McLame. She will fade into history after June 3rd. Capitol Hill Democrats will see to that.

[Median Democrat]

14. Good Point - Doesn't Sexism Undermine Her Electability Argument?

Hillary, Ferraro and Rendell have all made the argument that Obama is less electable than Hillary because white voters who are, to quote Ferraro, "resentful of race" will vote against him. However, the rallying cry going into the May 31st DNC meeting is that Hillary has been victimized by rampant sexism, which is greater than any racism directed toward Obama.

Okay, if this were the case, doesn't the sexism > racism argument undermine Hillary's electabity argument? I have not personally checked, but I have it on good information that John McCain like Barack Obama, is a male. Wouldn't Hillary be similarly handicapped by her gender against John McCain, if not more so, since Hillary will be seeking votes by conservative voters who may very well be more sexist than liberal voters.

Also, doesn't Hillary's argument about rampant sexism apply to female candidates generally. I don't see Obama attributing the closeness of the race to the fact that he has suffered from racism. This may be due to the fact that acknowledging this would support Hillary's electability argument.