Architect Of Vast Right Wing Conspiracy "Reassesses" Hillary

"To Bill and Hillary Rodham Clinton, Richard Mellon Scaife qualifies as a charter member of the 'vast right-wing conspiracy,'" the New York Times notes, "having bankrolled an elaborate multimillion-dollar campaign throughout the 1990s to unearth damaging information about the couple."

But in a striking about-face, Mr. Scaife now says he has changed his mind -- at least about one half of the duo.

"I have a very different impression of Hillary Clinton today," he wrote in an opinion article published Sunday, amid her campaign for president. "And it's a very favorable one indeed."

His sudden conversion from fervid Clinton basher to lukewarm Clinton fan occurred after Mrs. Clinton, a Democratic senator from New York, sat down for a 90-minute interview with reporters and editors of The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, a newspaper owned by Mr. Scaife, the billionaire heir to the Mellon banking fortune.

Here's a taste of Scaife's op-ed:

Walking into our conference room, not knowing what to expect (or even, perhaps, expecting the worst), took courage and confidence. Not many politicians have political or personal courage today, so it was refreshing to see her exhibit both.

Sen. Clinton also exhibited an impressive command of many of today's most pressing domestic and international issues. Her answers were thoughtful, well-stated, and often dead-on.

Particularly regarding foreign policy, she identified what we consider to be the most important challenges and dangers that the next president must confront and resolve in order to guarantee our nation's security. Those include an increasingly hostile Russia, an increasingly powerful China and increasing instability in Pakistan and South America.

Like me, she believes we must pull our troops out of Iraq, because it is time for Iraqis to handle their own destiny -- and, more important, because it is past time to end the toll on our soldiers there, to begin rebuilding our military, and to refocus our attention on other threats, starting with Afghanistan.

On domestic policy, Sen. Clinton and I might find more areas on which we disagree. Yet we also agree on others. Asked about the utter failure of federal efforts to rebuild New Orleans since the Katrina disaster, for example, she called it just what it has been -- "not just a national disgrace (but) an international embarrassment."

Comments

[Ash79]

LMAO! He suddenly changes his view after a 90-minute interview? Please. Sounds like he is trying to confuse those few poor undecided Democratic voters that are left. Pay no attention to Karl Rove behind the curtain!

[Plowboy]

Schaife had met with Bill earlier. This isn't the result of any 90 minute interview. Schaife knows what he wants to buy. You have been looking at it for a while now. But that has so weakened the Republicans that the Schaifes and Murdocks, who may be evil, but are not withour some cleverness, now hope to continue their program with Republicann-lite (or not so lite!) Democrats. The DLC is a group of fine collaborators. And now here is Clinton, and she is strapped for money....

[wino486]

You Obama commentors are absolutely nuts!

[M.S. Bellows, Jr. - Huffpost Blogger]

I love the rigorous way Hillary's supporters assemble facts to support their propositions.

[shanghaislim]

Why assemble facts.....­you guys have become the NEW GOP. Facts don't meet anything to you unless they are created by your own simplistic views that match your own self made reality?

[biglover]

wino486 - You say we are nuts!!! This is i"n yer face" and you call us nuts. Go back and drink more wine maybe you wil make some sense. What is shows is what true whores the Clintons are. This man spent millions digging up the Paul Jones affair and personally tried to destroy them and here she is sucking up to the man.

[tsloan]

is that all you got....nam­e calling?

[shanghaislim]

Seems to work for you guys? Gets you guys all foamed up at the mouth and worked into some pre-historic frenzy!

[muhair]

Hillary would probably do Osama bin Laden's laundry to get elected...­.

[joebaggadonuts]

Scafie is the best argument against the repeal of the estate taxes.

[robinhood1]

You are so right.

[Plank]

The most plausible explanation goes back to Hillary's political calculations. She is tapping into the racist, narrow-minded audiance of these right-wing nuts. This explains why she brought up the comment about Rev. Wright.
While we all know the Clintons would do anyhting to win, I have never thought they would stoop so low.

[GoodGuysandBadGuys]

no, I think the most plausible explanation is that in the 90's, this guy thought hillary was a liberal. now that he's seen her record over these years, he sees that her positions are really not too far from his after all.

[nippersdad]

With his candidate imploding; she represents the lesser of two evils, so to speak.

[PatrickWalker]

Ask yourself this, if Obama was such a leftie, why has his hate machine been so silent against Obama? They're lying in wait, ready to pounce and tear him to shreds when he gets the nomination. I swear, there won't be enough left of Obama to fill a teaspoon after they're done. If the machine can tear down Gore and Kerry... sorry... Obama is T-O-A-S-T.

[dartagnan]

Comparisons with 2000 and 2004 are invalid because at least four big things are different now: 1. By Election Day we will have had more than eight years of Smirky McChimp, The Worst President in History. 2. By Election Day we will have been bogged down in Iraqnam for five and a half years. 3. By Election Day we will be mired in a deep recession. 4.The right-wing hate machine isn't as effective as it once was. Most people have gotten wise to it.

[abellofgrace]

I do not dislike Hillary Clinton. But I do not trust her at all. Given all I've seen over the last several months from her....lik­e her mood swings, her not being able to run her campaign, like running out of money, not paying her bills, not thinking in the long term for her campaign, says a whole lot about her judgement. And the fact that she "misspoke" about Bosnia and the sniper fire, wow...that really scared me. Who in their right mind would misspeak about something like that. YOU WOULD NOT FORGET IT IF YOU WERE IN THE LINE OF FIRE WITH YOUR 16 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER. Sorry for speaking so loud , but really how could anyone really trust her to be president of the USA. She has lost all sense of good judgement and is blinded by the firece need to continue to run from herself. It does not surprise me that she would mingle with conservatives, her or her husband...­it's a calculating move that serves a purpose for her, (them).

[accountability]

OMG, you people are so insane.
Listen to yourselves. She went to an interview with a paper where many were present and she spoke the truth about what she sees as the issues.

I guess Obama supporters (the rabid hate Hillary ones) don't want discussions on the issues... they only want to preacdh hate to the choir. Yeah, that helps.
YIPES, you have all clearly lost your minds in this mass hysteria, or is it a psychosis.
YOU are pulling the party apart, Hillary has nothing to do with it.
You are so foolish buying into the neo-con line. Don't you get it, they love this shit, they love people to hate Hillary and you give them what they love.

Can't you see this?
Lord Have Mercy.

I don't care if you vote for Hillary, McCain, Nader, or Obama. Obviously I prefer Obama and Hillary. I support them both because the insanity became too great to stay aligned with just O. I can't support this craziness. It is actually painful to see people who are supposed to be Progressive, supposed to be supporting Obama because he advocates the exact opposite of your hatred, behaving this way, kowtowing to the neo-con agenda without even knowing it. If McCain wins you will all still be here pissing and moaning and wallowing, blaming Clinton, making your absurd accusations when in fact it is YOU that will keep a Dem out of the Whitehouse.
You are defeatists, not Progressive in the least.

[nohat]

Stop putting all Obama supporters in one basket.

[FJRinLA]

THE CLINTON INSURGENCY IS IN FULL SWING

WHAT ARE WE LOYAL DEMS PREPARED TO DO?

Fueling the current Clinton Insurgency against Obama AND the entire DEM party is the Clintons’ belief THEY were robbed of this nomination.

This belief provides them internal psychic comfort and external rationalization for ANY and EVERY behavior we have seen and will continue to see RIGHT THROUGH 2012.

Only the naive think this ends at the Convention. After losing there, the Clinton Insurgency goes underground to further expand their support of McCain's candidacy. If unsuccessful, it moves to the Senate where Hillary as Lieberman REDUX, will practically caucus with McCain to deny President Obama any success.

Between Super Tuesdays Obama won 11 straight states; and the Campaign to Elect Hillary morphed into the Campaign to Defeat Obama via this new political Insurgency we are witnessing daily.
Indeed, Hillary's campaign is an undeclared death-struggle to deny Obama not the nomination (she knows that's already lost), but the Presidency and any media coverage that would aid him.

The goal is no longer winning. Victory is in prolonging the battle and denying the favorite his expected result, while spoiling it so that ultimate victory is worth less each day the Insurgency continues. This new Clinton campaign can only be by design of our Chief Democratic Architect, former President Bill Clinton, himself.

We all know this in our hearts. The only question facing loyal DEMS, to paraphrase Sean Connery from "The Untouchables": What are WE prepared to do?

[suekzoo]

"She spoke the truth about what she sees as the issues"...­and a very very conservative news guy agrees with some of her assessments. Who do you think changed their position..­.him or her?
Pretty simple question..­.pretty telling answer.

[chlllfactor]

This was very bad move for clinton...­.it will further erode her support...­oh, on the other hand, maybe it was a good thing...sh­e will collapse even sooner!

[research]

We're supposed to believe Mellon Scaife?

If he told my the time, I'd check my watch.

[wdlindsy]

Hmmm. The Scaifes gave the seed money to set up the Institute on Religion and Democracy, which has sought in every way possible to capture the leadership of the United Methodist Church (Hilary's church), the Episcopal Church in the U.S., and the Presbyterian Church USA.

IRD documents state that the IRD believes the social teachings of these churches have too much influence on American politics, and the churches need to move back to a quietistic, pious position that focuses on conversion rather than social change.

Hilary's United Methodist church has pretty well allowed itself to be muzzled by IRD-funded groups like the Confessing Movement. Hilary herself says she thinks the Social Principles of the Methodist church have been over-emphasized to the exclusion of personal conversion.

Obama, on the other hand, belongs to the single Protestant denomination that has been willing to stand up to Scaife and the IRD. Scaife and his lot are deathly afraid of the kind of liberal interpretation of religion for which Obama's church stands.

Who's Scaife going to pick, the wishy-washy Methodist who wants to distance herself from her church's social principles, or a member of a church that has stood up to IRD and its nasty political agenda?

More to the point, where has the money come from to fund the big media feeding frenzy re: Rev. Wright? That feeding frenzy has the fingerprints of folks like Scaife all over it.

[accountability]

hmmmm.
links please.

Being a ministerI don't think you are being accurate. As a matter of fact the Methodists have been struggling with becoming open and affirming and allowing gay pastors. Right now they actually do but not when living with someone.

What feeding frenzy. There was no feeding frenzy with Wright. It was looked at, discussed, pondered, wondered about... one of the less insane over hypes by the media. Not to say they were responsible. They barely are... unless they are attacking HRC of course.

As far as Hillary and Methodism I do not see her distancing herself...­( LINK please,) her life is very much in character with Welsleyan theology both socially and personally.

I don't think it is responsible to use someones faith as a wedge, do you?

I mean unless it is Hillary Clinton of course.

Very sad indeed.

[wdlindsy]

You ask for links. For starters, I'd go to the Media Transparency's website and look at it's information on Scaife and the Institute on Religion and Democracy. Andrew J. Weaver and Nicole Seibert's "Church and Scaife" is especially enlightening at www.mediatransparency.org/story.php?storyID=42.

You may also find Weaver's 10 July 2003 analysis of the game-plan of the IRD at University of Chicago's Center Institute for the Advanced Study of Religion eye-opening. It's at http://marty-center.uchicago.edu/sightings/archive_2003/0710.shtml.

Weaver's a minister, by the way, a Methodist one.

On Obama's church, the United Church of Christ, I'd recommend Neela Banejree's "Liberal Denomination Fires Salvos at Right" in the NY Times 7 April 2007 at www.nytimes.com/2006/04/07/us/07ucc.html?_r=3&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin.

You ask for links re: Hilary's distancing herself from the Social Principles of the United Methodist church. Please read Kathryn Joyce and Jeff Sharlet, "Hilary's Prayer," at the Mother Jones website at hwww.motherjones.com/news/feature/2007/09/hillarys-prayer.html, which states,

"In an interview with the United Methodist Reporter, she expressed regret that her church had focused too much on social gospel concerns in the '60s, '70s, and '80s, "to the exclusion of personal faith and growth."

As Joyce and Sharlet note, Hilary now belongs to a prayer group, The Family or The Foundation, which emphasizes personal conversion rather than an emphasis on social justice in the churches.

[civilbehavior]

Here's one link that shows the fingerprints of Scaife. The Rev Neuhaus wrote the founding document for the IRD. It doesn't take much of a google to track these thugs.

wdlindsy is absolutely on target. All one ever has to do is "follow the money". Just follow the money.

[pilotinfla]

Looks like part of Operation Chaos to me

[rvme]

Lets see, she can't win because she is polarizing, she tries to find common ground to be less polarizing, and she can't win because she isn't polarizing? But Barack can be a flaming liberal when it suits him, then hide those facts when it doesn't?

[Denni]

She's STILL polarizing. She's just willing to sell out to the people who will make excuses for her now because she can't win on the other side of the aisle. This isn't about 'creating peace'... she's selling out to the people who would harm/have harmed our Democracy because they're willing to help her. They fear Obama, they can buy her.

[M.S. Bellows, Jr. - Huffpost Blogger]

Look at it this way: imagine what would happen if McCain sat down with George Soros and Soros later announced that McCain was actually a lot more liberal than he thought and that they agreed on a lot of things, and gave him his endorsement. Think the Republican Party would rethink his nomination? He'd certainly be in for criticism. This is the same -- except that Soros is a little openminded and Scaife isn't at all.

[accountability]

And yet people can't even entertain the notion that just possibly Bill Clinton is doing the same thing in praising McCain? It seems pretty plain to me that his repeating how McCain isn't really that conservative on some issues certainly hits home with the far right who cannot stand McCain and will wind up staying home the more it is rubbed in their faces about how "liberal" he is on certain issues, particularly issues they are so rabidly against.

Isn't there a possibility that Scaife is doing the same thing?
The Hillary Haters are always slavering for something else to feed their hate, the neo-cons love this and they continually throw scraps to them whild being vastly entertained by the rabid reactions.

the irrational arguments people make, the statements that are so often completely illogical and contradictory to something else they said is almost funny if it wasn't so bewildering and exhausting and tragic.

Pick someone out who is particularly hateful and go to their profile and read various entries. You will find inconsistancies in many of them when they are indulging in their hatred... say anything to make it fit the particular picture of the thread.
sad.

[BeefJerky]

Obama a "flaming liberal?" Please. He's a moderate Democrat at best. The only real liberal among the candidates was Kucinich.

[vallon]

Unless the Diebold junta does its job, the Republicans don't have a chance in November and Scaife knows it. The Clintons are center-right, and Hillary is far more acceptable to the 'right-wing conspiracy' than the unknown quantity--Obama.

[Stoyver]

Vallon, Nail hit directly on head!

[biglover]

Hillary is center wrong not center right. Nobody knew Bill Clinton and nobody knew Jimmy Carter. Being unknown in a plus after what this country has been through for the last 7+years.

Obama 2098

[civilbehavior]

Yep, Hillary is a moderate republican.

[Denni]

At some point, she has to stop selling her soul. She has to reclaim something. What's wrong with her? I don't get it.

[accountability]

could it be you don't get it because you are making the wrong assumptions and presumptions?

If you read all the garbage people say about Hillary clinton you will wind up becoming victim to this mass hysteria.

If you read all of this garbage and then do a google search using some of the keywords in the hate posts you will find all the same talking points on very old websites put up by neo-cons and far right organizations and individuals. This goes back over a decade. I made it my business to research Hillary due to all this insane hyped up Hate.
I found a very different person who does not resemble anything these venom spewing haters spit out.

If they are repeating this right wing crap I have to believe that they are either trolls, paid dividers, or dupes. do the researrch, its all out there.

Hillary isn't perfect, neither is Obama. Obama isn't a saint, neither is Hillary. They are both flawed hman beings with weakness and strengths, things to admire and things to not like so much. Thins you agree with, things you don't.
If you are at all objective you can't demonize someone just because you prefer someone else. Madmness lies that way.

[presto]

So giving an interview is selling her soul? Where does that kind of thinking stop? Is there a list of acceptable media organizations that she is required to stick with? Obama is scheduled to interview at the exact same place with the exact same people. Hopefully his magic touch will render the Pittsburgh Trib the required credentials to to have some relevance. I watched the clips of the interview. They were good.

[M.S. Bellows, Jr. - Huffpost Blogger]

It's less the fact of the interview -- though if you knew the history of Scaife and the Clintons, you'd question that too. It's the substance of the interview, and even more, the behind the scenes dealmaking that would make an insane billionaire trust fund baby neocon like Scaife -- who makes Howard Hughes look sane -- say nice things about a Clinton.

[psfurlong356]

5 S's in reassesses­.... cool ;)