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

[scamperdo]

Why the shock, folks? Clinton has been attacking Obama from right for quite a while, using whatever "tools" er fools she can find. I don't for one minute believe Clinton is a closet right wing Republican LOL! This is just another example of Clintons say anything, do anything, to get elected.

Her surrogates now pushing hard that Obama is too liberal. Saw one on Fox News agreeing with right wing pundits it's still a center right country. The aging Clintons supporters are hopelessly stuck in 90s and really out of touch with current mood of country which has shifted left center over last few years. And that pendulum shift isn't much of a surprise to historians which point to so many similiarities to 1960s, a very unpopular war, grassroot movements swelling, massive call for change. It's all there, Obama correctly predicted the mood of the country while Clinton still buys into the Republican attempts to sell the old center/right mood we've been stuck in since Reagan.

On top 3 issues for Americans: Economy, Iraq and Health Care,country turning away from right's stances and moving left. Ironically, Clinton's stance on these issues is pretty close to Obama but her behavior/bed fellows/supportors choices continue to alienate and spit on the left/left center to her own detriment.

[juangault]

The unfortunate part about Vietnam is that in order to walk away from it, we needed a selected, non ego type to use some common sense and cut the losses. That was Gerald Ford. He replaced Spiro Agnew, then Richard Nixon. Although he was on a re-election ticket, he seemed more of a hired bureaurcrat, without ego involved. There was a real aversion also for the congress to dump more billions into that black hole then.

With oil added into the equation this time around, the stakes at the poker table may go so high that America not just loses because it's own economy can't afford it, but that all the people around the world loaning us money to keep fighting give up, and we ultimately collapse like a caldera, ending the American post world war two empire. This may be the second motive for Bush and the neocon pirates, after reaching their first goal (and Osama's) of $100/barrel oil. A yearning for a free and independent nation of Texas?

Realistically, back in 2003, everyone knew that Iraq was just act 1 in a play to get rid of the risk to Israel (and others in time) presented by Iran. But things are not going the way it was planned. The question is "what is plan B?" And will these gangster/crusader/pirateers actually launch an attack in the last 9 months of office?


http://en.rian.ru/russia/20070327/62697703.html

[scamperdo]

I agree on Gerald Ford, he was a much maligned President but he actually did try to put the country first over his own ego. He's probably the last Republican I respected even when I disagreed with him on Nixon's pardon, I saw it as genuine desire to try to heal the country.

As for Iraq, what a disaster. Al Sadr backed by Iran will win the October elections just like Hamas won, ah those neocons insisting on democracy in the Middle East when will they ever learn, NEVER it appears!

Part of me really wants McCain to win in November just to watch him and his idiot brethern neocons sink even further in public and world opinion. Ack, then I think he's going to take us into World War III, and I scream NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

As for collapsing, many Americans are going into shock as they are finally forced to face the disaster, 1 out of 10 in Michigan are on food stamps and that's just the start... and the world hates us, are allies are so fed up they aren't going to help bail us out and China is just laughing itself at our puny threats over Olympics when they hold all the cards.

[WiseOne]

WARNING/WARNING:

Karl Rove/Obama Campaign boiler room invasion doing some SERIOUS damage control on this thread.

When Hillary hate runs 25 to 1 among supposedly "Democrats" posting here, it's a signal that there is deep truth in anything positive about Hillary Clinton in the article, and Rove/Obama don't want it to get out.

Because everyone knows Obama doesn't have a chance in hell of winning in November and never did, no matter how the GOP-owned mainstream media lie and how many of their faked dubious polls of 90% Obama supporters "prove" otherwise.

Rove must destroy Hillary FIRST so he can then destroy Obama, his straw man.

[gvidal]

Couldn't have said it better.
Obama = A major loss in November.

What fools Democrats can be.... ( but then again - most of his voters are not Democrats - just new voters or silly kids....) -
Oh well, - a hard lesson - but too late.

[SeekerOne]

What fools people of all ages and political persuasions can be. That includes you and me, gv.

[Obamamo]

This is one of the reasons why we disagree with Hillary. Richard Mellon Scaife is a Neo-con who believes in inflecting wars and mayhem on the rest of the Middle-East. Hillary seems to be what they are looking for: a Liar jus like Bush...A warmonger just like Bush....A secretive administration, who has only contempt for the rule of law i.e. the Constitution, just like the Bush administration....Pro NAFTA just like Bush...What's not to like about an endorsement from a Neo-Con to a fellow Neo-Con?

[nippersdad]

"Because everyone knows...."

Straw man argument which flies in the face of primary voting statistics. Millions more Dems have come out than R's and only a percentage of them (more Clinton voters than Obama voters) with any interest in voting for McCain as an alternative. I hope they are paying you well.

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

It's easy to say "Obama doesn't have a chance of hell of winning in November", but the facts show otherwise. If you average all the scientifically valid polls, Obama not only is more electable vs McCain than Clinton is -- but he's been consistently more electable for over 15 months now. Clinton's about 50-50, sometimes up sometimes down in a McCain matchup, while Obama's pretty much always up, sometimes by quite a lot. Scroll down to the graph in the bottom of this post:

http://vichydems.blogspot.com/2008/02/yet-again-its-about-electability.html

Clinton keeps talking about all these polls that say what this commenter said (that she's more electable), but it's wishful thinking. The data say otherwise -- and remember, we're supposed to be the "reality based community." Challenge ANYONE who claims Clinton can win v. McCain to show you consistent poll numbers (not just a one-off). They can't.

[BoulderSue]

Reaching across the aisle is one thing, but this has a funny smell about it. Why on earth would they be talking to each other? I really hope she's not THAT desperate. Anybody read Faust lately?

[astitious]

I guess the Clintons have always been a part of the vast rightwing conspiracy.

[mommadona]

Yale.

Skull and Boner

George H W (Poppy of the Silk Dancing Slippers and the Texas Two-Step 'bend over') Bush hugger.

George W (Turdblossom's bosom buddy) Bush enabler.

"The Family" member and koolaide drinker

Pre-emptive NeoCon enabler.

"You Gotta Have Friends"

[jnratliff]

I thought it was a vast right wing nutcase conspiracy?

[globality]

You were right the first time

[piquet]

This is what happens when you're message is inconsistent. I wouldn't be surprised if this is a setup. But she is bringing this on herself by passive aggressively setting a Republican tone on several key issues. Talk about being used...

[NoSillyName]

Well, duh, she's part of the Right Wing. Just look who she hangs out with in that "bible study group". Told you, she's a wolf in sheep's ugly pantsuits.

[wmbear]

I'M DEFINITELY GETTING OFF ON THE THOUGHT of a wolf disguised as a sheep wearing a pantsuit!

[NoSillyName]

Good! I'm glad someone is.

[raskolnikov72]

hahahah .. this is rich.

[civilbehavior]

Trust me, this is more than rich.

This man has nothing but ulterior motives in making such a statement. This is a very very RED flag that we should not elect Hillary president.

Do not trust Dick Scaife. Ask Margaret.

[JUSTME]

Of course he likes her. Birds of a feather and all that.

[wmbear]

SWANS FLY WITH SWANS BUT GEESE just stand around goosing each other....

[NoSillyName]

Good one, wmbear!

[gvidal]

You Obamanuts can't see the forest from the trees.... I wonder how you get out of your own way each day!!

[Sabreen60]

As I see it this as a two-prong plan. First the ultra right wing (a nice term) would rather face Hillary in November and two, anybody is better than that uh, uh, ugh black guy. The Penn. Govenor said himself that there are whites who will not vote for Obama simply because he's black. Now I said this before but I think the censors removed it. I guess it's all right to call people names and curse, but not the comment above.

[G24]

Well, of course he likes her. Just as most former Clinton fans are discovering that they can't stomach her and what she's become, it only makes sense that the republicans who once sought to destroy her, only to end up absorbing her, would discover that she is just to their liking. Highly buyable and not remotely weakened by conscience or self awareness. She IS part of the vast right-wing conspiracy now.

[TrevorAlan]

I'm another who thinks this is a bad sign for a Clinton who would want to lead the DEMOCRATIC party.

But there is another possibility. While I am sure this guy is a nut job still, perhaps this is yet another sign that Bush Jrs. monumental incompetence have laid bare the follies of the Neocon agenda so thoroughly that even former leaders see that it was always folly and their former enemies on the center left (the farthest Hillary and Bill have EVER been), are not really so bad.

But I still don't trust him and take this as a good reason not to trust Hillary.

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

I wish I could say Scaife has wised up, but no possible way. He's not just "an" architect of the "vast right wing conspiracy" -- when it came to the attacks on Bill Clinton (from Whitewater to Monica, with detours to the Vince Foster "murder" etc.), and also when it came to labelling Anita Hill a slut to get Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court, Scaife was THE architect.

He bought newspapers in order to tell them to print his anti-Clinton conspiracy theories. He put Ann Coulter on a private payroll. He's the main subject of "Blinded by the Right," the great book by the founder of Media Matters, who used to be a Scaife hitman before he figured out what was really up.

I wouldn't believe Scaife had moved to the left even if I saw him with a shaved head and a photo of the Dalai Lama, being carted away by Chinese policy in Lhasa. Clinton has moved to Scaife's side of the road -- ie, off the road, off the right shoulder, into the bushes.

[ruscle]

Oh he's just supporting her so the republicans can knock her down in the general election. It's not secret that Republicans want to run against Hillary and are concerned that their overt racism will boil the the surface -- turning off even more moderate Repubs if Obama runs.

This is a set up.

[lodipete]

Wow, another feather in Obama's cap. If this latest in a long line of draft dodging Mellons is scared about his inherited money, i like Obama even more.

[bucagogo]

i just want to say: if you want to see "non-sensationalized" coverage of our election process, CBC canada is the way i live here now and it's so non-MSNBC or CNN last night they broadcast on CBC a mini-series basically about the US ploy for oil. It was amazing. called Trojan Horse where we take over Saudi Arabia. Hillary can stop this.

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

CBC -- you mean the network that did HRC's dirty work by publicizing an inaccurate claim about Obama and NAFTA right before the Ohio election? Don't think for a second that they don't have a preference.