'Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy' Leader's Newspaper Backs Clinton

PHILADELPHIA — Could it be the "vast right wing conspiracy" is having second thoughts? Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton was endorsed Sunday by the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, whose owner and publisher, billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife, personally funded many of the investigations that led to President Clinton's impeachment in 1998.

It was one of a handful of endorsements the New York senator has received from Pennsylvania newspapers before the state's primary Tuesday. Most of the state's major papers have endorsed Barack Obama.

In its endorsement, Tribune-Review editors said Obama is too inexperienced to be president and that his recent comments about bitter voters living in small towns showed a lack of respect for middle-class values.

"In sharp contrast, Clinton is far more experienced in government _ as an engaged first lady to a governor and a president, as a second-term senator in her own right," the paper said. "She has a real voting record on key issues. Agree with her or not, you at least know where she stands instead of being forced to wonder."

Clinton met with the Tribune-Review's editorial board, including Scaife, last month. Afterward, Scaife wrote an editorial titled "Hillary, Reassessed," declaring how impressed he had been by the former first lady.

"Her meeting and her remarks during it changed my mind about her," Scaife wrote.

In the 1990s, Scaife helped support conservative groups and publications investigating Bill Clinton's financial dealings and sex life.

Scaife spent $2.3 million to fund a series of articles by The American Spectator magazine that dug into Bill Clinton's behavior as governor of Arkansas.

The magazine reported that Clinton had asked state troopers to help procure women for him and that he had sexually harassed a state worker named Paula Jones. Jones's legal case against Clinton helped launch an independent counsel investigation that eventually exposed his relationship with White House intern Monica Lewinsky.

Hillary Clinton famously defended her husband at the time, saying the allegations were part of a "vast right-wing conspiracy" heavily funded by Scaife.

Comments

[LORISNJ]

I am not surprised at all about the endorsement, or Hillary's warmly welcoming it.

I hope PA voters will put an end to this once and for all.

[RAND7044]

What does this and its acceptance say to Dems who stood on the front lines to stop the bogus impeachment of her husband. How in the hell can any self respecting democrat support this woman. Mell Scaife, her husband on Limbaugh ( albeit with a guest host, but the limbaugh show just the same), on fox news. Is there any honor in these people. These organizations tried to hijack the country and the Dems wouldn't let it happen. Now your telling me she is in cohoots with these people. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. NO! I 'm sorry that just doesn't wash with me. Its a slap at every dem that stood by her and her husband. Any Clinton supporter, ANY, please give me a valid ( non vitrol) reason why this endorsement, along with the others mentioned, is even remotely close to acceptable? Also, tell me how u feel about that? ( I want a honest response PLEASE!) ( no hate, just legitimate debate)

[flyguy14222]

Just reinforces that when you ACTUALLY meet Hillary in person, and not just suck up everything biased like a sponge, that most people like and admire her.

[Londonliberal]

Watching from afar, this seemed to me to be a very significant matter. There is quite a parallel between a Scaife newspaper endorsement of Clinton and the Murdoch press repeated endorsements of Tony Blair (ugh!). Neither Scaife nor Murdoch do this kind of thing for free - there is always a price to be paid for their support .

Bill Clinton and "Phony Tony" Blair were "triangulators" - government by focus group. If Hilary Clinton becomes the nominee and the next President, we can expect more of the same - the media will manipulate public opinion to a right wing position and the executive will follow like a lamb to the slaughter - only the slaughtered will be the poorest and the oppressed.

Then, once out of office, Hillary will benefit from all those honorary positions (perhaps on Scaife's foundations), lucrative book deals and speaking engagements to pay for the the super-rich life-style that Bill Clinton and Poodle Blair now enjoy.

Not a bad pension plan for a 60 year old facing retirement - but don't let her kid you that the interests of the voters have anything to do with this.

[jmsc1965]

Here is a question for you Senator Clinton. Given this gentleman's personal and political track record (see your own comments on the Today Show in 1998 and the Vanity Fair article on Mr. Scaife), do you renounce and reject his support?

[majseventh]

That is quite an endorsement and write up. Congratulations Senator Clinton. He didn't think much of Obama and his bitter comments against the middle class and his inexperience.

[DanielAdamSmith]

Republicans are supporting Clinton for two reasons. She's easy to whip up the base about and if she does win...they essentially have a hawkish, corporate candidate that won't do a whole lot to mess the game up...

[DanielAdamSmith]

I guess it's a case of if you can't beat em...join em.

[TheWesternBreed]

And in her terminal desperation to book enough angry-white-male votes to win the nomination (somehow), Hillary joins the vast right-wing conspiracy....

[AC500]

Financial Times endorses Obama

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/19c88b7c-0f00-11dd-9646-0000779fd2ac.html

[rgersmrk]

Lol, first she mocks an organization that probably saved the political skin of her husband's (making it to where she could run for president now). Now she is being backed by the very paper that tried to ruin her husband's career. Man, how times have changed.

[ChipOatley]

What did Randi Rhodes say?

[FogBelter]

Well, Hillary and Scaife have proven to have a common morality so this is hardly a surprise.

[BadChristian]

It WAS a vast right wing conspiracy...

But now it's even "Vaster"...

If you can't beat 'em (without MoveOn.Org), join 'em.

[NoFactsJustTruth]

Of course the WORST kind of republicants are backing and endorsing Hillary, they KNOW the candidate with the most negatives that would be easier to beat in November. It's becoming too obvious that Senator Obama now has them in a desperate panic.

[TomSutpen]

I don't think so. It's clear that the Right is supporting Sen. Clinton, but I don't believe it's because she's the easiest for the Republicans to beat this November (a proposition that doesn't hold much water). Remember, these people always support their class interests first, and they know that a race between her and McCain would insure a President that would keep the economic status quo (and the war in Iraq) going for another four years.

[truthyguy]

Without the republican switchover votes in TX and OH it would have been Obama in both those states' primaries. The GOP knows its best chance to get McCain in the WH is if he runs against Hillary. It seems that the only people who do not know or know but do not accept this are Hillary supporters who have drunk her coolaide - deadenders. Of course I am not counting the corporate backers who just figure they can buy what they want from Hillary.

[ChandraSF]

Anytime someone bases their endorsement on 'experience', we should ask where they have been living the past 8 years.

Dick Cheney has way more experience than Senator Clinton, and yet with all that experience he has masterminded the destruction of our country. Pretty much single handedly. he has lied through his teeth, and continues to tell us falsehoods every opportunity he can get.

He brought in other "experienced" hands like Rumsfeld, Colin Powell (we could count on him to dupe the nation on the location of WMD), the 'experienced' Paul O'Neill for Treasury secretary (who wants to remember him?), John Ashcroft for Attorney General (what a disaster), Gale Norton as interior secretary, the Neo-con warmonger Wolfowitz who went on to further embarrass the US at the World Bank, and so on.

Only an extreme partisan would sing their praises - these people were disasters for this country.

And the media continues to spin "experience" - why? Because the media pimps get favors from the "experienced" politicians. We are sick of it.

It is time for America to reclaim the country from slime ball politicians masquerading as 'experienced" and the media pimps.

[TheWesternBreed]

I've thought before that if we are to give HRC experience points for serving as First Lady, then Laura Bush's experience is both more recent and more relevant to our current situation....so why wasn't she considered as a candidate?

[majseventh]

Librarian versus Attorney: you choose