Carlsbad, CA -- Tonight at the "All Things Digital" conference sponsored by the Wall Street Journal, Rupert Murdoch -- Chairman of News Corp, new WSJ owner, and longtime torchbearer for conservative politics -- said this about Barack Obama: "He is a rock star. It's fantastic" "I love what he is saying about education." "I don't think he will win Florida.....but he will win in Ohio and the election". "I am anxious to meet him." "I want to see if he will walk the walk."
About the presumptive Republican nominee, Murdoch said, "McCain is a friend of mine. He's a patriot. But he's unpredicatble. Doesn't seem to know much about the economy. He has been in Congress a long time, and you have to make a lot of compromises. So what's he really stand for?... I think he has a lot of problems."
Here is the video of Murdoch's appearance at the All Things Digital Conference:
Update: More on Murdoch's speech from Silicon Alley Insider.
Follow Hilary Rosen on Twitter: www.twitter.com/hilaryr
So what part of Maine do you live in? Say Machias or maybe even Calais? This campaign has been a real Christer. I don't think Snow, though I have admired her, would squat for Obama.
Have you heard that Rupert Murdock has recently purchased MSNBC. That's why the corporate bias is so similar to FOX. Watch all the pols suck up to Obama, hoping he'll ask them to dance.
I am an Obama supporter who personally feels like anyone who supports Hillary must be insane. However, after a conversation with my boyfriend - a very smart, empathetic person - he has made me see that people who support Hillary have good reasons for doing so. He says that they probably even have good reasons for why they support certain choices which, to people like me, seem wrong and/or immoral.
So I would love for you, as a Hillary supporter, to write an article explaining your take on the following. It is very hard to get a straight answer from many Hillary supporters on these manners. So please, if you could, provide me with straight answers:
- Why did Hillary's supporters agree with the original 100% stripped MI/FL ruling, including Ickes?
- Why did Hillary agree with the ruling and sign a pledge to that effect?
- If Hillary thought it was a 'no campaigning' pledge, why did she say on MI radio: "You know, it's clear this election they're having isn't going to count for anything"?
- Why did Hillary wait to protest the MI/FL rulings?
- Why did/does she want 100% of the MI delegates?
- Why does she not want to count caucuses?
- Why does she want popular vote to determine the winner, when she agreed and has stated that delegates determine the winner?
What explanation do you have for these things which allow you, as a woman of integrity, to continue supporting Hillary's
Also, how can you and others continue to watch the American people in the face on MSNBC, CNN and Faux News, and defend Hillary Clinton, and then turn around and expect us to take you all seriously? As far as I am concerned, a Hillary Clinton administration would start off where the bush administration currently is (-20 credibility). I would never believe anything the likes of Lanny Davis, Terry McAuliffe, Harold Ickes, Evan Bayh, Mandy Grumwald et al. have to say; are you kidding me?!?!?!?!
I would admit, you are one of the few people, along with Dee Dee Myers and Ed Rendell, to some extent, who still have some credibility, but if you all continue down this part in the coming days, you would use up your "capital"; again, like the bush administration did with his in 2004.
Clinton has the popular vote.
She polls ahead of Obama, against McCain.
The president is +28%, the democratic congress +11%
Since Bittergate, Wright & the catholic padre, Obama has been getting his ass handed to him.
Sucks to be a democrat.
Has he told Billary?
Andrea Mitchell, of MSNBC fame, is now busy libeling Mr. Clinton. She and Mr. Balz are doing a dandy job of demolishing the possibility of a dream ticket. I wonder if they support say Neopolitanio or Sebelius?
Post the link.
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008May29/0,4670,Yahoo,00.html
I can't understand why everyone (besides Fox) acts like this is a non story. My mind is on fire with the possibilities, both positive and negative about whether Murdoch is a new convert or or a trojan horse. Maybe it's a hoax and people in the news know it so it's a non-story? Enquiring minds want to know.
The link I posted just beneath this one goes into quite a bit more detail as does the video here.
For a long time the left has insisted that Murdoch's conservative views were driving FOX. It appears that his political views don't and won't.
Fox is the only cable "news" channel that has been playing the anti-Hillary comments made by a white Catholic priest at Obama's former church for like the last 24 hours. They have been debating his comments on all their pundit shows. Is the "story" really that important? Is it really a "story" at all. Of course not!!! It is simply another guilt-by-association smear attack. You guys are on the right are so easily manipulated that it is really sad!
Not one of them over there is allowed to cover it.
Anyways, huge story. I found it first at a UK site. And although it's not on the front page of Huff, at least it's here. Why are the other news sites so slow? What are they waiting for? Anyways, I don't know what to think. Murdoch sounds sincere.... but he owns fox not real news. It doesn't add up, but I want to hear him out.
just saw you on Hardball
Question: How is it you can make claims about the comments that have come from Obama supporters
then in the next breath you state that Ferraro's comments (or any other Clinton surrogate) cannot be attributed to Hillary Clinton?
on one hand, you're saying Clinton backers want to punish Obama because his backers are "mean"
and then you say Hillary should not be held accountable for the comments of her backers.
I don't get it.
even accept a compliment from the other side.Just because a person has a different oppinion
doesn't mean that they are evil.
For a while I wondered if he was worried the race would be close, and wanted to galvanize the wingnuts to action.
However with the "What Happened" thing going on, I now consider this may be what Murdoch was talking about. That this will hurt Republicans and by extension McCain, perhaps deeply, and there's little Fox News can do about it except ignore it.
Were you able to post anything yesterday?
They simply take a critical look at yours and all the candidates and it makes you freakin crazy when anyone says anything critical of Obama. It's as simple as that.
If I asked you to tell me Obama's worst characteristic, you'd tell me something like... he's just way too adorable!!