Sit down for this: Richard Scaife paper endorses Hillary Clinton

ALLENTOWN, Pa.--The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, owned by longtime conservative Republican Richard Mellon Scaife, endorsed Sen. Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination in Pennsylvania's balloting on Tuesday.

The conservative newspaper's endorsement raised some eyebrows given the, well, stormy history that the wealthy Scaife has had with the Clintons.

Allies of former President Clinton accused Scaife of bankrolling opposition reporting of the Clinton White House. His paper was a persistent critic of that president, especially during the Whitewater investigation, and Scaife was a presumed prominent member of what Hillary Clinton once called a "vast right-wing conspiracy" trying to sink her husband's administration.

Interesting, however, that the reaction of both Clinton politicians was to ultimately meet with their conservative critic, whatever their lingering personal feelings. Sen. Clinton has also appeared regularly on Fox News and Fox News Sunday, Democratic bete noires. As several recent Ticket posters have pointed out, ....

her opponent, Barack Obama, declines to appear on Fox, although he has said he'd meet with the president of Iran.

Scaife's paper paid tribute to Clinton's courage in its endorsement editorial today, saying her decision to sit down with the newspaper last month "was courageous given our longstanding criticism of her."

"That is no small matter: Political courage is essential in a president. Clinton has demonstrated it; Obama has not. She has a real record. He doesn't. She has experience of value to a president. He doesn't," the newspaper's editorial endorsement added.

In contrast to Obama, the newspaper editorial said "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. 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."

The paper said an ex-state senator in his first U.S. Senate term was no match for Clinton. "Quite simply," the editorial added, "this is no portfolio for a president, the world's most powerful leader. The presidency is no place for on-the-job training in the best of times -- and certainly not when the nation is at war, the economy is struggling, and federal governance in general is adrift."

But some wonder if the Scaife paper's endorsement is perhaps a backhanded push for Clinton in the way that Rush Limbaugh urged votes for her in the belief that she would be easier for Republicans to defeat in the fall.

The paper previously endorsed Sen. John McCain in the state's Republican primary, where the Arizona senator's only prominent opponent is Rep. Ron Paul of Texas.

In something of a surprise given Obama's apparent strength among young voters, last week the student newspaper at the University of Pennsylvania, the Daily Pennsylvanian, also endorsed Clinton, also for her experience.

The Tribune-Review is the largest newspaper in Pennsylvania to endorse Clinton. The Philadelphia Inquirer and Philadelphia Daily News, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Scranton Times Tribune and the Tribune-owned Morning Call of Allentown all have endorsed Obama. (The Editorial Board of The Times, also Tribune-owned, endorsed Obama and McCain in the California primaries.)

--Rick Pearson and Andrew Malcolm

Rick Pearson writes for the Swamp of the Chicago Tribune Washington Bureau.

Comments

[Second Thoughts About Obama]

I would like to seee someone do a poll of democratinc voters, in states whose primarys have already been held, to assess how many Obama voters now wish they could have a "do-over." I voted for Obama and I wish i could take it back. I would vote for Clinton if I had it to do over again.

[Marks]

The President is supposed to represent everyone.

It's Rush Limbaugh's and Richard Mellon Scaife's duty to profit for themselves first. They both make money from Republicans defaming Clinton, why give that up.

They endorse Clinton because her supporters are knowingly represented. The new voters and change overs for Obama are a large unknown voting group apparently.

They aren't definable yet since people include many from cross sections of life and political beliefs. Independents and some moderate Republicans are voting for Obama.

People bitter about the Establishment of Clinton's and Bush's want real change in D.C.

Backing a candidate outside the Establishment shouldn't be happening. Yet, Obama leads in states, popular vote and delegates.

The media can't stop Obama. The repeated flag pin media fueled controversy and that guy Associated Press chairman W. Dean Singleton said "Obama bin Laden." at the annual AP luncheon are examples.

When the press can't get facts right and still frame discussions on Obama to syndicate nationally, it has to be calculated.

The FBI is looking for Usama Bin Laden.

Get that fact straight media so the jokes defaming Obama's name stops. It's making right, the wrong media keeps spreading!

Media is now full of columnists everywhere. Fewer reporters getting facts straight.

Can Obama beat Clinton asked to Hillary? Who cares what she believes! The voters are putting Obama ahead of her answering that question already.

Clinton and McCain both say Obama made "elitist" statements yet both are $100 Millionaires now.

Both have been Millionaires for decades while Obama just a few years ago was still paying student loans.

Everyone reporter becomes a columnist and questions Obama in headlines repeated for days. Obama's elitist screamed in bold print. Google is syndicating news blogs all over the net.

Drop it already, the controversy is only about Obama said a speech about Pennslvania viewpoints in San Fransisco at a fund raising event.

That's it, the key controversy, saying things he hadn't shared to the Pennslyvania people. Now Obama is saying those small town view points he's defending, to them directly.

One person can have an opinion but to say it's elitism, that's an attack. I'm wondering why Hillary keeps doing McCain's and the Republican National Committee's job.

Richard Mellon Scaife says,
"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."

Hillary's key voting record, she approved the war in Iraq. Her First Lady days, she championed NAFTA.

She stood in Bosnia safely, talking to a small girl on the tarmac. Yet lied about it. Her own biographer has to refute some of Hillary's "whoop de do" statements at rally's.

I wonder why. The Establishment knowlingly lies to the American people to get their political ways.

Hillary said 200,000 jobs would be created in her represented area of New York. Those jobs never occured.

It's Al Gore's fault she says, he wasn't elected as President so they didn't work together and achieve those jobs for New York.

Does that make sense? The media doesn't care if Hillary doesn't make financial sense.

Hillary's health care for everyone won't work. Mandating costs on all to benefit the fewer who need overwhelming medical assistance isn't right.

We should be offered lower cost health care plans that has a choice to purchase. Lowering costs is the key idea for medical care. It has to stay a personal choice to take advantage of.

The syndicated media can be bent, biased, unbalanced and manipulated, that's what Limbaugh and Scaife count on to make them money and fame.

Some other media characters want that kind of money and fame.

[Matt]

Whoops- it says the Daily Pennsylvanian endorsed "Hilton." Is that supposed to be Clinton?

[Piper Jamerson]

Give me a break! With the way Hillary has been campaigning so negatively and the lies that have been exposed......think of the many people that voted for HILLARY that would love to have their vote recast for Barack Obama!

[Jim]

What Scaife does not want to say is: GOP wants Hillary because she would be super easy for McCain to defeat.

What Scaife also does not want to say: Democratic voters do not care what Richard Scaife says. He's a conservative GOP. Why do they care, and his endorsement should send them running the opposite way.

As for Second Thoughts about Obama post above, 10:11PM: $50 says that's a fake post. It's posted by a longtime Hill-Billy supporter.

[I have no second thoughts]

Anyone who will have second thoughts about having voted for Obama and wishing they voted for Clinton is nuts. Yeah you can go back into the undecided column, but wishing you voted for a liar like Clinton is just nuts. OBAMA/KAINE 08!

[Ross C.]

Our news media disenfranchises the voters of Florida and Michigan by lying about the official vote count. The Associate Press is the primary culprit in that their vote totals do not tally the votes from either state. American state elections officials are not to be trusted now. Millions of Americans' votes are to be ditched and why? Some crybaby withheld his name from a ballot he knew he would lose in exchange for support in other states millions voted not the earliest, but too soon for Howard Dean. Who made the AP into Robert Mugabe? The AP did.

Hillary is ahead in the popular vote and has been almost all the way since New Hampshire.

[Mozzy Doyle]

When the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review ultimately endorses McCain, obviously all that this can be considered is an endorsement with ulterior motives. Clinton cannot and will not defeat McCain.

Barack can.

[jennifer potenciano]

adding his influential voice to the growing clamor for hillary’s “anointment” as the democrats’ presidential bet, pittsburgh tribune-review owner richard mellon scaife said a mouthful about barack’s (no quibbling here) incompetence, compared to hillary’s vast experience, courage, preparedness, vision, program of government. oh boy, scaife’s glowing endorsement of hillary makes barrack look like chicago’s “boy mayor” during the traditional annual observance of "children’s week."

but make no mistake about obama’s wiliness, even if he can’t hack it as commander in chief or america’s chief economist. after all, obama is a veteran product of the gangster-type-politics, chicago style (recall the warlord daley, pere, & his kind in the olden days, similar to the philippines’ semi-feudal, gangland political bosses exercising undisputed political power in the boondocks, where only the thickest-faced, crocodile-skinned, & unconscionable killer politicians could survive & rule). this was obama’s preparatory, intermediate & collegiate, as well as graduate school for machiavellian power politics, where he, obviously, excelled. the "dirty politics" craft that he learned there, he now applies in full force & glee against hillary today. (recall his seemingly self-deprecatory, yet frightfully loaded taunt uttered during his chicago days: "i may be skinny, but i'm tough!)

but there’s this bad news for obama. someone, a dutiful journalist, has made a comprehensive account of his stint as an illinois politician. though it’s certainly riveting, the account is not at all entirely pleasant to obama, whom the writer described, in sum, as a dyed-in-the-wool machiavellian politician (opportunistic, wily, duplicitous, ruthless, untrustworthy, liar, vain, two-timing, condescending, patronizing, consumed by overweening ambitions, everything bad & negative).

thus, in the spirit of truthful reportage, could this commenter recommend to the millions of readers of the LOS ANGELES TIMES and to the great American voters—the entire American people themselves—to please read an expose on obama by JONATHAN KAUFMAN @ today’s edition of the WALL STREET JOURNAL?

the EXPOSE is a highly revealing, eye-popping, vote-influencing, sense-knocking, idiocy-correcting, fanaticism-destroying, completely informative piece on obama.
though late in coming, this piece, it is hoped, will knock some sense into the thick skulls of hard-headed delusional obama fanatics, so that they may get enlightened in time for them to correct their choice for the democratic presidential nominee in favor of hillary rodham clinton.

it is hoped that this expose on obama will give your readers (native americans & int'l. readers) the true facts about the wily obama, so that we may view the slicky prexy nominee wannabe in the proper perspective.

all the by-now well-known obama dirty tactics, his slimy politics, killer-instinct binges, his damn-all-of-you-stupid-pols-i’m-the-best-one legendary self-conceited putdowns, in fine, his textbook machiavellian politics are in full grandstand parade here in this kaufman in-depth reportage.

read it—and weep for your choice, should you root for barrack, weep for your children, and weep for america. for the third , & perhaps, last time (before armageddon), let a truly duplicitous, if smooth-talking demagogue bring you to apocalypse now.

be properly warned.

now that obama has been thoroughly unmasked, the great american people should no longer be fooled by this great political pretender, a political fakir who's a disgrace to both of his black & white genes & forefathers.

for a while, the great american people have been had by the smooth-acting of obama, the snakeoil salesman. i do hope it's not yet too late in the day for the american voters to get wind of your special report on the phony obama.

it behooves all right-minded americans to at least xerox this obama expose 300 million times so that they may use such copies to slap obama in the face, even as you tell him to "go to hell, machiavelli." ****

[Johnny]

I am waiting for Barack Obama to be declared the democratic nominee so I can change my support from Hillary to McCain. I dont want to vote for McCain but just like people are voting against Obama, there will be Hillary supporters like my self who will be voting against the back stabing shady Dems like Bill Richardson and Edward Kennedy. Barack is just as much of a "politician" as Hillary and he cannot win the White House without Hillary's supporters. Period.

[Lynn]

I think that Barack is not looking to lead the nation as much as propel himself to power. I don't believe he respects our system of government and has Marxist views. Black Liberation Theology and Liberation Theology contains Marxist views even though it is alleged to be religious. Pope John Paul II took time to excommunicate many priests who subscribed to Liberation Theology in Latin America because of its connections to communism and communist movements. He couldn't tolerate working for the government in Washington for one year, how will he be able to tolerate it for 4 years as president? I think he thinks he can because he believes he will be able to manipulate the government just like President Bush has done for the last 8 years. There is no commitment to the constitution or our structure of government from him.

[SimpleRep]

So it is true ! The GOP actually thinks Obama has a chance to defeat McCain !

What next, the 700 Club endorsing Hillary?

[Bob]

I just can't get over it, how you people on both sides go after each other. This is what gives the Republicans another White House victory come Nov. Each of your candidates are honest, respectable, caring people, and yet you go after each other like they were Hitlers. What you spew out now will come to haunt you come the big election.
As for me, a long time liberal and democrat, I will be sitting this one out. The party is destroying itself once again. There will be no unification large enough to make a difference. So, keep on keeping on. You deserve the benefits of your efforts.

[Goldie]

Hillary is behind in delegates, behind in the popular vote and now in big trouble with money. She is $10 million in debt and has only $9 million in the bank. This shows two things: She can't run a campaign so how can she run the country. And that those who vote for her may not be committed to her, because they don't donate. Obama voters are committed. He has $52 million in the bank. He gets the grassroots donations and also he runs his campaign well, managing his money. He would be a better president. I think the Schaife endorsement is phony. The GOP knows that Clinton would lose a general election. That is why Schaife wants her to win.

[Chuck]

The purpose is obvious - trying to keep a destructive Democratic party primary going as long as possible to help McCain win in the Fall. This is an interesting take on the old "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" story, but fairly predictable.

[LCSUSAN]

A lot of people - among them John and Elizabeth Edwards - find HRC more appealing after in depth discussions with her; what she lacks in cool and charisma she more than makes up for with knowledge and understanding.

http://strictlyanecdotal.com

[Cakey]

Billary flips more than a hooked fish on dry ground..as far as negative campaigning..she wrote the book and now she's accusing Barack of that..is there anything she won't do to win the White House?

[JRT]

As Hunter S. Thompson said, "It never got weird enough for me." Mr. Scaife advanced his endorsement in a very thoughtful manner, almost like he meant it. Unfortunately, in a post Rove word, it's important to look "behind" the words. As a previous blogger has articulated, Mr. Scaife will ultimately endorse Mr. McCain. It stands to reason that Mr. Scaife would also hope that Mr. McCain has the weakest possible opponent. This is not rocket science. This is a well calculated political endorsement. My right wing friends have been spoiling for a fight with Mrs. Clinton since they got wind of her presidential aspirations. Mr. Obama's success was unexpected, and many right wingers have decided, at least temporarily, that Mrs. Clinton is the current " lesser of two evils". Be mindful that these votes will swing back to Mr. McCain in the general election.

[conradelledge]

So this man Scaife is saying that he will vote for Hillary in the general election if she is the democratic nominee. Of course not, he is truly an America hater.
Conrad Elledge

[Alex]

And the Rupert Murdoch-owned The New York Daily News ENDORSED Barack Obama.

Murdoch's clout is far greater than that of any other media mogul -- and he's "for" Obama.

(Actually, Murdoch does not own the New York Daily News.)

[Steve V]

"jennifer potenciano," I read the article in the WSJ and it's a completely unremarkable background piece. I swear, it is becoming more and more useless to read the comments sections of political blogs these days. The commenters either (1) are psychpaths or (2) come off like they're employed by some partisan group trying to propagandize unsuspecting readers.