by HoldEmAccountable, Sun Oct 07, 2007 at 07:15:11 AM EDT
This morning (Oct. 7, 2007) on Fox News Sunday, Nancy Pelosi went out of her way to thank Rupert Murdoch's Fox for being pro-environment. "Look at that, Fox News, leading the way in environmental protection and reversing global warming."
Pelosi praising Fox:
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Vuo9cwGl_C0"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Vuo9cwGl_C0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
But Robert Greenwald's YouTube video "Fox Attacks: The Environment" shows that Fox is a consistent global warming denier. And while Rupert Murdoch recently said NewsCorp will be carbon neutral, Sierra Club president Carl Pope points out, "The most meaningful action companies...can take to help the planet is to make sure the public knows the truth about global warming. That means rejecting Fox's pattern of misinformation."
by Hugh Stearns, Sun Aug 26, 2007 at 10:39:02 AM EDT
Why is Rupert Murdock financing Hillary Clinton? Here is what is written about Murdock's involvement in American politics on Wikipedia,
In the US he has been a long-time supporter of the Republican Party and was a friend of Ronald Reagan. Regarding Pat Robertson's 1988 presidential bid, he said, "He's right on all the issues." Many Christian conservatives were dismayed when Robertson sold his television network to Murdoch. Murdoch's papers strongly supported George W. Bush in both the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections.
Murdoch's publications worldwide tend to adopt conservative views. During the buildup to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, all 175 Murdoch-owned newspapers worldwide editorialized in favor of the war. Murdoch also served on the board of directors of the libertarian Cato Institute. News Corp-owned Fox News is often criticized for a strong conservative and anti-liberal bias.
On May 8, 2006, the Financial Times reported that Murdoch would be hosting a fundraiser for Senator Hillary Clinton's (D-New York) Senate reelection campaign. Murdoch's New York Post newspaper opposed Clinton's Senate run in 2000.
Clearly Murdoch knew that Clinton could win a senate seat in New York but cannot win a presidential bid.
If you think that Murdoch has had a radical conversion in his political views, just tune in to Fox News and take a look. No, clearly Murdoch is funding the Democrat that he knows will allow Fox News to most viciously attack in killing any hopes for a Democratic Presidency. Sadly, most Democrats continue in their blissful ignorance, unwilling to take a critical look at the very billionaire media mogul that they love to lambaste with platitudes of indignation.
My cursory look at Clinton's most recent FEC report (http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q2/C0
0431569/A_EMPLOYER_C00431569.html) of July 15 revealed massive corporate donations, but most striking were those from Murdoch owned companies. I do not have a full list of Murdoch owned companies, but counting only those companies that I know to be owned by him, I added up over eighty-nine thousand dollars in contributions.
Sadly, most Democrats are oblivious to the fact that decision about our candidates are not just being made by major corporations, but by major corporations who are looking to make profit by ridiculing us. Rest assured that neither Clinton nor the DLC are so clueless.
by psericks, Tue Jul 17, 2007 at 06:23:28 AM EDT
notes that Fox News mogul Rupert Murdoch wrote a $2,300 check to Clinton's campaign this quarter. Ben Smith
notes that Murdoch's son and heir apparent James
donated $3,450 and writes:
And lest you think this is just a corporate mogul spreading his money around, the Murdochs' stinginess with the other campaigns is equally striking. The only other beneficiary of their contributions is John McCain, who cleared a cool $200 from James.
Murdoch has helped Clinton out with fundraising in the past, now he also has an official contribution in to her presidential campaign. Murdoch has made no other donations this cycle and his son only made a small donation to McCain. This seem odd to anyone? Clinton declined attending the Fox News debate but is perfectly happy to accept their money.
Murdoch made the donation on June 5th, while his son made two separate large donations on June 30th.
In other news, Hillary Clinton's campaign is declining to release her second quarter total number of donors and her average donation
--- for fear of comparisons with Edwards perhaps?
by TarHeel, Tue May 29, 2007 at 06:52:14 AM EDT
Normally the NY Post as part of the Murdoch empire would be seen as naturally against all Democrats. However, given that Rupert is a pal of Hillary
and one of Rupert's kids works for Bill's Foundation it's kinda interesting to read storys like this.
Meanwhile, the source said many New York Democrats believe Clinton "isn't doing so well out there, that she may not have what it takes to become president.
"When you're out talking to real Democrats in the field, you hear them say, 'She has no pulse. Just polls.' Did you see how she voted on the Iraq resolution? . . . She waited to see how [Barack] Obama voted before she did. So calculated even on such a core issue," the source said.
by populist, Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 10:31:27 AM EDT
...The appointment of former Prime Minister of Spain, José María Aznar, to the board of the media empire, News Corporation, has come as more than a mild surprise. Although in our provincial world Spain is seldom a notable part of the news, we all do remember the third axis of idiocy at the Azores, George Bush and Tony Blair being the other two, as they met to stamp an unnecessary imprimatur to the Iraq invasion. If not by name, one is likely to remember the caricature of the little guy with the big mustache...