Sunday Pundit Shows & WaPo Editorial [Updated with Scaife Op-Ed]
By SusanUnPC on March 30, 2008 at 12:27 PM in Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Larry Johnson, MSNBC, Media, Meet The Press
[NOTE: Please post your opinions as well as your observations of the Sunday pundit shows in the comments below. UPDATE: The update, at the end of the story, is from an op-ed today by Richard Mellon Scaife on his observations of Hillary's courage on March 25th. More importantly, it shows how Hillary can change people's preconceptions about her when they meet her in person, converse with her, and are deeply impressed by her sense of humor and her knowledge of, and smart perceptions about, wide-ranging issues.
UPDATE II: The transformation that Scaife underwent when he met Hillary is very similar to that of Larry Johnson when he met Hillary for the first time. Larry presumed he wouldn't like her and that he'd never vote for her; instead, Larry left the meeting convinced she'd make a great president.]
I just got the report below by e-mail, from a friend, of today’s Meet The Press, where Russert apparently goes off about Hillary’s meeting on March 25th with the editorial board of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review newspaper. (On Tuesday, I posted a video clip and link to the board’s full video record and transcript.) Important: It was an editorial board interview of a candidate, just like those that other newspapers conduct. It so happens that Richard Mellon Scaife was present at the board’s interview. Why not? He owns the newspaper. Here’s my friend’s report:
Ok, I caught two minutes. Made my blood boil. Had to stop. But, Russert does the most ridiculous thing. He shows the Scaife picture, brings up all the Scaife smears, without acknowledging they are lies, then asks what is going on here. One of his guests says something about Hill has tried to mend fences with political enemies, but is there something more nefarious going on here?
Are these people for real? Jesus, he owns the Philly Tribune. It’s an editorial meeting. Not hard to connect the dots, right?
Then Russert uses that bogus poll about Hill’s approval rating [the discredited NBC poll]. And her losing to McCain, Obama winning. That’s when I had to turn it off.
On a much brighter note, the Washington Post has quite an editorial today titled, “Don’t Stop Campaigning / Why the rush to push Hillary Clinton out of the race for the nomination?”:
[...]
A time may come when someone should gracefully bow out. But their extended contest informs the electorate and serves to battle-test them both. We don’t see why the process should be short-circuited when millions of votes are yet to be cast and two qualified candidates believe themselves to be the best potential Democratic nominee.
There is no lack of excitement in the Democratic Party. States that have cast ballots have reported record turnouts. Registrations are through the roof. Just last week it was announced in Pennsylvania, which holds its primary April 22, that since November the number of registered Democrats increased by about 161,000. Altogether, Democrats now outnumber Republicans there by about 830,000. And this contest is far from over. While Mr. Obama leads Ms. Clinton in the popular vote and in the number of pledged delegates, it’s assumed that neither candidate will win the 2,024 delegates needed to secure the nomination.
One proffered justification for ending the campaign now, in fact, is the assumption that we know pretty much how everything will turn out. Ms. Clinton will win Pennsylvania, Mr. Obama will carry North Carolina and so on. But throughout this campaign, just about everything we’ve “known” has been wrong: Mr. McCain was finished, Ms. Clinton was inevitable, Mr. Obama had New Hampshire locked up. No doubt the Democrats have gotten themselves into a fix with rules that may leave the final decision to unelected superdelegates — but why is the answer to that less democracy? Why not give as many voters as possible a chance? …
The editorial cites numerous issues — from North Korea to affirmative action — that haven’t been addressed sufficiently in media reports and interviews of Sens. Obama and Clinton, and ends with this:
The list of issues to hash out is endless, and doing so in polite political combat could produce a stronger Democratic candidate for the fall and a better-informed electorate.
Read all of the editorial.
:::::::::::
I just checked, and neither the video or transcript of today’s Meet The Press is up yet. But the video will be up soon, with the transcript soon thereafter. MTP is good about getting its videos and transcripts up very quickly.
:::::::::::
UPDATE: From Richard Mellon Scaife’s op-ed today, March 30th, “Hillary, reassessed“:
Hillary Clinton walked into a Pittsburgh Tribune-Review conference room last Tuesday to meet with some of the newspaper’s editors and reporters and declared, “It was so counterintuitive, I just thought it would be fun to do.”
The room erupted in laughter. Her remark defused what could have been a confrontational meeting.
More than that, it said something about the New York senator and former first lady who hopes to be America’s next president.
[...]
The very morning that she came to the Trib, our editorial page raised questions about her campaign and criticized her on several other scores.
Reading that, a lesser politician — one less self-assured, less informed on domestic and foreign issues, less confident of her positions — might well have canceled the interview right then and there.
Sen. Clinton came to the Trib anyway and, for 90 minutes, answered questions.
Her meeting and her remarks during it changed my mind about her.
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. …
Read all of Scaife’s op-ed. (Special thanks to Andy for pointing me to Scaife’s op-ed.)
UPDATE II / SEE ALSO: Larry Johnson’s description of the transformative meeting he had with Hillary Clinton. Larry writes:
If you had asked me before my first visit in 2005 if she could be president, I would have said, “There are two ways–no way and no way in hell”.
Then read what happened when Larry, along with two experts in the Middle East, went to her Senate office and talked with her.
, the basis for the Best Motion Picture Nominee (Golden Globes) starring Brad Pitt.
, the novel by John Le Carre, a new motion picture starring Gary Oldman and Colin Firth.
by 
* (Included in the 
* 
.by David Fredosso who wrote 2008's 
- You'll have access to 18 million movies, TV shows, songs, magazines, and books, as well as ultra-fast Web browsing with Amazon Silk -- faster than iPad. Full e-mail and document access and a keyboard. Fire can transmit what is on your screen onto a connected TV or monitor without an accessory. It runs Flash (iPad doesn't). 
