While some seem to view the Clinton Election Machine as merely the victor of two Presidential campaigns in the 1990s, others keep a weary eye upon the re-emergence of the same systematic fundraising problems and issues that dogged them over the same time period.

It seems incredulous that a campaign can claim the mantle of "change" when it finds itself right back, neck-deep in controversy over whom raises money and particularly who bundles donations for the candidate with so many direct ties to legal problems dating from the 90s.

In fairness, Hillary's is not the only campaign with donor issues and the problem doesn't merely exist with the Democrats. As long as politicians are beholden to donated money to fund their campaigns, we'll likely see further shady connections and associations in these same areas with both major parties.

A politician is a politician , a rat is a rat and a politician is a rat.
It is all about their personal power ,position and wealth. You can pass all the laws and finance rules you want , but they will still find a way around them by hook or by crook.
In these times and we no longer have to accept spoon fed info from one or two sources. Voters need to step up to find the real truth behind the politicians schpeel...the vote for the rat of their choice.

OH...and DEMAND term limits. Those sharks will not vote themselves out of their cushy jobs...we must demand it!

their

So . . . I'm to believe that the Hillary campaign was unaware of where $850,000 checks in their mailbox are coming from.

Well, that makes sense. Kinda like the cattle futures, where she make tens of thousands of percent return on her money in just a few months, without really knowing how.

I guess it's a good thing the Clintons have all kinds of little people scurrying about, working so tirelessly--and profitably--on their behalf.

Corky...

If it weren't for the fact that you've yet to be right about anything regarding this issue, perhaps your incessant pleas not to bring up very relevant issues regarding paroblems that continue to besiege Hillary might have some merit.

Hillary's fitness in leading this nation is indeed an issue that America will decide about whether or not you agree with it. Hillary's opponents did not create her problems, the Clinton Machine created these problems with the dubious decisions they continue to make, which skirt close to and across the lines of legality and irresponsibility.

Hillary cannot whore herself out for donator money and then stake claims to being a virgin. It just doesn't work that way. And when her supporters act more like the feckless lemmings who support anything and everything that Bush says or does, it only underscores that winning is more important than playing by the rules and being proactive in avoiding potential conflicts of both legality and impropriety.

Pointing out the different ways in which candidates deal with this issue is drawing distinctions between them that voters might make their ultimate decisions about. Repeating that any recognition by fellow party members of these differences isn't anything other than using factual evidence to draw out the reasons why supporting one candidate instead of the others should always be based on having this information available. If you can't stand criticism, take your sensitive self and stay out of politics. Its always been a full-contact sport and it always will be.

So . . . I'm to believe that the Hillary campaign was unaware of where $850,000 checks in their mailbox are coming from.


Posted by rightisright

That's what she wants everyone to believe. Her answer to everything "what a surprise". That includes her brother selling pardons, her 100% track record win in futures, missing Rose Law Firm paers suddenly appearing, her campaign fund etc.

"dubious decisions they continue to make, which skirt close to and across the lines of legality and irresponsibility"

You have no evidence of that at all. Authorities say "there was no evidence that the campaigns were aware of the scheme or acted criminally."

-Hillary cannot whore herself out for donator money

Obama "whores" himself out for donator money, does he?

-her supporters act more like the feckless lemmings who support anything and everything that Bush says or does

You really have gone over the edge, eh?

Criticism is one thing, becoming a willing member of the Rethug echo chamber, quoting them even, is another.

Corky...

You have ZERO CREDIBILITY on this issue. Why don't you leave the debate to those of us willing to have an open debate worthy of the magnitude of importance that no polls show Americans wanting to repeat the numerous scandals of the Bill Clinton years. While Bill had many, many positive attributes, his dubious ties to discredited fundraisers was not one of them.

Hsu was everything I said he was on day one when his story became news. You denied, denied, denied, and were proven dead wrong numerous times. Its one thing to support your candidate, its another to be blinded to their faults and transgressions while arguing that everyone else shouldn't be concerned with the facts, only your incredulously stretched explanations.

Hillary just had a fundraiser this week where she brought together lobbyists and government officials. Please tell us how this synergy, which raised her big dollars, is supposed to be in the interests of us the individual voters? Money is Hillary's diety and she worships at the altar on a daily basis even while she tells the masses just how much "change" she's planning on bringing to Washington. This type of change isn't needed, infact its the opposite of what's needed.

But as you see, you have made the Reichwingers here happy.

Continue to smear me as a "rethug" Corky, and I will continue to show the Retort the lack of your judgment, sincerity and most of all honesty in assessing what has already been proven as fact.

Its truly amazing that you continue to act just like those from the right who continue to deny evidence put right in front of them. Denial is not an admirable trait Corky, its a character weakness. I point out problems with Hillary and you attack me personally and link it to my support of Obama. Now who's being disingenuous?

But as you see, you have made the Reichwingers here happy.

You continue to do that by denying what they're already fully aware of and will use to grand effect if Hillary is the nominee. I am not divulging anything that already isn't widely known. The only thing still in question is whether Hillary will address the issue or send out her spokespeople to try to demean the character of anyone who points out these things such as you do.

Yes, it was amazing prescience on your part to exclaim with joy a few weeks ago that this story could be damaging to the Clinton campaign.

An obvious observation if there ever was one.

There doesn't need to be any real "there there", it just has to sound nasty and suspicious and that has always been good enough for people more interested in rhetoric than fact.

But as you see, you have made the Reichwingers here happy.


Posted by Corky at 2007-09-21 10:56 AM | Reply


Yeah, because this place solely exists for leftwingers to preach to the choir. Who needs actual facts!?! We come here to have our already lame beliefs upheld and validated. We are lockstep fucking lemmings and any opinions we find uncomfortable should be struck!
It's "us vs. Them" regardless of the truth!
Sincerely,
Drudge Lefties

No, you aren't divulging anything, you are just trying to spread the shit around to see if some of it will stick.

We should ignre all this right Corky? We should only focus on her positives, right Corky?

lol!

Nice friends and supporters you have, Tone.

Enjoy.

Nice friends and supporters you have, Tone
Posted by Corky

Prelude to Act III starring Corky: A Rudy joke.

Yes, it was amazing prescience on your part to exclaim with joy a few weeks ago that this story could be damaging to the Clinton campaign.

An obvious observation if there ever was one.

Ah, the voice of hyperbole...

"Corky...

If you really think the Paw family and the other donors linked to Hsu are completely clean,"

Would you care to point out where I said that, "the Paw family and the other donors linked to Hsu are completely clean", eh?

That is your Strawman, not mine.---Posted by Corky at 2007-09-05

September 20, 2007---Hsu also is accused of donating money in other people's names, which is a federal crime.

Jack Cassidy, whoever he is, does not even himself claim that "Clinton Ignored Warning".


He says he told the campaign and got no response.

That does not mean either that Clinton was warned or that the warning was ignored.

And we know a Clinton Staffer was dismissed because she refused to take the Hsu issue up the ladder when Cassidy contacted her.

You're batting zero Corky, but please, keep trying.

This story is a convenient "gotcha" story for partisan hacks. It has nothing to do with the real issues of the campaign, no matter how hard you and some far-left Obama supporters try to make it relevant with ludicrous pop psychology followed by ridiculous analogies compounded with dire warnings that a good Dem is really a NeoCon in sheep's clothing.

Bizarre, if you ask me.

Yeah, I guess its bizarre that the candidate saying "I'm your girl" is also the same candidate pimping lobbyists and putting them together with government procurement officials as part of her fundraising efforts. I guess this shows she's really a corporatist like her's and Bill's history's show them to be, not the champions of the underclass as she debases herself to wander among, on her way to continue the dynastic control of the White House.

While Obama and Edwards continue to try and remove the influence of lobbyist money directly contributed to campaigns, Hillary just rounds up all the little doggies she can find to extract more cash from them, while directly delivering access to those in government making the decisions where our tax dollars are spent.

New way in politics? Hardly. Its the same corrupted political process that got Bill in such trouble during the 90s. You are judged by those you allow around you and the only prerequisite seems to be how many dollars one can deliver to Hillary, not whether there's any taint amongst these dollars, which you show can be easily returned once problems surrounding the donors becomes public. Situational ethics if I've ever seen it....

Definitely a cut above...your garden variety con artist.

"the Paw family and the other donors linked to Hsu are completely clean"

I pointed out that you attributed that statement to me when it was you who said it.

"That does not mean either that Clinton was warned or that the warning was ignored."

That comment is true as well.



Trying to turn problems with campaign donors into 911 type conspiracies, or insinuating that their occurrence is the responsibility of the candidate, without any proof, is just the kind of Rovite tactic that people are so tired of.

As previously said, you are just trying to spread the shit around to see if some of it will stick, and, presumably, somehow help your candidate.

-You are judged by those you allow around you

Obama being introduced to his biggest campaign supporter by...... none other than Mr Hsu, must disturb you equally as well, eh?.

Your rants are becoming most.... Tadish, btw.

Everyone already knows how to eliminate these types of problems but no movement of any size has materialized to push for Federally funded campaigns. If we ever eliminated lobbyists and funded campaigns we would finally have a country not ruled by special interests. Til then it's just raise as much as you can from whoever and hope you can distance yourself if they turn up dirty.
Reforming the election process should be one of the primary issues but really we hear little about it.

lol!

"Clinton", in my statement means what it says, Clinton. Not campaign staff.

What's sad is taking some statement by Mr. Cassidy, whoever he is, as God's Own Truth, just because it fits in with your 911 type conspiracy theory.

Tell me, how did Hilary manage to set all those explosives in the Twin Towers without anyone being able to see her?

Corky defecting to the twin towers can only mean one thing...game, set, match.

"And we know a Clinton Staffer was dismissed because she refused to take the Hsu issue up the ladder when Cassidy contacted her."

If that is true, then it is an example of the Clinton campaign trying to solve these problems.

I expect Obama himself would tell you the same things I am telling you about potential problems for him and all other candidates in the fundraising area.

You aren't helping his cause a bit.

Everyone already knows how to eliminate these types of problems but no movement of any size has materialized to push for Federally funded campaigns. If we ever eliminated lobbyists and funded campaigns we would finally have a country not ruled by special interests. Til then it's just raise as much as you can from whoever and hope you can distance yourself if they turn up dirty.
Reforming the election process should be one of the primary issues but really we hear little about it.

And this is what Edwards and Obama are trying to get their fellow Democratic candidates to do, so far with no takers.

Sorry Corky, just because an introduction took place doesn't meant that immediate suspiscion can be drawn as an inference. What happened to you not using negative inferences toward fellow Democrats? Just like everything else that deflects from Hillary's real problems, its nothing more than hot air from another hypocrite, "do as I say, not as I do".

Face it, Hillary is the Republicans favorite Democrat because her views are closer to their views than those of any other Democrat. That doesn't make Hillary wrong, but it does beg the question why Democrats should accept the Republican's choice instead of making their own based upon DEMOCRATIC ideals, not those closely mirroring the conservative agenda.

Well, your Rethug buds are calling the game in your favor now, so I guess that speaks for itself.

See ya.

Corky defecting to the twin towers can only mean one thing...game, set, match.

So true....

-not those closely mirroring the conservative agenda.

The more you say Hillary is a Neo, the less believable you are to anyone concerned.


The effect your kind of rhetoric has is to make Obama look more Liberal than her, which is the last thing he needs in a general election.

""And this is what Edwards and Obama are trying to get their fellow Democratic candidates to do, so far with no takers.""

And Hillary's defense of Lobbyists didn't earn her any love from me. I would say I was going to vote for Edwars or Obama in the primare except that Democratic Pary isn't going to recognize the Florida primary as I understand it.

thanks to the highly technological society we live in, you can catch anyone in a lie. even Rob the Ahole!!!

if we had the instaneous communici that we have now you would have also been able to catch the candidates of the 20th century in even more lies. when every thing you say has the possibility of being recorded, videotaped or taken out of context. you could make the church lady look like satan with a little bit of editing and splicing.

let's face it- REPUBLICAN. DEMOCRAT. everyone lies. people will tell the public anything and everything they want to hear to get elected.

it comes down to who is the best person for the job, and if you have Karl Rove behind the scenes, that don't hurt either!

'I really want to do a presidential'," says a senior adviser who would speak about the campaign process only anonymously. 'That was the wrong answer. The right answer was, 'I really want to work for her'."

Not, "I want to work for the betterment of America," or "I want to be a part of revolutionary change". No, the "right answer" was "I want to work for her." Sounds like a 'cult of personality' to me, eerily like that surrounding those working for our current President, who demands absolute fealty and deference no matter how non-sensical his words and policies might be.

HOW did Obama get left out of the headline on this thread, btw?

Oh yes, squeaky clean, eh?

I really used like Obama until his supporters decided that all they could do is trash their opponent with unsubstantiated campaign donor allegations.

This is a dirty system they work in and and there is no evidence that the Clinton campaign did anything untoward as of yet.

But hey, spread the shit, add a little unrelated pop psychology and NeoCon accusations as manure, and see what sticks.

Nice strategerizing.

""Clinton is often too afraid of political risk.""

Hillary isn't my favorite candidate but there is another angle to the Clinton's triangulation style of politics. Pragmatism. I believe they learned that getting something is better than standing on principle and getting nothing. The accomplishments of Bill Clinton's presidency in spite of a REpublican, antagonistic Congress can't be denied.
Jimmy Carter was a great man who had principles but he accomplished little.

Very insightful post, Danni.

Half a loaf is better than none to a starving man.

But then, there are some so zealous that they will diminish the half loaf as best they can so that it is unappealing to anyone.

-Sounds like a 'cult of personality' to me, eerily like that surrounding those working for our current President,

When you finally hit bottom in your diatribe, TR, do let us know.

Compare and contrast, boys and girls!

Let me break it down by Senate voting:

Ethanol production: Obama--yes; Clinton--no

Expanded Oil production in the Gulf: Obama--no; Clinton--yes

Limit earmarks: Obama--yes; Clinton--no

Strip funding for tv Marti, which Cuba jams anyway: Obama--yes; Clinton--no

Easing restrictions on Cuba travel and money transfers from US: Obama--yes; Clinton--no

Confiscation of legally-held guns during a natural disaster: Obama--no; Clinton--yes

Allow Senators to work for not-for-profits while still seated: Obama--yes, Clinton--no

Mandating higher auto fuel efficiency standards: Obama--yes; Clinton--no

Seems to me that one candidate walks the walk of change while the other one seems tied to the status quo, but maybe thats just me....




Posted by tonyroma at 2007-09-10

The fact that Americans disagree with your absurd analysis in mounting numbers belies the basis of your continued conjuring of Clinton into Bush.

It just sounds so ...... desperate, ya know?

Vote on Bill comdeming moveon - Hillary- No

Obama- Chicken-out of vote


Makes one wonder what he REALLY would have voted on the Iraq vote, were he experienced enough to have been there that long.

I mean, if you can't stand up to the GOP with an actual vote against their silly little Bill against moveon, how do we know how much intestinal fortitude he would have had on Iraq?

Perhaps retreat would have been the better part of valor for him there, too.


( game, two can play )

Hillary would probably be a good pres, we need people who are smart. I think Obama would be better though.

""Vote on Bill comdeming moveon - Hillary- No

Obama- Chicken-out of vote ""

Good point. What is Barrack thinking???

Good point. What is Barrack thinking???

He was likely thinking that old man Harry Reid should have done exactly what Nancy Pelosi did in the House, namely tell the Republicans to go pound sand and that no votes over an AD will be taken while the President continues to misuse Petraeus as his political cover, something that's constitutionally corrupt.

Hasn't anyone else noticed what the above author has, namely that the only party which matters is the one keeping an insane war going and funded as if the people's voices cannot be heard on the matter at all? And that party goes by the name of Congress?

Hell, Tony, I don't even use that site when I want to support some Lefty idea, for fear of not being taken seriously.

I'm going to hate myself for asking, I know, but what does that rant have to do with, "The fact that Americans disagree with your absurd analysis".... as opposed to what some opinion on that site that doesn't even pretend to associate itself with what most Americans think?

I was talking about most Americans as in current national polling.

Obama is not in the House, he is in the Senate where they held the vote.

If I can borrow your superior powers of gross insinuation for a moment, TR, it appears he was thinking that it would only make him look more like a far-lefty if he voted against condemning Moveon.

So he just did nothing.

Wow, I bet I could never go around the internets and find snarky articles that rip Obama.... and then re-post them ad nauseum.

Congrats, Tony!

Wow, I bet I could never go around the internets and find snarky articles that rip Obama.... and then re-post them ad nauseum.


Go right ahead. If Obama was as compromised as Hillary is you shouldn't have any problems, should you?

Cannibals do what cannibals do....leftist cannibals are the most cannibal of all cannibals.

;-)

Yet another fan, TR.

That's the point, T.

It would be easy to do, but I'm not a cannibal.

""leftist cannibals are the most cannibal of all cannibals.""

Just ask Larry Craig. I think he may disagree.

Thats because we're much more delicious than conservatives. Less bitterness, more flavor....

Just ask Larry Craig. I think he may disagree.

Posted by danni at 2007-09-21 03:28 PM |


Who's larry craig?

-Who's larry craig?

Look in the stall next to you.

Or.... just slide your foot over and tap....

-Who's larry craig?

Look in the stall next to you.

Or.... just slide your foot over and tap....


Posted by Corky at 2007-09-21 03:35 PM | Reply |


Why are you following Incubus into the bathroom? Or were you there waiting for the stall next to Craig to open up?

Corky...

All the deflections in the world cannot hide the factual record of Hillary as both Senator and as First Lady. She bears the responsibility for what's occured by her own hand or by others in her name. Hillary is not a traditional liberal, nor has she ever been one. She's a self-avowed 'Goldwater Girl' so why does this truth cause you such indigestion?

No other Democrat is beloved by big business and corporate interests as much as she is. No other Democrat has been directly responsible for legislation that allowed Indian companies to displace US workers from domestic jobs while pocketing campaign cash at the same time. No other Democratic Presidential nominee has such close ties to Rupert Murdoch, the patriarch of the rightwing slander machine. No other Democrat running for President has refused to apologize for their unconscionable decision in backing George Bush regarding Iraq without since recanting. No other Democrat wrongly infered that Senator Obama is "inexperienced and naive", opening the politics of accusation and misrepresentation, since reputed by those very polls you like to sight as evidence of agreement with your candidate showing America agreed with Obama's point more than Hillary's by a wide margin. And since Obama's legislative experience is more accomplished than Senator Clinton's, one wonders what other erroneous slimes she has in store later in the campaign. No other Democratic nominee has refused to have a press conference since January and consistently avoids direct questioning by the press on issues that matter to Americans.

Its all in the public record, no a word of it subject to interpretations, just a factual recitation of Hillary's actions compared to her flowery words. Color me unimpressed, but then you already knew that, didn't you?

Thats because we're much more delicious than conservatives. Less bitterness, more flavor....

Posted by tonyroma

But not very filling.

There doesn't need to be any real "there there", it just has to sound nasty and suspicious and .....

Posted by Corky at 2007-09-21 11:00 AM | Reply

Sucks, ehh ....... When your standard of behavior is used against you?

Liberals always hate it when their hypocricy is pointed out.

After all, you are so pure and purely motivated: it's not fair when someone asks how many people must be destroyed to create the perfect society. Maybe Uncle Joe (Stalin) can help you answer that.

Tony,

Thanks for positioning Hillary as a candidate that most of America can vote for.

I was SO worried about that whole "Socialist" image, lmfao!!



Vermininsky..... oh, never-mind.

If clinton gets the nomination expect a republican president!