Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 29
  1.    #1  
    It is amazing how we bash around people something fierce. However, when a donor like Norman Hsu comes to light, no one says anything about him or the people he hangs with and contributes to. Is it ok for Hsu to contribute to the Democrats and for them to keep the money? What about Obama slamming Hillary about special interests when he is just as guilty?

    Ben
  2. #2  
    Seems to be all over the news. But you're right, its politics as usual in Washington D.C. and that needs to change. Then again, I don't see how one can win the Presidency to affect change without playing the system themselves to get there first. Its a chicken or egg situation and there are no assurances that the winner will do the right thing once they get into office and actually change the system.
  3. #3  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    It is amazing how we bash around people something fierce. However, when a donor like Norman Hsu comes to light, no one says anything about him or the people he hangs with and contributes to. Is it ok for Hsu to contribute to the Democrats and for them to keep the money? What about Obama slamming Hillary about special interests when he is just as guilty?

    Ben
    Its an interesting story, and to date, there is no evidence anyone knew of his past felony convictions before the Wall Street Journal exposed him last month. Do you know something no one else does?
  4. #4  
    This is hardly a partisan issue. If treated equal-handedly, there would be reports each and every day about the improper collection of political donations on both sides of the aisle. That is a regulatory matter.

    From what I've read, Hsu is not a lobbyist or a pac leader, so the reference to Obama's slam against corporate special interests is simply off-base. Also, from what I've read, all money from Hsu has either been returned, at a time when it could be legally returned, or openly donated to charities.
  5.    #5  
    Oh, your reading is not complete then. All the money directly attributed to Hsu was not returned - some of it given to "charity" and that which could not be directly connected to him was kept.

    And no, it is not a partisan issue; however, when a few Republicans were doing it, this board came alive and with this guy, this board is dead.

    The California court thought he had skipped the country. It still makes no difference. He was handing out money and the goats were feeding.

    Ben
  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    Oh, your reading is not complete then. All the money directly attributed to Hsu was not returned - some of it given to "charity" and that which could not be directly connected to him was kept.
    We're saying the same thing. The judicial process doesn't allow for simply returning funds once certain legal hurdles are tipped.

    And no, it is not a partisan issue; however, when a few Republicans were doing it, this board came alive and with this guy, this board is dead.
    Such is the nature of a nonpartisan forum.

    The California court thought he had skipped the country. It still makes no difference. He was handing out money and the goats were feeding.

    Ben
    DIfferent goats, different day.
  7. #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    And no, it is not a partisan issue; however, when a few Republicans were doing it, this board came alive and with this guy, this board is dead.

    Ben
    I guess I was traveling (again) that day. Can you please provide some links to threads that are making you feel so picked on? Specifically, the ones that mirror the circumstances of the Norm situation you started this thread over.
  8. ktm97's Avatar
    Posts
    341 Posts
    Global Posts
    392 Global Posts
    #8  
    His only mistake was he gave money to one party, most give to both.
  9. #9  
    I just saw coverage from the "liberal" media today that reported Clinton gave $850,000 in donations back to 262 different donors solicited by Norm. I am struggling with finding the basis of your argument of unfairness Ben. Please do provide some specific links on this forum to substantiate your argument that someone in the GOP received donations through hundreds of donors and unwittingly received them not knowing the donors were solicited by a guy like Norm AND then returned such donations after learning that how those funds were raised.
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by ktm97 View Post
    His only mistake was he gave money to one party, most give to both.
    Again, Hsu was not a lobbyist or agent of a pac. Fundraisers, which is what Hsu was, primarily only support a single party and select candidates within that party. Fundraisers do not operate industries of influence as do pacs and lobbyists, they merely generate campaign capital.
  11. #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by lifes2short View Post
    Again, Hsu was not a lobbyist or agent of a pac. Fundraisers, which is what Hsu was, primarily only support a single party and select candidates within that party. Fundraisers do not operate industries of influence as do pacs and lobbyists, they merely generate campaign capital.
    yes -- and he didn't to have an agenda beyond helping good people to get elected.

    And though he was living a very publc life, L.A. was uninterested in getting their "fugitive" until The Fox Street Journal investigated him. (sounds a bit like some Dickens story...)
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  12. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    And no, it is not a partisan issue; however, when a few Republicans were doing it, this board came alive and with this guy, this board is dead.

    Actually I've noticed that with the continued demoralizing of the Republican party as a result of bathroom sex, failed foreign policy, etc, the conservative leaning folk have quit posting and most of the Libs just don't want to rub salt in the wounds of what is increasingly appearing to be a corpse.
    Last edited by daThomas; 09/11/2007 at 03:45 PM.
  13. #13  
    daT, you're kidding, right?
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by sblanter View Post
    daT, you're kidding, right?
    specifics?
  15. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #15  
    Surprising we haven't heard really heard too much about Alan Fabian. Yet we heard endless stories about Hsu.
  16. #16  
    Of course you won't hear about Alan Fabian. Any more than we're hearing about the attacks on Max Cleland now while the GOP successfully changes the subject and raves about the moveon.org ad against General Petreus. Instead I watched 20 minutes of the Today show this morning and there was not a single mention of the attacks on Max Cleland or John Kerry for that matter.

    It seems the GOP has a "selective service" of their own when it comes to slandering war heroes for political gain. And the "liberal" media has once again over-steered the ship in trying to be fair to the whining right and failed to take them to task for their obvious hypocrisy.
  17. #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    Of course you won't hear about Alan Fabian. Any more than we're hearing about the attacks on Max Cleland now while the GOP successfully changes the subject and raves about the moveon.org ad against General Petreus. Instead I watched 20 minutes of the Today show this morning and there was not a single mention of the attacks on Max Cleland or John Kerry for that matter.

    It seems the GOP has a "selective service" of their own when it comes to slandering war heroes for political gain. And the "liberal" media has once again over-steered the ship in trying to be fair to the whining right and failed to take them to task for their obvious hypocrisy.
    very well said ...
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  18. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    Of course you won't hear about Alan Fabian. Any more than we're hearing about the attacks on Max Cleland now while the GOP successfully changes the subject and raves about the moveon.org ad against General Petreus. Instead I watched 20 minutes of the Today show this morning and there was not a single mention of the attacks on Max Cleland or John Kerry for that matter.

    It seems the GOP has a "selective service" of their own when it comes to slandering war heroes for political gain. And the "liberal" media has once again over-steered the ship in trying to be fair to the whining right and failed to take them to task for their obvious hypocrisy.
    Kind of my point, but said much better than me. Another point of my post was for some people to look for who it was so they would learn who he is/was.
  19.    #19  
    No, just tired of the same old stuff that never ceases to be repeated and repeated. As for moveon.org, their trash has not gone well with the middle of the road democrat. None that I work with are at all pleased with the stupid move the Democrat leadership has taken to sleep with moveon.org.

    One mumbles about the successful attack against moveon.org due to its comments about General Petreus - successful only because people realize the tone presented by moveon.org was unacceptable. If the average guy did not think it was wrong, then moveon.org would have been able to walk away without anyone saying a thing. Attacking our military, the people in it, accusing them of being puppets of the civilian leadership - few of us buy it.

    As for Fabian, not right at all.

    Ben

    The media taken steps to be fair? Oh, gosh, you know that is so far from being correct. The media though needs to stop being so apparently tuned to the left - it is far from even in its presentation. Take a look at your old buddy from CBS - an excellent example of not wanting to take responsibility for what he did. His staff states he was involved in every step of the story, but he himself says he was nothing more than reading it. An excellent example of the media unable to be fair and when caught with its pants down, blame everyone else. Danny Rather, heck of a man.
  20. #20  
    OT-

    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    No, just tired of the same old stuff that never ceases to be repeated and repeated. As for moveon.org, their trash has not gone well with the middle of the road democrat. None that I work with are at all pleased with the stupid move the Democrat leadership has taken to sleep with moveon.org.
    Might be a tad safer than sleeping with the Amoral Majority since we know where their members have been.

    One mumbles about the successful attack against moveon.org due to its comments about General Petreus - successful only because people realize the tone presented by moveon.org was unacceptable. If the average guy did not think it was wrong, then moveon.org would have been able to walk away without anyone saying a thing. Attacking our military, the people in it, accusing them of being puppets of the civilian leadership - few of us buy it.
    This is only because the price is too high and very few conservatives can afford taking heed of those former-intelligence officials, both military and civilian who have named Rumsfeld as their puppetmaster. Petraeus is far from the first to employ administration talking points into his less than realistic report. 69% of the US just ain't buyin' it. We've all seen this episode before and we've had enough of reruns.

    As for Fabian, not right at all.
    And that's all the moral outrage we'll hear from the conservatives about him.
    /OT

    Back to the topic at hand.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions