Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

So why did Hillary give back the money?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
King Coal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-09-06 03:32 PM
Original message
So why did Hillary give back the money?
That's the question all the Freepers here are asking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Vincardog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-09-06 03:33 PM
Response to Original message
1. To avoid the appearance of impropriety I will bet
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-09-06 03:34 PM
Response to Original message
2. Because she likes to act like a Republican.
:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-09-06 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #2
13. HAH! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mike_c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-09-06 03:35 PM
Response to Original message
3. me too, frankly....
I mean, by giving it back she certainly creates the impression that taking it in the first place was wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-09-06 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
4. She's not at politically astute as she thinks she is.
She just ends up looking like she did something wrong taking it to begin with.

And if the money is from an Indian tribe, it's an insult to them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-09-06 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. Exactly!
The Indian tribes have been giving money to Dems for years! Dumb move on Hill's part, imho. Only those who got money directly from Abramoff should worry, really. THAT is the tainted money, not direct contributions from a Tribe that regularly makes contributions!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oleladylib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-09-06 03:42 PM
Response to Original message
5. It WAS the smart thing to do..
but, then again Hilary is damned if she does or damned if she doesn't ..even here..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tyedyeto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-09-06 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. It was NOT the smart thing to do.
Edited on Mon Jan-09-06 03:46 PM by tyedyeto
Makes her look just as corrupt as the Repugs who are giving back money. Look at Harry Reid for a smart example. He will not give it back because it didn't come from Abramoff, it came directly from tribes ... therefore, the money is NOT tainted and shouldn't be given away to some charity who has nothing to do with where the money came from.

On edit:

Welcome to DU :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imagevision Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-09-06 03:43 PM
Response to Original message
6. Why didn't Hillary stand - up for those calling for investigations in Ohio
The Dems are playing the same game as repugs - if it hurts THEM -- they turn a deaf ear when americans need them the most. - Politics makes the mob at its worse seem like childs play.

They use Bush to get their foot in the door for oil in the middle east and whether Kerry or Hillary replaces Bush --- the war will simply take off where Bush left off citing it'll take years to undo the Bush damage. --

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
King Coal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-09-06 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. Why didn't Hillary standup for Bush's impeachment for his NSA
bullshit?

Hillary is out in my book.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-09-06 03:48 PM
Response to Original message
9. Imo, I don't think Congress should donate the money back.
The money from the tribes. Giving it back makes them look like they did something wrong, which they didn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-09-06 03:48 PM
Response to Original message
10. Because Hillary is just like Bill
She caves in if she thinks it's the thing to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-09-06 03:50 PM
Response to Original message
12. CYA. What else? Why did she take it in the first place?
Why do politicians take money from corporations while being allegedly against the corporations? To get elected so they can weasel out of real campaign finance reform and keep this country an oligarchy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mattclearing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-09-06 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. Very few are allegedly against the corporations.
Most of them are perfectly willing to tell you that they have business interests at heart.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msgadget Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-09-06 03:55 PM
Response to Original message
14. Because the president did
($6000 of the total contribution) and so did Reid. As one caller to C-Span pointed out, if you rob a bank but later return the money, you've still robbed that bank. If she took that money in good faith and did not allow it to influence any decisions made on our behalf then she had no reason to return it. However, it will surely become an election issue either way so she'll have to publicly revisit the issue very soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-09-06 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. Reid gave nothing back, because he says he did nothing wrong. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msgadget Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-09-06 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. Thank you, I was wrong
Last week I was pissed to read and hear that he had returned the money but I just looked it up and found quotes directly from his office that he did NOT because they were legal contributions. He's set an example for democrats to follow but Hillary has decided instead to follow the example of her colleagues from the right. Her choice and her's to answer for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imagevision Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-09-06 03:56 PM
Response to Original message
15. so the msm couldn't report that she didn't...!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-09-06 03:57 PM
Response to Original message
17. What money?
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RandomKoolzip Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-09-06 03:59 PM
Response to Original message
19. In two years, the nuance needed to explain this whole Abramoff thing
will have disappeared, and all that people will be able to remember is that "Money was given to politicians for favors, and the good ones gave it back."

It sucks, but people aren't going to remember that tribes gave $ directly to Dems without Abramoff acting as liason, while Abramoff gave lots and lots of $ directly to Repukes. Remember, America reads at a fourth grade level.

She's giving it back so that it'll APPEAR that she's on the side of good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msgadget Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-09-06 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. That makes sense
and I agree with you but I wonder if in the near term her actions will help take leverage away from anyone attempting real reform on K Street. If the money was legal and did not buy influence, returning it so long after receiving it is meaningless. Instead it suggests that accepting money from lobbyists is wrong. Why not return all the money from all the lobbyists? To be on the side of 'good' that's what one would have to do.

I just hope this issue receives attention during and after the Alito hearings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-09-06 04:39 PM
Response to Original message
22. IMO giving it back looks much worse than keeping it would have been
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 12:09 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC