State dept reveals Hillary Clinton received $500K worth of jewelry from Saudi king

Ouch, proof that you can't really trust anyone in these days of big lobbying. Yeah, it's a big issue to me. Because I don't think any candidate should be brought out. That said, I think we need to make a slight distinction between American lobbying money and foreign lobbying money. I don't mind so much, if a candidate is tied up to the "Koch bros"(Partially, because a hell of a lot of people make more money than the Koch's. That's Harry Reid's delusion that the Koch's are taking over Washington. You wouldn't see it, if policy were any proof)

And I don't mind for example if a candidate is pro-military industry, though it means he's a neo-con which is a position I oppose but on purely ideological grounds that are debatable, not on a candidate's qualifications. Basically, American Lobbying Money=Eh, necessary evil. Foreign lobbying money=Potential disaster and unwarranted influence.

And while Rand Paul's blocking taxes hurts his record with me now that I know of it, and he's affiliated with someone lobbying for the Sunnis. That takes him down a peg. But if it's swine VS swine, he smells a little bit less still. But only a little bit.

I'm trying to find a Center-rightist who won't break the bank and will restore a sense of dignity to the Presidency. I may not find a suitable candidate in this pool. That's too bad. Never was a Rubio-Bush fan. But since I'm "icky" but not upset with big American donors, I won't hold it against Cruz for competing along with everyone else.

While I have always wanted to ban ALL forms of lobbying, as a way of crony government for now, as we transition to such an era I won't hold it against candidates who take clean, legal forms of American money.

 

Rubbish! How would she know what she was getting before she got it unless she was told first? That's the thing with gifts; people like them to be a surprise.

 

At the time someone is trying to give you a gift, you can either accept it or refuse it. But of course you already knew that. And so did the Framers of the Constitution.

 

That's a fairly common position that seems to be based on the hypothesis that American lobbyists represent goals that are good for Americans, while foreign lobbyists represent goals that may not be good for Americans...
I challenge that hypothesis. In what way is it beneficial for Americans to have tax dodges enabled for the wealthy (so the tax burden falls to the rest), decrease in government oversight of industries (resulting in more exploding factories and increased ground water contamination), more jobs shipped overseas to increase profits, a greater percentage of corporate salary/wage budgets being allocated to the top percentage of employees (who happen to largely be GOP campaign contributors) - and all the other goals of those conservative lobbyists?
Similarly, I assume you're aware that foreign entities hire US lobby firms to promote their interests - so even if the lobbyist is "American", it doesn't mean his goals are centered around American interests.

As for the Koch bros specifically, I presume you're aware that their money came from Fred Koch (their dad), who was the primary founder/backer of the John Birch society? http://www.prwatch.org/news/2014/07/12531/koch-brothers-roots-run-deep

So you think foreign lobbyists shouldn't be allowed, but have no problem with the guy who has a lobbyist for Saudi Arabia as his campaign chief? That seems odd.

Are you also aware that Rand Paul claims to be a boar certified Ophthalmologist, based on being recognized by the National Board of Ophthalmology, which is a certification organization, created by Rand Paul and his relatives? Rand Paul, in fact, is listed as the "owner/president" of his own certification board.

That's not the only instance of him being an outright liar:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...nd-paul-says-obama-advocating-drone-strike-p/
http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin...-rand-paul-says-average-public-school-teache/
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...aul-says-federal-workers-paid-120000-private/
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...aul-says-half-uninsured-americans-make-least/
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...aul-says-more-half-students-medical-dental-a/
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...aul/did-rand-paul-propose-cutting-aid-israel/
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...aul-says-most-people-receive-disability-back/
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...aul-says-40-times-more-kentuckians-have-gott/
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ok-meme-claims-rand-paul-and-marco-rubio-hav/
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...aul-says-barack-obama-spent-nearly-trillion-/

Insofar as lobbying is concerned, he has clearly stated that he supports something that's already law (portraying it as a new idea of his), but that he doesn't think there should be transparency around where campaign finance comes from... I wonder why?
[video=youtube_share;din4emct8BQ]http://youtu.be/din4emct8BQ[/video]

I find it ironic that the conservative end of politics has shifted so far to the extreme right that anyone who would historically have been called "center-rightist" would now fit well within the Democratic party. For example, Teddy Roosevelt and Taft would be called RINOs today, as would many former GOP senators like Mark Hatfield, Lowell Weicker, Arlen Specter, Bill Cohen, Bob Packwood, Nancy Kassebaum, etc.

Remind me which party fought against Citizens United, to get big $ out of politics - and which party fought to protect this form of legal bribery...?

 

I shouldn't be surprised that there's been no reply by any conservative to my last post...

 

you are spreading lies. she didn't keep it.

 

Can you not read?

See, in the post that YOU quoted, I acknowledged that she gave it back. So why did you lie about that?

But why don't you go rob a bank, then try to return the money (once people find out what you did), and see if you're held blameless.

 

petty whining

 

Yes, the post that you quoted, that dishonestly accused me of lying, is petty whining.

 

Do you really want her to offend a gift giver? I thought so.

 

What part of "it's illegal" don't you understand? Should a cop take bribes, so as to not "offend a gift giver"? Quit pretending like this was anything other than buying influence.

 

you are making that up plain and simple. she and bush and Eisenhower and Clinton and FDR and so on and etcetera all gave the gifts to the gov but I bet you already knew that.