Dishwashers for Clinton: Once again a zeal for campaign cash trumps common sense

[cali]

Monday, October 22, 2007; Page A22


DONORS WHOSE addresses turn out to be tenements. Dishwashers and waiters who write $1,000 checks. Immigrants who ante up because they have been instructed to by powerful neighborhood associations, or, as one said, "They informed us to go, so I went." Others who say they never made the contributions listed in their names or who were not eligible to give because they are not legal residents of the United States. This is the disturbingly familiar picture of Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential campaign presented last week in a report by the Los Angeles Times about questionable fundraising by the New York senator in New York City's Chinese community. Out of 150 donors examined, one-third "could not be found using property, telephone or business records," the Times reported. "Most have not registered to vote, according to public records."

This appears to be another instance in which a Clinton campaign's zeal for campaign cash overwhelms its judgment. After the fundraising scandals of President Bill Clinton's 1996 reelection campaign, the dangers of vacuuming cash from a politically inexperienced immigrant community should have been obvious. But Ms. Clinton's money machine seized on a new source of cash in Chinatown and environs. As the Times reported, a single Chinatown fundraiser in April brought in $380,000. By contrast, 2004 Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kerry raised $24,000 from Chinatown in the course of his entire campaign.

As with the warnings it dismissed about the mega-bundles being brought in by fundraiser Norman Hsu, the Clinton campaign saw the red flags here. After the April fundraiser, when some of the donors' stated occupations seemed out of line with the amounts they were giving, the Clinton campaign wrote to contributors asking them to confirm that the money was their own. In the case of seven $1,000 contributions, donors did not respond and their checks were returned, according to the campaign. The campaign says that the others, including one who told the Times that he did not give the money, reaffirmed the legitimacy of their contributions.

It's certainly true, as campaign spokesman Howard Wolfson says, that "Asian-Americans in Chinatown and Flushing have the same right to contribute as every other American." The campaign argues that it did what it could to ensure that contributions were legal. The alternative, the campaign says, would be to prevent those with foreign-sounding names from participating in the political process. But there's another alternative: to strengthen a vetting process that seems geared more toward justifying the acceptance of checks than toward uncovering problems.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/21/AR2007102101069.html

[acmavm]

1. The Clintons take money from anyone under any circumstances. BUT

you cannot tell me that those republicans aren't doing the same damn thing.

[Inuca]

2. I assume they do

(and as of now less effectively than Clinton), but I don't think thia THE point, nor the right comparison.

[acmavm]

12. I'm not comparing, I just want to know where the stories are about it.

I am NOT a Hillary supporter. Actually, I'm a Hillary anti-supporter. But I am not stupid enough to think that she's the only one taking funny money. The republican party perfected the art.

[Skidmore]

8. And that makes it okay?

Wow! And we want to know why elected officials won't represent us out here.

[acmavm]

11. Did I say it was okay? What I am wondering is where are the stories and

investigations into everyone else's bank accounts and war chests.

[katmondoo]

3. Bush has used every event to raise money

and push his agenda. He used kids, the military, working people, religion,the media, anything and everyone who could add a dollar to his party. Also is he repaying using Air Force One for his fund raising. How much free transportation has he gotten.

[cali]

4. Do you really want to make that comparison?

Clinton's fundraising practices stink to high heaven. There's no getting around that.

[asthmaticeog]

5. Bush does something bad; GOP: "Well, Bill Clinton did it, too!"

Hillary Clinton does something bad; DU: "Well, the Repukes do it too!"

:eyes:

[MethuenProgressive]

6. "Asian-Americans in Chinatown and Flushing have the same right to contribute as every other American

Campaign spokesman Howard Wolfson says "Asian-Americans in Chinatown and Flushing have the same right to contribute as every other American."
I think the underlying racism of this "outrage" will continue to be ignored.

[cali]

7. Bullshit. Throwing out the charge racism

won't cut it. The Clintons have a lousy history in this regard, and quoting their campaign chairman as evidence that things are on the up and up, is laughable. From the editorial in the WaPo:

"DONORS WHOSE addresses turn out to be tenements. Dishwashers and waiters who write $1,000 checks. Immigrants who ante up because they have been instructed to by powerful neighborhood associations, or, as one said, "They informed us to go, so I went." Others who say they never made the contributions listed in their names or who were not eligible to give because they are not legal residents of the United States."

[MethuenProgressive]

10. Also "from the editorial in the WaPo:"

It's certainly true, as campaign spokesman Howard Wolfson says, that "Asian-Americans in Chinatown and Flushing have the same right to contribute as every other American." The campaign argues that it did what it could to ensure that contributions were legal. The alternative, the campaign says, would be to prevent those with foreign-sounding names from participating in the political process.

So, some would be happy if Clinton just refused all donations from funny sounding names?
Ask Barack Obama how he'd feel about that...

[TalkingDog]

9. Too many Red Flags in this story.

Clinton may not know where the money is actually coming from -which is not good.

Or she may not care - which is SO not good.


But these points:

* Chinatown has not EVER been a fundraiser for any candidate....in it's entire history.

* The workers were all dishwashers, laundry workers, etc. How can they afford that much money? Which for many families, even in the true middle class, is a chunk of change.

* The workers, many of whom don't speak English, are recent immigrants, illegals, and very few are citizens. Of those few, even fewer of those vote.

* They all hail from the same PROVINCE IN CHINA. That is beyond coincidence.

have led me to a rather unsavory conclusion:

Someone is funneling large amounts of "untraceable" money through these people into the Clinton campaign.

If she doesn't know who is doing it, she is setting herself up for a fall. If she does, she is engaging in some questionable practices.

Either way it speaks to her judgement.



My Favorite Master Artist: Karen Parker GhostWoman Studios