Why is pay for play a scandal? 100 % do it.

[Cicada]

Every elected official gives favored treatment to donors and other supporters. For instance donors or other supporters are more likely to have phone calls answered. That's pay for play. Donors are favored for ambassadorships. Every President does that, all of them without exception. Pence says hillary should be investigated for pay for play. It is 100% certain Pence also practices pay for play. Elected representatives must rally support to get things done. Support increases if you favor donors and other supporters. We want those we vote for to be able to get things done.

So saying Hillary practices pay for play is no different than saying Hillary is or wants to be an elected official. Every elected official, everyone with a chance of being elected to federal Office, is guilty of pay for play without a single exception. So why is it considered a scandal?

Jimmy Carter sinned less than others. Who did more good for the country - Carter or Bill Clinton? The making of sausage or legislation is gruesome to watch but if you want to eat or make progress you must accept the ugly details. We need to grow up here and act like intelligent adults.

ruPaul is a grown up. Google RuPaul endorsement Clinton - and grow up people.

[TDale313]

1. Get the big money out of politics.

Yes, everyone does it. Yes, unless you do it in a really stupid way it's legal. That's the fucking problem!!! The system works for those who can afford access and lobbiests and screws everyone else.

[PSPS]

2. LOL. Thanks for your "concern."

These posts are getting a lot easier to recognize.

[happydaze]

3. Grow up and accept the status quo of big money in politics

trumping absolutely everything... In other words, we live in an Oligarchy, not a democracy and you are comfortable with that reality.... You must have privilege to be able to make statements like this. Many, many, many citizens in this country have been harmed, hurt, and killed by ther "pay to play" schemes.

Lead in drinking water. Cut backs at OSHA so less people are allotted to oversee work safety (essentially underfunding govt that regulates businesses who don't want over site and don't care if you die from salmonella). Handing out billions in foreign aid, including weapons, to the ME, and yet we can't build better schools or rebuild a bridge? Or how about creating trade deals that actually harm your country? Whose ever heard of giving away a competitive edge before? Hmm, those corporations sure banked big on breaking the American worker. Higher education indebting a nation that must compete with the world now. Or private prison and the judicial system pipelining children into the system and creating an "enslaved" nearly free work population for minorities (more African American men are in prison than were ever enslaved during slave periods).

Pay to Play is illegal! However, the Supreme Court has created law that has essentially locked in political bribery as legal. It sure smells bad and sure feels bad and the American people are being screwed.

I am a grown up, I have children, and I certainly don't teach them to go steal the poor kids lunch. Shoot many days, mine is the "poor kid". I believe we need some sanity in our govt and we absolutely need to get the money out of politics.

[bullimiami]

4. And what exactly are they paying for? A foundation that does nothing but good around the world.

A rated.

Where exactly does this serve the Clintons?

[LWolf]

5. Wow.

Last edited Mon Aug 15, 2016, 11:32 AM - Edit history (1)

If that's a sincere question, I don't know if anyone can really explain it to you.

I'll address the larger question. I'm not going to dive into the attacking or defending of HRC, since the issue is not about her, even if your question is.

It's called corruption. Our elected officials are supposed to represent their constituents...the citizens. Represent them equally, without favor to those that can and do "pay to play." It's a kind of political nepotism.

Let me give you some related terms: bias; discrimination; inequity.

For the record, finding a way to spin a preferred candidate's weakness or problem into something that is okay does not help win votes; neither does it make the party, nor the nation, better or stronger. It simply enables the continued slide into corporatism.

And comparing Carter to Clinton? That's like comparing a meal made of fresh, organic, just-prepared ingredients to a stop at McDonald's. I lived through both of those administrations. I voted for both of them. Carter was my very first presidential vote. Who was the better president? I'd take Carter over Clinton every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Carter did not give me NAFTA. Carter did not eliminate the Fairness Doctrine. Carter did not repeal Glass-Steagall. He did not bring us welfare "reform" that devastated single mothers, especially if they weren't white. He did not sign the largest crime bill in history, which allocated $10 billion for prison construction, expanded the death penalty, eliminated federal funding for inmate education, intensified police surveillance and racial profiling, and locked up millions for nonviolent offenses such as drug possession.

That alone would put Carter well beyond Clinton when it comes to "doing good for the country." He didn't have to do anything at all to do better than that. He did do some good things, though: The Camp David accords, for example. There were plenty more, and some that, as with all presidents, I didn't support. The biggest and best contribution he made, in my opinion, though, is what he did NOT do.

Carter did not take us to war.

ruPaul? I'm somehow supposed to take his endorsement of Clinton as an endorsement of "Pay to play," or...???

[Lars39]

6. Thank you!

Some people wouldn't recognize conflict of interest if it bit 'em.

[LWolf]

7. You're welcome.

It IS biting all of us, repeatedly.

[Cicada]

14. Yes, RuPaul has more political wisdom than you do, odd S that sounds

You may not like acts of Clinton but I do like them Employment and economic growth exploded after Nafta. The banks which expanded into nonbank activities were LESS likely to fail in 2007 and 2008. Their non financial activities buffered their financial losses. Yes, the truth is that the repeal of Glass Steagel reduced the problems of the financial crisis. And I think Carter did GREAT. Faced with the oil shock the U.S. outperformed all other big economies. I just think Clinton did even better. But these are just political differences of opinion. You may be right, I may be right. And obviously we should severely restrict private financing of political activities. We should publicLy finance campaigns I agree money causes corruption. But I want Hillary to succeed. Obama care saves lives and families. But it would not have happened without buying the support of many interest groups, such as insurance companies. Single payer would be better - but single payer was impossible. I want to live in the real world, the world of doing corrupt things when those corrupt things are absolutely essential to achieving good ends. FDR, JFK, LBJ, Clinton, Obama have all done some corrupt things because otherwise they would never have gotten elected and would never have achieved anything. Let's pass laws which reduce corruption, such as overturning Citizen's United, outlawing gerrymandering, etc. But for God's sake try to understand how the world actually works when you want to get something done. You may not like reality, you should legislate to make it better, but don't ignore how the world really works. You scratch my back, I scratch yours is how we make a better world. Really.

[LWolf]

15. lol

Because you know anything whatsoever about whatever political "wisdom" I might have, and you base your knowledge of RuPaul's political "wisdom" on...something he said?

You can think whatever you want about Bill Clinton. There's plenty of evidence for my position, which I offered. You offered some rationalization.

Please note: I didn't say anything at all about Hillary Clinton. I was not talking about Hillary Clinton, and what I had to say had nothing whatsoever to do with her current campaign. Or Obama, or the ACA. You went on a birdwalk about them and came back to tell me to "try to understand the real world," lol. Bill Clinton? His administration was in the real world of his day. I understand it just fine, thanks.

I don't mind if you disagree with me. I'd prefer it, of course, if you'd direct your disagreements to something I actually said, instead of your faulty assumptions about me. And, if you want me to consider what you have to say, offer up some evidence to back up whatever it is you are trying to say.

Or don't.

[procon]

8. This IS the system we have!

We've sat back and watched it metastasize for decades, and done damned little to curb the influence of money on our doomed little adventure in democracy. No one should be trying to climb up on that snooty high horse and pretend that it's anything different than what is is today, and tomorrow, and most likely for years to come.

The paltry efforts at reforms we've seen in the past have been eroded away by big money interests who paid off politicians to do their bidding, grease the skids, and make life ever so much more fun for the rich and famous. By and large, the voters don't care because they stupidly keep reelecting the same politicians who freely tell them that they intend to make life at the bottom even worse.

Suddenly, this year, there's an awaking and some people have had an eye opening moment of epiphany. Hurrah! Change the system, if you can. Clean out the corruption at every level of government, if you can. Get better politicians effected to pass the strong laws necessary to make a democratic system work fairly and equitably for everyone, if you can.

You'll need to organize a national grassroots effort, and that takes time and money before there is sufficient mass to institute any meaningful change in the calcified government culture we have now. Good luck with that.

[alarimer]

9. It should be a scandal; it should not be "business as usual"

I believe this is at least part of what Bernie was talking about.

Also George Carlin ("There's a club and you are not in it.&quot

Why is this at all acceptable for anyone? This diminishes democracy and turns everyone cynical about how it works. It's all a game for those Washington folks, making deals with people's lives.

[Adrahil]

10. It's called patronage....

... and it is not 100% bad.

Like in any job, you want to work with people you know and trust. When I went to my new company, part of my mandate was to set up a new department. I looked to hire the people I knew who had a skills and talents necessary to make it a success. One guy I hired was a guy who actually hired ME for a previous job. From the outside, it might look like payback. But the truth is, the guy was extremely capable, and I thought he had what it takes to do what we needed. It's that simple. Hiring from resume and interview? Sure I do it. But it's sometimes a crap shoot. The guy who is extremely qualified on paper might be an asshole once you work with him for a while. Or he may not have the intangible skills he needs. I'll go for the person I know, if I have a choice, and that person is good.

[closeupready]

11. It's bribery. Not perhaps from a strictly legal standard of proof basis,

but it's as clear as day to anyone with common sense.

[Act_of_Reparation]

12. If your local community college offers an introductory course in ethics at a reasonable price...

... I suggest you take it.

[TheDebbieDee]

13. Actually, it's not pay for play...

The State Dept has a long history of interacting and communicating with NGOs, many of which are charities and/or organizations working on behalf of the UN and other charitable organizations. The Clinton Foundation is more or less an organizer of NGOs and private corporations around the world...