Oh, I know if he broke campaign finance law, because I’m intimately familiar with all the goings-on on Capitol Hill without having links provided, not to mention having a degree in congressional law :rolleyes:
… Nope, not seeing the outrage. Criminal, unknown, now going to jail. Not directly connected to the campaign.
Good call on the Clinton-Chinese connection, though, Moto. Forgot about that issue.
(Sorry, no comment on the OP…I didn’t even know who this guy was until mid-way down the thread)
Really? Who are these Repubilcan/right-wingers ready to pounce? This is a ‘just curious’ question. Haven’t seen much Republican/right-wing pounce-age lately around here so was just wonderin’…
-XT
I can answer the question in the OP. If Hsu were a Republican, he’d probably be getting a Medal of Freedom, be tight with Rove, and all emails from and to him would be lost or hidden under Executive Privilege. Happy? Oh, but if it turned out he had teh gay then they’d send his money back.
A family around here, btw, has been found to have donated more money than they have in almost the exact proportions that Hsu did. They’re being investigated. Nobody is protesting, and nobody is blocking the investigation.
Is there a proposal on the table to do background checks on all donors? Any evidence that any Dem did anything in return for the money? Or are things in Pubbie-land so bad that you have to start Pit threads out of desperation? Or are you pitting the Dem candidates for being ethical?
If anybody was defending Hsu, or keeping his money, then I’d join in pitting that.
Can we pretend Liberal is a communist, too? That’d be more fun.
To be fair, at the State level, two Democrats from New Jersey look like they’ve been caught with their pants down and wallets open.
Republicans are good at playing “Let’s pretend.”
Let’s pretend this is a big story.
Let’s pretend Vince Foster was murdered by the Clintons.
Let’s pretend we’re winning in Iraq.
Let’s pretend we’re not gay.
etc.
etc.
etc.
C’mon, does everything have to be a Dope thread? Isn’t a little quiet enjoyment of scandal acceptable? (actually I was only dimly aware of this until the front-page story in the N.Y. Times today, which I was planning to savor over chips and salsa this evening. At some point I will definitely vent outrage, you betcha).
By the way (and no tu quoque intended), is it true that Sen. Larry Craig has quietly accepted a big fee to be the national spokesperson for this product?*
*Don’t miss out on the click-and-drag - it’s hypnotic!
These two sentences are not necessarily related. After all, there could be plenty of people just waiting for a juicy Democrat scandal to break out, but there’s none to be had, while over on the Republican side, their cup runneth over. The two sides aren’t necessarily equal.
That said, I can admittedly only think of two right now; Evil One, as evidenced by this thread, and Mr. Moto.
I’m not saying pouncing on stories is a bad thing, mind; do it too often and it gets annoying, sure, but someone has to bring these things to the board’s attention in order for discussion to happen. That Captain EO here did so by lambasting the lefties for not bringing it up is what makes this thread so very mockable.
I think the story is a non-starter…and would be so if it were a Republican supporter (though I’m certain there are enough loony-lefties that SOMEONE would have started a pit had the man been a 'Pub). I was just wondering about this horde of Republican’s in the wings thingy. 
Anyway, carry on. I was just passing through…
-XT
a) Never start a thread with “Why aren’t there any threads on this topic?” If it’s such a crucial topic, start a goddamn thread about it. If you’re stewing about it for days waiting for others to start talking about it, you’ve got nobody to bitch about but yourself.
b) As far as your linked to story, the guy had a warrant for grand theft of investors 16 years ago. I’m not sure how that relates to his contributions to Democrats. Is there some hidden link between the two?
I’ll never suggest that there will never be a Democrat in the future who commits fraud or some other crime. I would argue that right now, the Republicans, rather than the Democrats are clearly engaged in the most scandalous, fraudulent or otherwise criminal behavior. I think that the numbers clearly bear this out.
I would also argue that the current Republican party has overseen historic levels of wrongdoing, but that is probably a bit more subjective. I still think it’s pretty evidently the case.
Again, I don’t propose that Democrats will never do anything wrong. I just think in this case a criminal has also happened to be a large contributor to the Democrats.
But by all means, nobody is stopping you from starting any posts that you like.
But the CONTRAST is what made it FUNNY. Yeesh! Would you rather he said, “I think you’re a cherished friend who contributes valuable insight to political debates here on the Dope, and you score a point for the Blues Brothers reference?” Did you get lost on your way to MPSIMS?
I’m a little surprised how few people here seem to be aware of this story. About a week ago, the Wall Street Journal did a report about the Paw family - six adults, some of apparently modest means, who have given around $200,000 to Democratic candidates in the last few years. According to campaign donation forms, they all live in the same house, which was formerly owned by Norman Hsu, and in another story I read that one of the Paws once worked with Hsu. Timing-wise, their donations closely tracked or matched Hsu’s, but despite their generosity, the Paws apparently don’t vote much. The Journal said there was no direct evidence that the Paws were being reimbursed for their donations, but the suggestion that something was off lead to some of the candidates returning or donating away money from the Paws. That, in turn, lead to scrutiny of Hsu, who was found to be a fugitive. He then went on the run again, but was caught and is going to be returned to California.
If you have your ideological compass on, you know pretty much how threads are going to go. I thought about it, but I was curious about whether those who would jump on him in a nanosecond if he was a Republican would do the same if he was a Democrat.
They can’t. They are too busy checking to see if they themselves are connected to him. If they jump too soon and get burned, it would be nearly fatal.
Apparently, I overestimated the level of interest in current events among some folks as well.
Meh. It takes about 14 seconds to check since all the names of donors above $200 are publically available and openly searchable. And it’s not like those poster will be forever shunned if they should criticize Hillary and it turns out that Edwards also took some of Hsu’s money.
The much more likely explanation, in my eyes, is that this kind of thing just doesn’t rise to the level of scandal in the current environment. Haven’t there been some members of actual GOP campaigns that have resigned because of criminal activity this cycle? I ask because I’m not sure; I (and I think the rest of politically active America) have been focused on issues like whether Alberto Gonzales lied before Congress, etc.
I happen to think the number is a bit higher than that, but I agree with and concede your point.
I agree. And exposure to it is what drove me to the attitude that led to the opening of this thread. I have enjoyed this board for over five years now, but the constant drumbeat of “OMG Bush is teh evil” is getting tiresome. I consider myself moderate right and therefore disagree with many of the political positions of the majority of the posters here. But I enjoy the high level of discourse and reading the opinions of the informed and amusing people who come here. If I wanted to spend time in an echo chamber, I would go to Free Republic…but I don’t want to talk to a bunch of people who think prayer in school is the burning issue of our time.
So…I allowed the strident voices to annoy me to the point that I got down in the mud with them and started a cryptic and dismissive OP. I didn’t live up to the same standards of the board which keeps me coming back to it in the first place.
My apologies.
Would you folks mind a little fact checking? This story was “broken” by two of the most conservative papers in the US, the Wall Street Journal (since I’m not a subscriber, I have only Marley 23’s summary of the high points) and the church-owned Washington Times. CNN swallowed that whole, with no further research.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200709060012?f=h_latest
Mr. Moto seems to have such evidence, but hasn’t shown it.
Clinton, Obama, and the DSCC have all said Mr. Hsu’s money will be given to charity.
Now, can we confine this to the facts?
Words rather thin on the ground here at times, and I salute you for saying them.
I’m sure it seems that way, but I’ll contend a) there are arguably things the current administration has done that are worthy of strong criticism, and one can’t really suppress the non-legitimate criticisms without stifling debate of the more valid ones; b) there is not and never has been anything like universal approval of the “Bush sucks” threads by self-identified liberals on this board (consider the general hooting directed at folks like the erstwhile Reeder, and to a similar extent, DerTrihs; c) tit-for-tat just never seems to work out all that well. I’m just sayin’, here.