Not really unless I am unaware of some facts about McCain’s wife’s wealth. The McCain situation seems much more comparable to John Kerry or even Forbes or Perot. They are rich and they are able to put their personal funds (or things like private planes) into the campaign.
Clinton has been paid an enormous amount for something that may or may not have been worth the services that he provided. Even if it is worth it from a monetary standpoint, there are some questions as to ethics of a former president charging a fee for lending his name to someone solely for the purposes of adding credibility to them. Those funds are then commingled with other Clinton assets and then injected into a campaign. What was to stop Burkle from paying Clinton an additional 25 million last year and that money going straight to the Hillary campaign?
Are you purposely being obtuse? I am the one bringing up the possible loophole; you appear to be trying to re-define it as something it is not. I am not arguing about a loophole where rich people are simply using their own funds to donate to their campaign.
What I am stating is that I perceive a loophole existing when a third party is in effect donating more to a candidate than permitted by funnelling it to a candidate’s spouse through a sham employment. This certainly relies on two key assumptions that have not been supported by anything yet: i) that the employment is a sham; and ii) that it is motivated to funnel funds to a campaign. I am perfectly willing to concede that I have seen no evidence that the Clinton’s and Burkle are doing this; I am simply saying that I see a potential loophole.
I have personal friends in Cameroon who have gone from “I am going to die. I cannot work. My children will be orphans within a few years” to “I am going to live a fairly normal life” thanks to the work of the Clinton foundation.
He could be a jerk who screws goats for all I care.
I am talking about the cash that marc rich’s wife fronted Hillary (in exchange for her husband’s Presidential Pardon of Rich).
Bill and Hillary are VERY adept at raising cash!
I guess one debating point could be whether or not W. J. Clinton’s public speaking skills have noticably changed in the last few years/months.
I don’t follow him closely enough to have an opinion of my own, but I have noticed comments on this board speculating on whether he was trying to deliberately hurt his wife’s campaign. (In regards to some comments he made in one of the Carolina’s.)
Is the general consensus amongst the Doper’s that he is not as skilled or likeable a speaker as he used to be?