Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mark_H who wrote (6891)	5/7/2004 2:47:11 PM
From: MrLucky	Respond to of 90947

She will explain it as all Cheney's fault. <g>

To: Mark_H who wrote (6891)	5/7/2004 2:55:16 PM
From: American Spirit	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 90947

Kerry has taken less special interest money than anyone in the Senate over his tenure. Of the hundreds and hundreds of contributors the rightwing can only find one single case where anything even approached looking unethical. Jk would return any money with a bad whiff to it right away. $10,000 is a tiny amount of money compared to the millions and millions in corporate soft money and bundled corporate goodies Cheney-Bush have taken. Kerry has taken less special interest money than anyone in the Sneate over the last twenty years, because he's refused all PAC money and 99% of all soft money when everyone else was taking it. That case you posted was simply a case of not knowing the nature of the source until after the check was deposited. When I met to raise money for JK the first thing they told me was to refuse checks if anything or anyone even hinted any any quid pro quo. Right before soft money was banned the Kerry campaign refused a 200 K check just because the guy said he might like to be an ambassador someday. Bush on the other hand has a long record of "cash for trash" documented fully in the book "The Dirty Truth".

To: Mark_H who wrote (6891)	5/7/2004 3:59:14 PM
From: American Spirit	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 90947

That's the old Johnny Chung story whose name you conveniently left out to make it look like some new "scandal". That is not what Newsweek said, that has been rewritten by rightwing attackers to sound a lot more unethical that it was. In fact it was just a mistake, one unethical person out of thousands who slipped past the guardians. Kerry runs very ethical campaigns. Always has, always will. JK had no idea he was doing anything wrong and would never in his life accept money from a foreign national. In fact he has never even accepted legal PAC money and only accepted legal soft money for 3 months before it was banned because everyone else was. Even then, he limited the soft money he took to small amounts of no more than $30,000. Meanwhile Bush-Cheney took millions and millions in huge soft money chunks from companies they have directly helped make billions since they came into power. Kerry remains the most ethical senator in DC when it coems to fundraising.

To: Mark_H who wrote (6891)	5/7/2004 5:51:21 PM
From: American Spirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

More slander against Kerry. Why don't you post the entire article next time instead of slyly editing out only the sliecs you want to show. The article which totally vindicates Kerry. It states that Johnny Chung of Artesia California appeared to be a totally legit American businessman and that he was in fact a con artist. There was no way in hell Kerry could have or would have known anything about Chung's shady connections until after it came out in court. Kerry remains one of if not THE most ethical fundraisers in Washington DC completely unlike the corporate special interest cash for trashers in the Cheney-Bush campaign. An entire book "The Dirty Truth" has been written about all of the cash for pollution rights contributions made to Bush while governor, and that's just up until 2000. The book includes all the official data, names, numbers, dates and corresponding favors mostly having to do with letting the donors poison the atmosphere more. Shame on you for defending corruption which know exists on a major scale in the Bush-Cheney financial world by falsely implying that Kerry has done anything wrong.