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 : Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. President or Pretender? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mistermj who wrote (690)	3/8/2008 9:14:24 PM
From: MJ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1090

This is what I am having a real problem understanding. Why is it considered okay to donate money received for one's campaign to charity when the person or persons who gave the money get into trouble with the law-----months and years after the original donations? If Rezo or his associates gave the money as contributions and they have been spent previously then why should new funds be given to charity. From where do these new funds come-------what is their source. Seems that Ms Clinton and Mr. Obama should return the funds to the original giver and say thank you but no thankyou and with interest. Now to the 2nd question------- WHOSE MONEY IS IT that is given to charity? To make it seem okay before the voters both Ms Hillary and Mr. Obama have donated "new money" to charity as they have already spent the old money from Rezo and Hsu. So whose money is being given to charity? Is it the grassroots $10 and $25 donations that are now covering the all ready spent donations that Rezo and Hsu and others gave to Clinton and Obama? This is certainly a wrinkle in "Campaign financing" that I have never heard of until this election. If I were running the charity that received the donation I would consider it tainted money and not accept. mj