Politics and Religion

There is a small knot in this string of thought.
WickedBrut 27 Reviews 52 reads
posted

When you say, "To think the CF is the only NGO to [do] anything good is ridiculous," you are saying that if an organization is doing good work and accomplishing what it sets out to get done, and which garners sufficient funds to fulfill its mission, that this alone does not make deserving of existence.

Compare this to how we might feel about individual people. The Delia Lama does good work. But he is not the only person doing good work. So wouldn't you argue that things would be better, less corrupt, more transparent, if we terminated the Delia Lama, use whatever wealth he has at his disposal to fund someone other who can do good work, because that would be less corrupt, more transparent? I would counter argue that, in case of the person, you would be suggesting murder for the purpose of personal enrichment.

Surely other NGOs who are indeed doing good work can command the same flow of donations as The Clinton Foundation.

BTW, half of the non-government personnel who sought and received a meeting with The Secretary of State were NOT people who had made any contribution whatsoever to the Clinton Foundation. People who are granted face-to-face meetings with people in high office have some reason that is or seems of interest and importance to both parties. I don't know how many regular joes email the Secretary of State (say Kerry now) and say, "Hi John! My name is Slush So'n'so'n'so, and I'd like to come by and shoot the shit sometime! Whaddoysay?!" But probably most of them get turned down. So the field narrows.

nuguy46433 reads

Many of her defenders only talk about the 'good work the Foundation does" and never hint at the shakedown method used to further themselves. But many, other than a few like Carville, are openly advising to 'shut it down',, obviously before the calls to 'lock her up' get louder. To think the CF is the only NGO to anything good is ridiculous. But.........if shutdown, Bill no longer commands $500K per speech. THAT is the real reason to keep going. Both of them are Money Whores.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Joe-Scarborough-Hillary-Defends-Clinton-Foundation/2016/08/25/id/745103/

bigguy3065 reads

Posted By: nuguy46
Many of her defenders only talk about the 'good work the Foundation does" and never hint at the shakedown method used to further themselves. But many, other than a few like Carville, are openly advising to 'shut it down',, obviously before the calls to 'lock her up' get louder. To think the CF is the only NGO to anything good is ridiculous. But.........if shutdown, Bill no longer commands $500K per speech. THAT is the real reason to keep going. Both of them are Money Whores.  
   
 http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Joe-Scarborough-Hillary-Defends-Clinton-Foundation/2016/08/25/id/745103/

nuguy4657 reads

because he liked the work CF did (he didn't get a meeting). Keep trying to defend the Clinton money grab by selling access to State Dept.....next.

It takes "intelligence" to see that. In fact, her poll #'s are rising, despite Trump's laughable & condescending recent  "outreach" to voters of color & fruitless "fishing expeditions" to find something illegal in her e-mails. Check below link.

Posted By: nuguy46
Many of her defenders only talk about the 'good work the Foundation does" and never hint at the shakedown method used to further themselves. But many, other than a few like Carville, are openly advising to 'shut it down',, obviously before the calls to 'lock her up' get louder. To think the CF is the only NGO to anything good is ridiculous. But.........if shutdown, Bill no longer commands $500K per speech. THAT is the real reason to keep going. Both of them are Money Whores.  
   
 http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Joe-Scarborough-Hillary-Defends-Clinton-Foundation/2016/08/25/id/745103/
-- Modified on 8/25/2016 10:38:34 AM

bigguy3048 reads

Posted By: nuguy46
Many of her defenders only talk about the 'good work the Foundation does" and never hint at the shakedown method used to further themselves. But many, other than a few like Carville, are openly advising to 'shut it down',, obviously before the calls to 'lock her up' get louder. To think the CF is the only NGO to anything good is ridiculous. But.........if shutdown, Bill no longer commands $500K per speech. THAT is the real reason to keep going. Both of them are Money Whores.  
   
 http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Joe-Scarborough-Hillary-Defends-Clinton-Foundation/2016/08/25/id/745103/

When you say, "To think the CF is the only NGO to [do] anything good is ridiculous," you are saying that if an organization is doing good work and accomplishing what it sets out to get done, and which garners sufficient funds to fulfill its mission, that this alone does not make deserving of existence.

Compare this to how we might feel about individual people. The Delia Lama does good work. But he is not the only person doing good work. So wouldn't you argue that things would be better, less corrupt, more transparent, if we terminated the Delia Lama, use whatever wealth he has at his disposal to fund someone other who can do good work, because that would be less corrupt, more transparent? I would counter argue that, in case of the person, you would be suggesting murder for the purpose of personal enrichment.

Surely other NGOs who are indeed doing good work can command the same flow of donations as The Clinton Foundation.

BTW, half of the non-government personnel who sought and received a meeting with The Secretary of State were NOT people who had made any contribution whatsoever to the Clinton Foundation. People who are granted face-to-face meetings with people in high office have some reason that is or seems of interest and importance to both parties. I don't know how many regular joes email the Secretary of State (say Kerry now) and say, "Hi John! My name is Slush So'n'so'n'so, and I'd like to come by and shoot the shit sometime! Whaddoysay?!" But probably most of them get turned down. So the field narrows.

Register Now!