National Review Online has published a reasonable article discussing the campaign contributions from certain unsavory characters, and the possible political ramifications of choosing to keep, versus returning, the money.
But the controversy raises a broader question. Campaigns must return illegal contributions — stolen money, straw donor money, or corporate money, for example. But what are they ethically or morally obligated to do when they receive legal contributions from one or two individuals known to be controversial?
…
Paul’s line — probably the correct one, if not the wisest politically — is that no matter how evil the donor, the return of a political contribution is a purely symbolic act undertaken for public-relations purposes.
I will be attending the debate on Thursday 9/27/2007 at Morgan State University in Baltimore, MD. The so called ‘top tier’ candidates will not be there. They have nothing to gain by showing up.
The good news is that Ron Paul will be there. The bad news is that he will most likely be ‘attacked’ regarding accusations that he is racist. I suspect Paul’s views will not sit well for most of the debate panelists along with the majority of black voters. I wish then that the following video be required viewing as a response:
What follows is a list of 10 common criticisms of Ron Paul and his candidacy for President with rebuttals for each criticism. The rebuttals include links to Ron Paul’s own words on the issue to support the rebuttal and for further research.
Liberty Maven
Loading ...
