Rod Blagojevich was attempting to sell Barack Obama's senate seat to someone in exchange for help in raising campaign funds and for a well-paying job for him and/or his wife.

Hillary Clinton agreed to support Barack Obama in exchange for his help in retiring more than $10 million of her campaign debt.

I know there is a difference (and I know that not just Democrats make these kinds of political deals - Republicans make them as well).  But is the difference one of substance or degree?

IMO there is a difference, in that the senate seat is within Blagojevic's control as a function of his elected office - he was elected as governor and given the power on behalf of the people.  To sell that mandate, either for party political ends (campaign funds), or personal ones is a breach of trust.

Hillary's agreeing to support Obama in return for wiping out her campaign debt is not close to the same thing - it's part of the usual quid pro quo in realpolitik.  She'd lost by then, anyway - it might have been different if she pulled out of a race she was going to win: her supporters would have been rightly annoyed were that to have happened, but it didn't.

So I guess I'm saying it's a difference of substance, not of degree.

So I guess I'm saying it's a difference of substance, not of degree.



Hillary's exchange of her support for Obama's assistance in eliminating her campaign debt (was the Secretary of State position part of the deal?) was definitely part of the usual political quid pro quo.  But Governor Blagojevich and his attorneys will argue that what he was doing was also part of the usual quid pro quo.  I think that the way he went about it was tasteless, cynical, and inappropriate; but I think he has a point.  I think that the difference between Hillary's exchange and Blago's attempted exchange was only a matter of degree.

The difference I see is that Hillary's support is hers to sell.  The senate post isn't Blagojevich's.

The difference is that Hillary isn't a total scumbag.

The difference I see is that Hillary's support is hers to sell.  The senate post isn't Blagojevich's.


That's basically it.  Hillary was operating within the law--slippery perhaps--but within the law.  Governor Baloneysandwich is over there in Tony Soprano territory!
::)

That's basically it.  Hillary was operating within the law--slippery perhaps--but within the law.  Governor Baloneysandwich is over there in Tony Soprano territory!
::)
   


Yeah, Max, but that’s just status quo for his neck of the woods. Of  course there is corruption in political theaters in every state in this great country of ours but the corruption in his tate has gotten a majority of the press over the past fifty years.

The difference, IMHO is substantive.  There was speculation that Hillary's support would be luke warm at best in hopes that Obama would lose.  My guess is that the Clinton camp figured that such a course would alienate most of the party and damn her cause in any case.  The help with her debt, I think, was peripheral.  And as others have said, the support was hers to give for whatever reason, the senate seat does not belong to R.B.