Hillary Clinton Says 'Yes' to Playboy, 'No' to Hustler

from avn

By: David Sullivan
Posted: 1:30 pm PDT 4-17-2007

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Hillary Clinton's first-quarter campaign finance filing reveals that the former first lady recently accepted a $2,300 contribution from Playboy founder Hugh Hefner.

-advertisement-
Clinton's acceptance of the Hefner donation contrasts with her rejection of a $1,000 contribution from Hustler publisher Larry Flynt during her Senate campaign two years ago.

When asked why he thought Clinton took Hefner's money but rejected his own contribution two years ago, Flynt replied, "Well, I guess she probably sees Hugh Hefner as harmless, and maybe she's safer with Playboy than she is with Hustler."

"She has every right to denounce me, and to denounce pornography � but she can still take my money," Flynt said. "And if she can't take my money, she's lost something much more important � my vote."

Submitted on March 28, Hefner's contribution is one of 60,000 donations in Clinton's $28.6 million first-quarter fundraising statement filed with the Federal Election Commission on Sunday.

According to Newsday, a Clinton spokesman "wouldn't explain why the candidate believed Flynt's money was dirty and Hefner's was clean."

That's cold man..Larry Flynt is one of my idols.

Hillary Clinton *pulls a face*
urghh

She's a retard for throwing away the porno vote. With how much is spent on porn every year, what a fool to deny that demographic. Hustler is also totally funny and leftist.

I don't know I can see how one could like one and not the other I would say playboy is classier and I can almost look at the photography is more artistic ala blueblood vs hustler which is more like back door bimbos 5

I wouldn't vote for hillary even if she was running for dog catcher.

It is a trick question. If she accepts the money, she is tied to pornographers which is a vote killer even with the porn watching demographic, but it basically tells me that she will actively not represent the interests of Larry Flint who is to my understanding, a citizen.

When you are sending campaign funds, it should be a message that you support what a candidate is saying they will do (and not, you know, buying appointments and contracts when we invade a foreign country... for example). When a candidate accepts money from some, it is expected that favors are owed, but when they refuse money, it is saying that, in an effort to be disassociated with your name, they will work against you. She will crap on Larry Flint just to make a show.

You know what I would like to see from campaign finance reform? Candidates should not be allowed to know where the money comes from. No favors and no snubs.

If Hilary Clinton ever won the presidency, I would kill myself.

hustler has some amazing photography in my opinion.


"Candidates should not be allowed to know where the money comes from. No favors and no snubs."
i like that idea ^

why does everybody gotta hate on hilary


with our current president, im surprised people are not a little more supportive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GnArKiLL

why does everybody gotta hate on hilary


with our current president, im surprised people are not a little more supportive.

---

If Hillary ran last time I might have been, but Bush can't run again. Don't get be wrong, the Republican candidates don't exactly fill me with rainbows and puppies either. The thought of a Clinton / Guilliani election makes me wonder why I vote in these things. It's like a doctor asking if you want to be blind or deaf.

As for why, she is already pushing the Democratic party to the with us or against us mentality I hated about Bush. In the world community we need a politician to fix things a lot more than we need a leader. She jumped on the feel good blame videogames bandwagon, but dropped universal health care as soon as it got hard. Which do you think will fix more of our problems, limiting the sale of video games to children (cause it worked so well with music) or actual mental health care available to the mentally ill?

There are other reasons, but most of them flare up and fade in the shadow of the all powerful Bush. It is hard to remember one of Hillaries votes when the prez decides we don't need to look for corruption among contractors in Iraq.

I love Larry. Not too many people can say they took a bullet for porn.

Hustler > Playboy

Granted, Hugh Hefner was an innovator, and there's no question that's he's done a lot to make this country less uptight, but I have one major gripe with Playboy.

They are afraid to show vaginas, and they airbrush the hell out of that whole region.

I want to see the full girl, not just an edited dollhouse version.

I wonder what Bill thinks about the subject.

I think that it doesn't matter where the money comes from.. When I run for Pres in 2015-16 whatever. i would take money from the Nazi's, Jews, bulimics, Hollywood, Pimps, Dealers, Big Business and small business.. Any money is good...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morning Glory

I wonder what Bill thinks about the subject.

---

he probably thinks she should wait until she gets an offer from fox magazine

i work in a porno shop
im surrounded by porn, so i read hustler for the articles and fucked up cartoons

That is awesome Grebo

Ain't politicians great!

I don't live in america but we had something like this happen in NZ.

Or National party leader of the time Don Brash took a large donation from a group called the "exclusive breatherin" (read *cult*) for his run for prime minister, he lost and the donation was never mentioned untill he was investigated for something or other, the public out cry was huge, he steped down.

Personaly i would rather have a porn promoting president/ prime minister than a cult puppet.

what about a donation from a porn cult?