[johniegrad]

True but there goes the moral high ground on this issue.

[Miss Marple]

No, these are friends of long-standing, who raised money without inducements. And by the way, did you note how they included Pataki and Owen, who are GOVERNORS?

The difference is that Clinton actually had a list of how much money you had to raise before you got to stay at the White House, and many times he wasn't even there.

[noexcuses]

True but there goes the moral high ground on this issue.

I respectfully disagree. Everyone one of the people mentioned have other connections to GWB and family than just fundraising. In contrast, clinton didn't have any "long time family friends", he didn't personally know most of the folks, neither he or she were "home" during the majority of the stays, and the only tie was the $$$ donation. Big difference - of course the media won't mention any of this!

[AppyPappy]

True but there goes the moral high ground on this issue.

You mean the Democrats I assume.

[HenryLeeII]

True but there goes the moral high ground on this issue.

Not really. I know the media simpletons will spin it that way, but don't forget that Xlinton was selling access to the White House for stated prices (i.e. the teas with photo-ops, overnight in the Lincoln Bedroom, etc.). With Bush it appears more that its long-term friends, party associates, etc., that are also donors/fundraisers in addition to the relationship.