The View From Here

A blog about Politics.
About drilnliftcrude


Member Since:
March 14, 2006
Last Signed In:
December 02, 2008
Profile Views:
1228
Blog Views:
4619
View Profile
Send a Message
Send To A Friend
Sign Guestbook
Add as a Friend

Previous Posts
The Famine of 2009?
"His Confident Smile and Kind Eyes are an Inspiration to Us All"
Who Needs a Drummer When You Have a Rusty Old Tractor
They said if Obama won, rich people would refuse to pay taxes. And they were right!
Screw The Honeymoon, Load The Torpedoes!
Apalling Racist Attacks By Gays Against Blacks!
Obama Claus Will Buy Your Gas and Pay Your Mortgage!
Teaching His 9 Year Old to Steal Campaign Signs, Then Lying For Him.
The Big Losers This Election: Women
Yes I Am Crazy to Post This, Map of Newspaper Endorsements
Archives
March 08
April 08
May 08
June 08
July 08
August 08
September 08
October 08
November 08
December 08
Subscribe!
RSS 2.0 feed RSS 2.0
Add to My Yahoo
Add to My Google
Add to Bloglines
Add to My AOL

Share!


drilnliftcrude - > The View From Here -> The Audacity of Hype and Lobbyists
The Audacity of Hype and Lobbyists

While reading some comments posted recently, it came to my attention that some people still believe that Barrack Obama is demonstrating his moral integrity by making a big issue of not accepting donations from "federal registered lobbyists".  But is he keeping his promise by accepting donations from the spouses of the big Washington lobbyists?  Or is he keeping the promise that you understood by accepting money from lobbyists registered in State capitals?  Do we need a leader that will require that we hire our own attorneys to read between the lines of his statements?  Symbolism over substance, change we can believe in!

Read about it here.

"The campaign has no problem accepting money from the spouses of Washington lobbyists. A database search conducted for this column by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks campaign-finance issues, found that more than 20 spouses of prominent Washington lobbyists have donated to the Obama campaign, including the wives of Dan Glickman, the head of the Motion Picture Association of America; Norman Brownstein, a prominent Denver-based lawyer who has lobbied for Oracle, Toshiba, and Comcast; and Stuart Pape of Patton Boggs, Washington’s foremost lobbying firm, who has lobbied for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, and the Smokeless Tobacco Council.

The campaign accepts money from lobbyists registered in state capitals. It accepts money from partners at law firms that engage in lobbying. It accepts money from the C.E.O.’s, chairs, and officers of corporations, but not their lobbyists. Obama has received more than $627,000 in contributions from employees of
Goldman Sachs, including, for example, $2,300 (the maximum contribution allowed) from the likes of managing director George Butcher. But Michael Berman, a registered lobbyist (and a former adviser to Walter Mondale), cannot give money to Obama because his firm, the Duberstein Group, has lobbied on behalf of Goldman Sachs on energy and tax issues. Aren’t such policies a little inconsistent with the ban? “Maybe,” said the senior Obama official. “But it’s important symbolism.” "

 

Posted in these Groups:
Topics:
posted by drilnliftcrude on Saturday, September 20, 2008 at 07:47 AM
Report a Violation
Viewed 21 times
1 comments from 1 users

1

posted by catpaw on Sep 20, 2008 at 08:14 AM

In fairness to both candidates, they have tried to discourage keeping lobbyists in their campaigns. They tried to keep them out of the respective conventions. Everybody said, "Yeah, great idea," and went to the gala parties anyway. Influence peddling was an aspect of American politics before the US was a country. It's an institution that's not going to go away simply because people of morals, integrety and honesty would have it so. If idealism cannot win the voters, well, there's bribery.

1

  (You need to be signed in to leave a comment)

BAKERSFIELD.COM HOT TOPICS:

Advertisement