Change you can believe in.

Let 'em stew until they're good and cooked.

They should all be run out of Washington.

When I first came to this site, I advocated moving the Capitol to the middle of Kansas somewhere, building a fence around the offices of Congress, and enforcing/creating bribery laws.

Anything Congress needs to know about an industry, they can get from a website.

Dem pols are at least more open to public financing of campaigns than the GNOP; getting the dirty money out of politics and working full time for the American people instead of spending half their time courting industry for campaign donations.

Well, those fired ACORN employees need jobs....

Obama is much kinder than I would have been.

Lobbying should be a capital offense.

when will he stop appointing lobbyists to his administration?

Obama is much kinder than I would have been.
Lobbying should be a capital offense.
#6 | Posted by MaryTylerWhore at 2009-10-07 05:19 PM

Agree 100%.

Where are all of the Faithers, Birthers and Teabaggers on this issue? I'm curious if they perceive this as a 180 from BushCo's reign..

ps - Every time I see your handle I hear "You're gonna fake it after alllll!" [da-de-dat-daaaa, da-dat!, plink, plink, plink, plink.. plink, meow]

I would like to believe that this isn't just one junta taking over another, BUT I'M CURSED TO NOT BE THAT FUCKING STUPID.

The only 'change' has been the sitting President. They can give us health care or $500 to all newborns but it is just so we'll shut up. Scraps from the table.

This is a step in the right direction.

This might very well be the first decent ballsy thing he's done.

when will he stop appointing lobbyists to his administration?

#7 | Posted by semtex111

They get a new Title, you fool....Czars.

#4 | Posted by Corky

You started out making a good point but by the time you got to the third paragraph you did a 180 and became a political hack.

but by the time you got to the third paragraph you did a 180 and became a political hack.

Corky can't help himself. He is amongst those handful of partisans who can only regurgitate, "Republicans bad. Republicans bad." over and over. And these fools wonder why they are never taken seriously.

Corky can't help himself. He is amongst those handful of partisans who can only regurgitate, "Republicans bad. Republicans bad."

I think that's a bit of an exaggeration. But if he is a member of that class, he's one of the least rabid among them.

They get a new Title, you fool....Czars.

#13 | Posted by wisgod at 2009-10-07 08:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

Czars....you act as if this is a name Obama gave them.

They actually began using the term under Nixon.....but anything you turds need to try and make him sound 'commie like'.

Where are all of the Faithers, Birthers and Teabaggers on this issue?

Hiring lobbyists.

#4 | Posted by Corky

Missed the story on Schumer getting 1.65 million in contributions from Wall Street.

Obama doesn't need no stinkin' lobbyists--he has worms like the ex Van Jones-types to head up policy.

Fuck K Street.

Every consultant, advisor,czar or person who is not screened by our corrupt congress, should go through separate Public Scrutiny.

Congress is the biggest bitch of lobbyist contributions. They are whores of pay-ola.

The more you can donate to a congressman, the more they could do for you. Ask Charlie Wrangle and Kriss Dudd.

The title of "czar" is a media fabrication.

There's no such title or job description in the federal government.

OTH, it does have a nice foreign ring to it . . . for those posters who like to sound oh so cosmopolitan.

The title of "czar" is a media fabrication...
OTH, it does have a nice foreign ring to it

Expecially considerint its etymology. It's derived from the proper noun "Caesar".

"Where are all of the Faithers, Birthers and Teabaggers on this issue?"
Hiring lobbyists.
#18 | Posted by northguy3 at 2009-10-07 10:24 PM

I expected more, but at least we've got a few. FF for high probability!

"#4 | Posted by Corky"
Missed the story on Schumer getting 1.65 million in contributions from Wall Street.
#19 | Posted by MURPHY at 2009-10-07 10:26 PM

Tell you what - you keep doing what you are doing - watchdog the Democrats. I don't trust them either, particularly the very well-off and the very well-paid.

For what it's worth, I also detest the way that Republican officials have abused their own party.

I would appear that leftits and rtards do have anti-corruption as our common platform. Together we can not only come to agreement, but hopefully project some clear, accurate determinations off the global political sounding board.

"Fury on K Street" LOL

Trent Lott must be going off like a volcano right now.

He had such high hopes of expanding his influence in the lobbying business.

Where are all of the Faithers, Birthers and Teabaggers on this issue?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the "faithers" the religious zealots? "Birthers" are concerned about the veracity of Obama's birthplace, right? And isn't "teabaggers" the name given by the left to the people protesting Obama's spending practices?

OK -- what do lobbyists have to do with any of these three things? Maybe that'll help answer your question as to why these three groups aren't here.

Just a guess.

This might very well be the first decent ballsy thing he's done.

I thought green-lighting the Navy Seals vs. the pirates was pretty ballsy. Imagine if a sniper had missed his target a la Randy Weaver... the right would still be talking about it.

Heck I might still be talking about it too, seeing as I'm still talking about Randy Weaver.

GOATMAN

You're right. This thread is about lobbyists on advisory committees.

I think it's safe to assume that none of these groups have positions on Obama's advisory boards.

However, they all consider themselves lobbyists, even if they're only courting public opinion.

Which, of course, they all hope will influence Obama's policy choices.

But you already know that I'm sure.

"Where are all of the Faithers, Birthers and Teabaggers on this issue?"

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the "faithers" the religious zealots? "Birthers" are concerned about the veracity of Obama's birthplace, right? And isn't "teabaggers" the name given by the left to the people protesting Obama's spending practices?
OK -- what do lobbyists have to do with any of these three things? Maybe that'll help answer your question as to why these three groups aren't here.
Just a guess.
#27 | Posted by goatman at 2009-10-08 01:51 AM

Those groupings all fervently protest President Obama, particularly prior to any decisions he's yet made. So, I'm curious what they would feel about this particular change - would they perceive it as anti-American or anti-corporate?

Or, maybe they would feign stupidity and request I restate the obvious..

While I don't fall that well into any of the 3 categories listed above, I guess anti-tax hike or less-damn-gov't would fit well enough.

I like the IDEA of him getting rid of lobbyist in advisory boards, but only if he is getting good advice from people who will tell him the truth. If all he surrounds himself with is "yes men", and no one else, then there is no improvement at all.

I like the idea of hiring forensic accountants to review members of congress at random and if they find something, the congressman is arrested on the floor and taken out for trial. Wonder how many would be taking an early retirement to a non-extraditing country the next day? My guess, 534 [Is Teddy the only vacancy?]

1LIBERTARIAN

I like the idea of hiring forensic accountants to review members of congress at random

With . . . or without . . . secret warrants?

There's lots of wiggle-room for partisan abuse in that idea. It sounds like something that Karl Rove or Dick Cheney would think up.

No secret warrant needed... they would be investigating the records of public officials looking for corruption. If you are worried about 1, hire 10 from each party and turn them loose. Better yet, hire one for each member of congress. Throw all of them in jail and start over!

[not fair, their might be a person in congress that hasn't lined their own pocket. If so, I haven't heard about them... but its possible. Ron Paul, maybe? Who knows.]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the "faithers" the religious zealots? "Birthers" are concerned about the veracity of Obama's birthplace, right? And isn't "teabaggers" the name given by the left to the people protesting Obama's spending practices?

Faithers are people who choose faith over commonsense.

Birthers are people that can't find anything more legitimate to bitch about.

Tea baggers are well, tea baggers. What do you want, a more graphic description?

Obama werks to reduce the over-influence of lobbyists by preventing them from sitting on governmental advisory boards?

Make the revolving door from Big Gov to Big Biz move a little more slowly?

Good fer him sez Spud.

Lobbying is, essentially, legalised bribery.

Do not want.

Be Well.

Obama is at least doing something I have been bitching about for decades. Good for him. Screw everyone else that wines and moans. It's about time. Anyone with a negative word about this can eat my worms.

Anyone with a negative word about this can eat my worms.

You have worms? Yuk!

Now THIS would be Reform!!

go O'man go!!

#14, #15

Leave it to the repugs to find fault in reducing corporate influence in D.C. Didn't Krugman peg you guys the other day? Somehting about spite? LMAO...

Not to rain on anybody's parade, but lobbyists in some form are critically necessary to provide informed votes on issues. So, hating them all is stupid. Now, of course, the corrupt and dishonest ones are a problem, but that's true of every profession, including the politicians themselves....

I belong to an organization called NFIB (National Federation of Independent Businesses)

I don't have the time to go up to Washington to keep an eye on every piece of idiotic legislation congress is proposing.. (like Cap and Trade for instance)

SO I guess I support lobbyists who I indirectly pay to be sure that congress is considering my interests..

OR.. a Congress that would only meet for about one week a year.. maybe then our lives and property would be safe from them..

Or how about a national bi-partisan campaign to re-elect NOBODY.. that would help.

"They actually began using the term under Nixon.....but anything you turds need to try and make him sound 'commie like'."

Which is especially funny 'cause the commies KILLED THE CZARS. Ah, history. (Yes, I'm oversimplifying. But I like drama.)

"Not to rain on anybody's parade, but lobbyists in some form are critically necessary to provide informed votes on issues. So, hating them all is stupid. Now, of course, the corrupt and dishonest ones are a problem, but that's true of every profession, including the politicians themselves...."

Fair enough, and a political friend of mine pointed this out, then another friend said it's not all capitalistic tomfoolery (which is what I was ranting about at the time). As a teacher, I'm glad there are education lobbies, and as a citizen, I'm glad that various nonprofit groups can have voice in the system. But... yeah, I guess I'm conflicted. How do we ensure that lobbyists aren't corrupt? Well, fuck, same way we ensure politicians aren't corrupt, huh? Fuck.

Now if he will boot the tax cheats, the thugs, the criminals, and the incompetents we would be getting somewhere. I just hope he turns off the lights before he leaves the Oval Office.

From Webster "to conduct activities amide at influencing public officials and especially members of a legislative body on legislation", " to attempt to influence or sway (as a public official) toward a desired action.

Lobbyist represents all sides of the wing (left to right). They represent all types of opinions from global warming, high taxes, abortion, ObamaCare (for and against), business interests, war, and community action groups. With our elected officials clamming up, no transparencies (no citizens can't read a bill), loading up administrations with extreme ideologies (left or right), this appears a move by the administration to withdraw back inside of their cocoon and make decisions within the inner circle.

Remember, to disallow lobbying means to eliminate outside influence. This is another step to tyranny. Maybe, the administration just meant they are not going to allow lobbying from people that do not share their ideology.

I'm not sure this is a good thing. Everyone should have the opportunity to influence decisions that affect everyone. Without lobbyists (paid or pro gratis), we may never know what's going on in our government until it is too late. We do not life in a dictatorship, this America.

I'm not a lobbyist or represent a lobbyist. I'm a small business man trying to grow a business. I believe that we all should have the ability to influence. Without that we are nothing but drones. Ask yourself this question, if this was such a great thing, why didn't O have another press conference? They leaked it on the WH blog that no one reads!

So, hating them all is stupid... #40 | Posted by jonryker

First of all, who is talking about hate? Secondly, with the level of corruption in DC, much propagated by special interests, what is really stupid, reducing special interests in DC or your post?

Obama's "Safe Schools Czar" needs to be bounced next. This ass clown we elected to be our leader has given his ear to advisors that should shock any normal person.

10/1/09 - Washington Examiner

Kevin Jennings, President Obama's Assistant Deputy Secretary of the Office of Safe and Drug FreeSchools at the U.S. Department of Education, is in hot water this week for having failed to report that a 15-year-old sophomore student in his school had told him of having sex with an older man.

But failure to report what appeared to be a case of statuatory rape of a child may be the least of Jennings' worries. Lori Roman of Regular Folks United points to statements by Jennings a decade or more ago when he praised Harry Hay of the North American Association for Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), which promotes the legalization of sexual abuse of young boys by older men.

Roman provides damning details and links here. She also notes that Jennings wrote the forward "to a book called Queering Elementary Education. And another fellow you may have heard of wrote one of the endorsements on the book jacketBill Ayers." Ayers, of course, is the Weather Underground bomber from the 1960s who is just an "acquaintance" of Obama.

"that a 15-year-old sophomore student in his school had told him of having sex with an older man."

Except that he wasn't 15, he was 16 though the right wing liars have changed that little but important detail in their version of the story. Perhaps the student involved should speak out...guess what, he did....

"In a statement obtained by CNN, the former student, who wanted to be called Brewster, wrote: "Since I was of legal consent at the time, the 15-minute conversation I had with Mr. Jennings 21 years ago is of nobody's concern but his and mine. However, since the Republican noise machine is so concerned about my 'well-being' and that of America's students, they'll be relieved to know that I was not 'inducted' into homosexuality, assaulted, raped, or sold into sexual slavery."

"Remember, to disallow lobbying means to eliminate outside influence. This is another step to tyranny."

I simply can't stop laughing after reading this tripe.

"I don't have the time to go up to Washington to keep an eye on every piece of idiotic legislation congress is proposing.. (like Cap and Trade for instance)"

That's why you have elected representatives who represent you equally with the rest of their constituents. What you really want is someone who has personal relationships with Congressmen and Senators to push legislation which you prefer instead of for the representatives to consider how each piece of legislation will effect all constituents, even the one's too poor to hire lobbyiests.

I have a brother who was a lobbyist so I've heard the pro-lobbyist song and dance enough times to understand it. If we had federally funded election campaigns and strict laws to keep money out of politics then lobbying would be a way for Congress to learn about issues but as it is today it is a way for Congressmen and Senators to raise money and thus it is a corrupt practice which is ruining this country.

Hearing Danni defend an older man using a 16 year old unemancipated boy for sex sort of brings a tear to yer eye. A more honorable act I cannot think of.

And I'm sure that if it were a republican appointee who engaged in the same conduct, we would be hearing the same reasonable, principled defense.

Liberals ... you gotta love'm!

"If we had federally funded election campaigns and strict laws to keep money out of politics then lobbying would be a way for Congress to learn about issues but as it is today it is a way for Congressmen and Senators to raise money and thus it is a corrupt practice which is ruining this country."

Better yet Danni, if government was not in the business of doling out all that largess (benefits, money and programs) to begin with, there would be no lobbying and corruption tied to those same benefits, money and programs.

A government that governs least governs best.

"A government that governs least governs best."

Hail Somalia!

Somalia is a failed state. For you libtards that thought NULLIFIDAN's comment was peachy keen clever, that that means there is no government.

More to the point though and illustrative on the "government does all" side of the spectrum, just look at all communist, socialist, fascist and totalitarian regimes.

Does that example work for ya?

"Hearing Danni defend an older man using a 16 year old unemancipated boy for sex sort of brings a tear to yer eye. A more honorable act I cannot think of."

Guess you never clicked on the link, the kid didn't have sex with the guy. I know, you're disappointed. As if you give a crap about that kid. YOu care only about assasinating the character of an Obama appointee. I will say this, Mr. Jennings is a much more honorable person than you. Who knows what skeletons are in your closet??? I don't even want to know.

Nulli was just giving you an example of the type of nation you seem to want. What's the matter, it isn't as pretty as you thought it would be????

"Guess you never clicked on the link, the kid didn't have sex with the guy."

I didn't say he did. Read my post again SFB. (Shit For Brains) I said, "I'm sure that if it were a republican appointee who engaged in the same conduct, ..."

Why don't you familiarize yourself with what the "honorable" Mr. Jennings did, or should I say, didn't do.

"I will say this, Mr. Jennings is a much more honorable person than you."

How surprising! Like I said, smart, articulate and entertaining!

"Nulli was just giving you an example of the type of nation you seem to want."

When did I indicate that I wanted a nation with no government? Let's review:

A government that governs least, governs best.

Notice that I didn't say "A failed state governs best." You certainly are a smart, articulate and entertaining democrat.

"The President recognizes that some lobbyists advocate for public interest goals shared by this Administration," Eisen wrote. "Nevertheless, the President made a commitment to the American people to reduce the influence of lobbyists in Washington."

Hard to believe Frank Rich would be the one to point out this broken campaign promise.

Op-Ed ColumnistThe Rabbit Ragu Democrats

It's in this context that you have to wonder what some of the Obama era's most moneyed and White House-connected lobbyists were thinking as they preened before a Washington Post reporter recently for two lengthy articles. We're not even nine months into the new administration, yet these swaggering, utterly un-self-aware influence peddlers seem determined to prove that nothing except the party affiliations has changed in the Beltway's pay-for-play culture since Tom DeLay. If these lobbyists were stocks, I'd short them.

One of the articles focused on Heather Podesta "The It Girl of a New Generation of Lobbyists" who lobbies for health care players like Eli Lilly, HealthSouth and Cigna. Podesta is half of what The Post has called a "mega-lobbying" couple. Her husband, with his own separate (and larger) lobbying shop, is Tony Podesta, the brother of John Podesta, the Clinton White House chief of staff who ran the Obama transition. Back in November, Tony Podesta told The Times that only "very unsophisticated" clients would hire his firm because of his brother's role in assembling the new administration. That encyclopedic and ever-expanding list of "unsophisticated" clients includes Amgen and the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity and that's just among the A's. His business was up 57 percent from last year in the first six months of 2009. Heather Podesta's was up 65 percent.

More from Rich...

Barack Obama promised a change from this revolving-door, behind-closed-doors collaboration between special interests and government. He vowed to "do our business in the light of day" with health care negotiations broadcast on C-Span and to "restore the vital trust between people and their government." He said, "I intend to tell the corporate lobbyists that their days of setting the agenda in Washington are over." That those lobbyists would so extravagantly flaunt their undiminished role shows just how little they believe that a new sheriff has arrived in Dodge.

In his scathing Wall Street Journal column on The Post articles last week, Thomas Frank crystallized the gap between Obama's pledge and this reality. "There is something uniquely depressing about the fact that the National Portrait Gallery's version of the Barack Obama Hope' poster previously belonged to a pair of lobbyists." That's no joke: It was donated by Tony and Heather Podesta.

Obama's promise to make Americans trust the government again was not just another campaign bullet point; it's the foundation of his brand of governance and essential to his success in office. At the first anniversary of the TARP bailout of the banks, we can see how far he has to go. Americans' continued suspicion that Washington is in cahoots with powerful interests in joints like Tosca is contributing to their confusion and skepticism about what's happening out of view in the battle over health care reform.

The public is not wrong. The administration's legislative deals with the pharmaceutical companies were made in back rooms. Business Week reported in early August that the UnitedHealth Group and its fellow insurance giants had already quietly rounded up moderate Democrats in the House to block any public health care option that would compete with them for business. UnitedHealth's hired Beltway gunslingers include both Elmendorf Strategies and Daschle, a public supporter of the public option who nonetheless does some of his "wink, wink" counseling for UnitedHealth. The company's in-house lobbyist is a former chief of staff to Steny Hoyer, the House majority leader. Gephardt consults there too.

Danni would have us believe that had Bush appointed a Special Advisor to the President in the role of Safe Schools Czar who became aware of a sophomore student (male of female) being used for sex by an older man and kept quiet about it, donning the hat of an enabler, that this new appointee would be an honorable man. Danni would rise to his defense and point out that there was nothing wrong with the underlying sexual relationship and proudly exclaim that republicans and democrats attacking him are just engaging in a character assassination of Bush.

I will say that you Danni, are the worst kind of liberal turd.

"I will say that you Danni, are the worst kind of liberal turd."

Yeah, let me think back a few years, to the case of one Mark Foley and the behavior of then Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert....oh yes, I remember the outrage expressed by the righties right here....when they realized Hastert was totally aware of the real crimes that had been committed by Foley which weren't servere enough, even when confessed to Dennis Hastert for Hastert and the other leaders of the Republican party to report it, hell they encouraged him, no demanded that he run for reelection.
Sorry, but the Party of No has lived in a glass house far too long to start throwing stones.
Notice Hopey Changey, I don't need to sink to your level, and use profanity and such as you do, because I have a memory and can recall facts that make Mr. Jennings behavior look like nothing at all in comparison to your former leaders.