She sounds more and more like a republican with every passing day.

Taxman, remember the Democratic Leadership Council? The attmept to bury the populist tradition in the Democratic Party? Bill Clinton's presidency was essentially one of a moderate/liberal Republican.

I wish I could have seen Hillary's face when this happened:

Edwards asked crowd members how many of them were represented by lobbyists. A few hands went up, and his point was made.

LOL

Bill Clinton's presidency was essentially one of a moderate/liberal Republican.

Bill started shifting when the control of Congress shitfed to the republicans, IMO.

Zat, that is probably the face she wanted to make.

"probably the face she wanted to make."

Posted by taxman

Must be the ben wa balls.

Once again Hillary shows her true colors. I can't understand why people think anything will change if she is elected.

"Markos Moulitsas Zuniga, founder of Daily Kos and spiritual leader of the convention, said Clinton still might be able to mitigate her problems.

"We may decide she's not our first choice, but she's not a bad choice," he said."

Nice to see that not all lefties are apparently willing to let their own egos become so entwined with a particular candidate as not to be able to keep the best interests of their country and their party in mind.

Yeah, Hillary isn't about to give up those big buck donations she's been getting in exchange for screwing thousands of American workers out of their jobs by making sure her best buddy here in the U.S. -- Indian foreign worker insourcing corporation "Tata" -- gets tens of thousands more H-1B visas as they continue bringing in foreign workers to replace American jobs.

Hillary gives Tata the H-1B visas, Tata gives Hillary major campaign bucks and both Hillary and Tata give the American worker the shaft.

Hillary has nothing to do with the best interest of the demorcat party nor the interest of the typical democrat voter. She is the democrat shill for big business. Like Obama said, she is Bush-Cheney lite.

Lessee, Markos Moulitsas Zuniga, founder of Daily Kos and spiritual leader of the convention.... or "Taxman"......

such a hard choice.....

Bill started shifting when the control of Congress shitfed to the republicans, IMO.

Posted by taxman at 2007-08-05 10:10 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e


so what you are saying is that he bent with the prevailing winds......


and hillary is right in a way........there are lobbyists who work for good.....surely there has to be somewhere...

and I know where.........if a lobbyist is working for something that would help you, then you are all for it..and if they are working against you or for someone else......well thats different.......and by you I mean anyone, not just someone from the left.....that seems to be human nature, dont you think?

"Nice to see that not all lefties are apparently willing to let their own egos become so entwined with a particular candidate as not to be able to keep the best interests of their country and their party in mind."

Corky,

This is how the Chimp in chief was originally elected, then re-elected, and his policies supported. Republicans blindly supported everything he did because he was your one trick gimped up pony. Or wanted to ban abortion, ban Gay marriage, worship the flag, conceal their shiny metal .45 penises, etc, etc. All special interest issues that are virtually irrelevant to the security and vitality of the country.

Bill Clinton's presidency was essentially one of a moderate/liberal Republican.

Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Bill Clinton did whatever the polls said he should do. The man had no principals at all. Legslate by poll! All he had on his mind was sex and an ugly woman would do fine. At least JFK had some taste in his partners and they were all willing.

so what you are saying is that he bent with the prevailing winds......

And the polls.

Obama looks better every time Hillary speaks.
Apparently, those Republican candidates are worried about him because they sure try to lie about what he says a lot.

What Rethug culture war issues have to do with special interests such as teachers, fireman, police, or environmental concerns, I am not sure.

Not all special interests are equal. K Street lobbyists have very little resemblace to the ones mentioned above.

BLT,

Lobbyist = Socialism. They represent not one individual's view but a collective that inevitably become subvertive to "the common good". Even if that "common good" is negative to the rest of America. Take the NRA, IDL and ARP. Three anti-American lobbies.

You should hate lobbies if you are a true conservative.

""A lot of those lobbyists, whether you like it or not, represent real Americans, they actually do,"

Yes, typically they represent a small group of Americans who are promoting something that is bad for the vast majority of us.

Besides all of this, Hillary has the most condescending tone about her. It irritates me to hear her speak.

FU, the NRA defends the constitution of the United States. That sure is anti-american. Are you that stupid? They have not asked that any leglislation be passed. They want the unconstitunal leglislation to be done away with, such as the McCain-Fingold bill. You know, the campaign finance bill that was going to clean-up politics.

Besides all of this, Hillary has the most condescending tone about her. It irritates me to hear her speak.

Posted by GIMPSTER at 2007-08-06 09:56 AM

Of course, because she is better than most everyone. IHNSHO

Besides all of this, Hillary has the most condescending tone about her. It irritates me to hear her speak.

It's because she thinks she is the "inevitable" democrat nominees and invincible so she can get away with it.

Sniper are you saying you are in favor of "palm-greasing" in politics?

Sniper are you saying you are in favor of "palm-greasing" in politics?

tax, what does defending the constitution have to do with palm greasing? The NRA is a lobby but to my knowledge they do not wine and dine or bribe the politicians. They donate to campaigns which is legal and the members do let their reps know what they think on issues.

They do not fill freezers with cold hard cash.

I wonder who you would get to admit to a mistake first?

Hillary or Dubya?

Its a dead heat...you can't have government/president worship if the great one is not infallible.

and I know where.........if a lobbyist is working for something that would help you, then you are all for it..and if they are working against you or for someone else......well thats different.......

Not to me. I've never paid a dime to a lobyist, and I never will.
To me, using a lobyist is cheating. It's saying that you can't get what you want fairly, or convince your fellow citizens that you're right, so you bribe a lawmaker into changing the law to your favor.

So many times lobbying works against the little guy, and contrary to the laws of supply and demand.

Let's take eminent domain for example. A little old lady owns a house that she's lived in for 40 years, and she doesn't want to move. Along comes a developer who wants her house, but the offering price isn't worth her hastle to move.
Now basic free market economies say the developer should have to pay enough to get her to move if he wants the land so badly.
Instead, he lobbies his Congressman to get the house taken by eminent domain.
And he argues that it's all for the 'greater good' because his new development will create jobs and everything. And he's correct, but then the little old lady who owns the land should get a fair market value, and not be squeezed out.

Furio is correct, lobbying is basically sociallism.

Hillary told you in the prior debate that she is PROGRESSIVE..!!

Hillary is way too Smart to let "Radicals" or "Extreme Liberals" or "LOBBYISTS" control her Agenda

That is what went wrong with "Conservatives" - the Radical NEOCONS captured the Govt, SOLD IT and controlled everything to Extremes!

Have you learned NOTHING from the RepubTards Radical mistakes for 7 Years!!!??

The lobbyists will say however that the little old lady is free to lobby back. Sure, with what money?

Maybe the little old lady can band together with all the other little old ladies around the country and fight back.

But then the developer will band together with all the other developers, and the fight's over before it began.

Lobbying means the people with the money win and get richer, while those without money lose and get poorer.

Because for every union lobbying to get more benefits, there are CEOs and corporations with far more money lobbying to undo those benefits, and the politicians are only going to listen to those with the biggest purse, not to those who make the best argument.

This is news?

I thought 'republithugs' were the only ones with ties to Lobbyists?? What a suprise!!

No, it's just that Rethugs under Delay made K Street law writing and Congressional/Lobbyist job trading a enterprise level business.

Edwards asked crowd members how many of them were represented by lobbyists. A few hands went up, and his point was made.

LOL
* * * *

That's because the audience was either ignorant, or made up of the chronically unemployed. Union members, retirees, all the professions, students, educators, anyone working for the public sector or for private industry--has lobbyists they don't even know about. And Edwards should know better than anyone, as his campaign is being underwritten by the Trial Lawyers' lobby.

Somehow, I doubt he had his own hand raised.

RiR, you're dead on...

Trial Lawyers lobbying courts and supports virtually EVERY Dem member of Congress and the Senate.

but... I have to correct you a bit...

The unemployed have the entire Dem party lobbying for them.

The Union Members not only have one of the most powerful lobbying efforts, but they steal the money from their members to support it.

Retirees have the AARP and they spend as much time trying to scare their own members about things, as they do lobbying Congress.

The NEA brought us 75% graduation rates while protecting teachers that can't teach.

"The Union Members not only have one of the most powerful lobbying efforts, but they steal the money from their members to support it."

How does that happen?

""The Union Members not only have one of the most powerful lobbying efforts, but they steal the money from their members to support it."

How does that happen?"

Well one thing they do is force all union members to strike. If you don't strike you are out of the union and then treated as a scab for the duration of your worklife.

I still remember eating shitty government surplus cheese when my father was on strike for a few months at UAW. The best one was when UAW decided to strike against Thyssen in a buy out factory because they said "either we cut benefits to become profitable or we close the factory". UAW called their bluff. Thyssen closed the factory. Dumb UAW reps didn't realize Germans don't bluff much and actually try to be honest in labor relations. Dad took early retirement.

I think unions harm their members in equal proportion to supporting them nowadays.

CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa (AP) -- Democratic presidential contender John Edwards on Monday criticized former President Clinton, arguing that he allowed corporate insiders to shape the 1993 North American Free Trade Agreement that has cost U.S. jobs.

Looks like they are starting to gang up on Hill.

"force all union members to strike"

The Union Members themselves vote whether or not to strike, whether or not to give it's negotiators strike authorization. They make that decision, it's not made for them.

I think unions harm their members in equal proportion to supporting them nowadays.

Posted by furio


You may be correct.


Unions really had a place and relevance back in the day. However, with the introduction of all sorts of legislation (40 hour work-week, minimum wage, etc) their relevance has diminished considerably. Thus, they have to try and manufacture problems, or the perception of problems in order to justify their continued existence.

" Dumb UAW reps didn't realize Germans don't bluff much"

I doubt that's how it went down: in labor contract talks, when management claims poverty, they have to open the books to the Union negotiators.

" Thus, they have to try and manufacture problems"

I'd have to laugh if I didn't want to cry.

I've been involved in Unions and in on negotiating sessions for over 20 years now. I have yet to see one rule come about in a vacuum. The only reason Union workers get timed breaks is some idiot owner thought he didn't have to give breaks. A seemingly silly rule about required temperature ranges? Some boss thought 95 in the summer and 45 in the winter was AOK. Reimbursement for mileage over 50 miles? I'm sure you can guess. And the seemingly dumber the stipulation, the more idiotic the manager. No, you can't take their 40hr "flex" schedule and require two 20hr days.

I've believed since the start that, ideally, Unions should work for the day when Unions aren't needed, but has that day come? As we say in Union negotiating parlance, NFW. The way workers are losing benefits at work and the way wages have stagnated, we may need Unions now more than ever.

I think you missed my point, Danforth.


My point being that unions are not nearly as valuable to workers now, as they were very early in the 20th Century.

The way workers are losing benefits at work and the way wages have stagnated, we may need Unions now more than ever.


Unfortunately, the more unions pressure for considerable increases in compensation, the more they are going to drive demand for cheaper, off-shore labor.

"considerable increases in compensation"

Unions of late have been lucky to get wage increases equal to the cost of living, yet corporate profits keep skyrocketing. Weaken Unions and you get a continuation and exacerbation of these trends.

I know you can see the big picture. What will be better for the US in the long run: if we seek equilibrium by lowering our pay standards to theirs, or do we try to raise their standards to ours?

Lobbying should be a fucking capital offense. Automatic death penalty, one appeal, drum 'em outta the gene pool.

Unions really had a place and relevance back in the day. However, with the introduction of all sorts of legislation (40 hour work-week, minimum wage, etc) their relevance has diminished considerably. Thus, they have to try and manufacture problems, or the perception of problems in order to justify their continued existence.

Posted by JeffJ at 2007-08-06 04:49 PM | Reply


They still have relevance today for You see they are the Watchers that make sure those fuckheads in their corporate hoity toity towers are doing right by the employee. That is the trouble with You republicans it's all about the big wigs and fuck the little guy. Why do You think the Republicans are the Elephant and the Democrats the Donkey because it is the DOnkeys that do the real work while Your elephants just lord over them.

Larry

Hillary is playing it very smart, by not pandering to the Leftist Wackos at the Kos convention she looks almost moderate, even conservative.

It's like putting someone 25 lbs overweight in a room full of Sumo wrestlers, all of a sudden the person 25lbs overweight finds he's getting called "skinny" by everyone.

Her position on "lobbying" is sober and rational if unpopular.

After all, what "lobbyists" are doing is legal -- and they are the natural result of the the petition clause of the "1st Amendment" which affords groups and individuals of every stripe the right to air their grievances and pressure our elected officials to act in their interests.

And this folks might be why Hillary may very well win the presidency. Shes the only candidate that not only has one of the best chances of winning, but is sure to be hated on all sides if she does. LOL.

That is the trouble with You republicans it's all about the big wigs and fuck the little guy.


Actually, I am all for the little guy.

I just understand economics and that certain types of legislation, no matter how well-intended, often times results in worsening conditions for the American worker.

Danforth,

Yes there is a vote but it is decided by majority. And if your shop foreman is pushing to strike and if you vote "No"? Unions like UAW and Teamsters are not the same as ILGWU(my alma mater). You vote to strike or your life will be miserable thereafter even if you honor the strike.

In this case UAW was being stupid and trying to make a stand. They gambled with jobs. It caused a large number of workers to be laid off. Was this really a good thing in a shrinking manufacturing economy in the US in the late 80's? I think not.

Simple facts. Company wanted to cut benefits to keep the factory open. Union called strike. Company closed factory.

As a Republican, if we have to lose the general election for the presidency in '08, I sincerely hope Hillary wins. Why? The Gun lobby, the oil industry and every other major corporation and conservative lobby group will be able BUY her vote on issues from drilling in ANWR & gun rights to healthcare reform. We still win!!!! I love this country! LOL!

After all, what "lobbyists" are doing is legal -- and they are the natural result of the the petition clause of the "1st Amendment" which affords groups and individuals of every stripe the right to air their grievances and pressure our elected officials to act in their interests.

That being said, there is nothing to say that lobbyists should have any greater access to our elected representatives than does the average citizen. Consequently, since the average citizen can't provide a private airplane for transportation, neither should a lobbyist. Since the average citizen doesn't get a chance to write legislaton, neither should a lobbyist.

Note: I make no distinction between lobbyists for profit or non profit orgs.

"We may decide she's not our first choice, but she's not a bad choice," he said."

Spud could live with Hill as Prez but Obama is, of course, Spud's first choice.

The notion that if she wins it will be 24 solid years of either a Bush or a Clinton in the WH makes the whole system look less than democratic.

Be Well.

PS: And with Spud is exit blog-world as he does
stage left.

We still win!!!! I love this country! LOL!

Posted by utastaff at 2007-08-06 08:56 PM | Re

You honestly call these last 7 years under THIS President a "win" for the American people????
By any stretch of the imagination????
The only "winners" under Bush have been the corporations, the war profiteers, his political cronies given plush government jobs for which they had absolutely no training, and the 30 million illegal aliens now here on our soil. The losers? That would be the rest of America -- particulary the American middle class.

I do not want Hillary no way no how. Did You see Her picture over at the Drudge REPORT?? She looked like a God damned Chimpmunk for Christ sake. A Lot of people believe She is a Liberal that is so much Poppycock. She has always been a Conservative. The ONLY Thing She is Liberal about are Women's issues. I do not trust Her at all. Sorry like I keep saying I am voting for Lawrence Mohr come 2008 come hell or high water.

Larry

Yes, typically they represent a small group of Americans who are promoting something that is bad for the vast majority of us.


Posted by Sully at 2007-08-06 09:55 AM | Reply


I was going to go straight to comments about unions but I see where that has already been brought up.

so the left says no to lobbyists but they want to expand and glorify unions, to a large degree......

sounds a little shady, doesnt it?

I mean unions and lobbyists are sort of the same thing in some ways, arent they?


and who ever said that the teacher's union was what brought us 75% graduation rate is not entirely correct......while that has a blame in it.....remember one thing....
when you read about graduation rates....or rather dropoout rates....they manipulate the stats EACH AND EVERY TIME...........
they take the number of entering freshmen and then the numbes of graduation seniors and make no provision for rates of students who move and other reasons of attrition........I have asked and talked to several people who supposedly were in the know about this and they all said the same thing........no they didnt take any other things into consideration on dropout rates...............

..and there have been some cases where a student skipped a grade and then wasnt counted in the rate of his original class....

so if you know about educrats, you know that they can manipulate stats and figures with the best liberal in dc........

Hillary will make it 36 consecutive years of the Bush/Clinton Klan in the White House.

36 consecutive years that the integrity of this country has been sold out to corporations and international banks in the name of free trade.

Maybe in 2016 the country will then be stupid enough to vote in Jeb and we can squeeze 44 year out of the white house, just in time for Jebs hispanic son to take over.

Sheep love the New World Order - Hiel Clinton 08'

""I mean unions and lobbyists are sort of the same thing in some ways, arent they?""

Hate to break it to you BL, but no they are not even similar things.