Obama's Lobbyist Hypocrisy

@gewcew23 (8011)
United States
June 7, 2008 6:53pm CST
Obama continues to talk about being a "new kind of politician". Obama has said that he and his party will not take money for loobist but the fact do not say that. Here are a few examples: Obama continues to accept money from employees of lobbying firms who aren't technically registered lobbyists. How hard would it be for a lobbyist to have his "employee" make a donation to Obama (in exchange for a favor, of course?). MoveOn.org a large pac is encouraging folks to give money to Obama through them. They admit the goal is to gain "influence." Will Obama reject this money? No way. Two arms of the Democratic Party (DCCC and DSCC) will continue taking money from lobbyists. Obama is the head of the Democratic Party. If he really wanted to impose a rule to ban lobbyist money, don't you think he should?
1 person likes this
3 responses
• Poland
8 Jun 08
All politicians are thievies and liars and this is a worldwide truth I think. If they can take some extra cash, they will do it... if they can say something to build up their reputation, they will do it too. Question is: will they do something good for the country beside this?
1 person likes this
• China
8 Jun 08
don't belive politican, they can say anything only for their belif
@Destiny007 (5820)
• United States
8 Jun 08
I would say just give it some time, and we will see what this so called change is all about. Given what I have seen with some of Obama's dealings in Illinois, he is not above buying and selling influence. Rezko is just the tip of the iceberg, and I am sure there is a lot of dirt to find on the Obamanation. Then there are his associations, and Muslim ties... along with his communist beginnings. He is far from clean, and this should be a lot of fun to see. As to the lobbyists, I wonder if that is going to include ALL of the special interests... or is that going to depend on the definition of a lobbyist? ... Kind of like depending on what your definition of is is. If Obama is not the head of his party, then he doesn't really make the decisions for the party, so he most likely doesn't even have the authority to make those kind of statements on behalf of the party. I figure it to be more empty liberal rhetoric, the same symbolism over substance that is their trademark. You can bet some idiot is stupid enough to believe it though.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27242)
• United States
8 Jun 08
You're right about the DCCC and the DSCC still taking money from lobbyist and I'd like to see them stop but as another poster already pointed out Obama doesn't have the power to do that since he is not the head of the Democratic Party. Obama received most of his contributions from private citizens with most of the donations being in very small amounts. MoveOn.org isn't a lobbying firm, it's no different from the NRA; should they also no longer be allowed to take donations? I'd love to see some real campaign finance reform but it has to apply to both parties. As I type this they're talking about the "527's" on TV; I think they're the ones that need some kind of regulating but they're not controlled by either party or candidate. Annie
1 person likes this