David Corn

Name one thing morepolitically toxic than George Bush, Dick Cheney or Congress... That one things is Lobbyists.

If only rarely, sometime George Bush, Dick Cheney or Congress's interests line up with mine but almost never do Lobbyists.

Lobbyists use corporate wealth and campaign contributions to influence policy favorable to companies. Voters see this process as a process in which there interests are neglected and ignored.

Hillary has a lobbyist problem and its gonna take Bill to help get her over it.

It is hardly what is SAID about lobbyists. It isn't even so much what lobbyists DO for a candidte. The bait of fundraising and advice leads to the set of the hook with a win. The crank then turns as they reel into the catch net of "re-election".

Gotta get the institutionalized bribery and viral influence peddling out of the pond. Most all the fish
are already covered in cankers and fin rot.

There's got to be a wise prize catch for America somewhere!

-T

Thanks Hajji, I think you just killed my love for seafood. :P
Taking a few swipes at lobbyists won't change anything. The whole system need an overhaul from campaign finance to voting standards to doing away with the electoral college. Unfortunatally anyone who would be willing to make real changes to the current system is not allowed to advance within the current system. It is a self protecting circle.

We should all call lobbyists (most of them) by their real name - Influence peddlers. The trading of political power for money is antithetical to American values (the old ones) and those paying the bribes are never the people nor in the peoples interests.

What they do, for the most part, should be considered outrageous and illegal by any standard.

Nobody would offer any politician a mountain of money just to do the right thing. The very idea . . .

This might actually be some good news:

from:

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gKN2yiOeJG-S9dHCswW1FqWembNw

Admiral says US attack on Iran not 'in the offing': report
6 hours ago

LONDON (AFP) — The United States is not about to launch pre-emptive strikes against Iran despite increasingly tense rhetoric between Washington and Tehran, the head of US Central Command was quoted as saying Monday.

Admiral William Fallon did not rule out strikes at some point, but said such military action was not "in the offing."

"None of this is helped by the continuing stories that just keep going around and around and around that any day now there will be another war, which is just not where we want to go," he told the Financial Times.

"Getting Iranian behaviour to change and finding ways to get them to come to their senses and do that is the real objective.

"Attacking them as a means to get to that spot strikes me as being not the first choice in my book."

He said the job of Central Command, which runs US military operations in the Middle East, was not helped by verbal sabre-rattling.

"Generally, the bellicose comments are not particularly helpful," he said, but added: "That said, we have to make sure that there is no mistake here on the part of the Iranians about our resolve in tending to business in the region."

"There has got to be some combination of strength and willingness to engage. How to come up with the right combination of that is the real trick."

The United States and several of its European allies believe Iran is trying to develop a nuclear weapon, a charge Tehran has repeatedly denied.

Key members of the United Nations Security Council are seeking to increase pressure on Iran to convince it to stop enriching uranium, which can be used to generate energy but also to make an atomic bomb.

*****

I wonder if Busheney approved of this message?

I'm genuinely interested and would like someone to help me out - why are Democratic voters both a) dissatisfied with their Congressional leadership for failing to challenge the administration and b) so supportive of Hillary Clinton, who is notably less progressive than say, Nancy Pelosi?

I am really struggling to understand this.

Anybody...?

Fair to say that lobbyists are an anathema to most those on both the right and left. From union to corporate lobbyists, and everything in between, generally despised by the American populace.

But how does one reconcile their wished banishment with right of free speech?

What is the realistic solution? Payoffs, trips, etc., are decried by one party, which then assumes power. Payoffs, trips, etc., continue to escalate under the new party in power. And one can pick either 1995 or 2007. Repulicans are Democrats alike are of one accord on this matter.

"a) dissatisfied with their Congressional leadership for failing to challenge the administration and b) so supportive of Hillary Clinton, who is notably less progressive than say, Nancy Pelosi?"

That is the message being pushed by the MSM - I think the corporate support for HRC has sway over the media coverage. They (the MSM) have all but scheduled her coronation.

I don't buy it.

from:

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Corporations/Corps_FreeSpeech.html

Corporations and Free Speech -

Money is not free-speech and politicians that receive bribes should be prosecuted for accepting the same. The fact that it is currently legal does not make it right or correct, moral or even American.

Profit at all cost is what is wrecking the country and corporations are by definition amoral constructs of profit seekers.

No lobbying money, no gifts, no free travel, no free lunches, no junkets, no money for politicians period. If they can't do the job for the money we pay them then they should get a different job.

The old rule was the appearance of impropriety nowadays it is prove it. That is wrong.

We should be secure in the base integrity of those that are elected to represent us - no matter the ideology or party.

But I admit to being a bit old fashioned and behind the times.

I'm not supportive of Rodman. I won't vote for her in the primary and if she is nominated I'll vote Green in the general election.

In my book she is a DINO, who started out as a Goldwater Rupug.

GOP-lite!

Tastes bad AND less filling.

HA!

But there are all types of lobbyists in addition to corporate lobbyists. There are trade associations, unions, states and county, liberal and conservative advocacy groups, etc.

Do we ban all of them, also? Who decides which ones we keep and which ones we ban?

No lobbying money, no gifts, no free travel, no free lunches, no junkets, no money for politicians period. If they can't do the job for the money we pay them then they should get a different job.

****

No half measure.

"That is the message being pushed by the MSM - I think the corporate support for HRC has sway over the media coverage. They (the MSM) have all but scheduled her coronation."

Well I hope so (my preference is for Edwards).

I guess we can wait for the primaries themsevles, but it does seem from the available polling that Clinton has established a mighty lead.

I would prefer GOP-lite to GOP-beating-me-on-the-head, but a Clinton nomination would be an historic miss for American liberals. There is a realistic opportunity to get someone with serious progressive policies into the White House.

So why vote for the same old corruption, environmental apathy and foreign policy craziness? Dems can do better!

One example of abuse is union political donations. Like every union member supports one candidate or takes the same side on any issue?

Same goes for any institution, corporation, or other "bundled" political donations.

If we leveled the field with public financing the public could be better served.

Imagine a media multinational that can donate to a candidate knowing the money donated would be used to buy ad time from the source? How much would be too much and how big could you go knowing the money is coming around in a circular fashion?

It is the same with advocacy groups and business interests. They do not donate because of a passion for the candidates positions on the issues, they donate for a quid pro quo.

That is how we end up with big business actually writing the laws and defining the governmental oversight and control. It simply doesn’t work.

We have all heard a bunch about lead in and on the toys from China. Nobody has even approached the issue of lead in and on products that are not toys sold for use by adults (except one lipstick).

Profit for profits sake is on a crash course with the best interests of the non-corporations.

Nothing wrong with business and profits that are both reasonable and fair as long as it is not at the expense of our lives, health, prosperity or security.

Those are all cast aside in the name of better return on the dollar and that makes our twisted system "Dollar democracy" - the founding fathers would be ashamed.

"There is a realistic opportunity to get someone with serious progressive policies into the White House."

Let us hope the opportunity is not squandered.

Absolutely,

Open the doors, windows and appointment books for all public employees.

True transparency and full disclosure should NOT be seen as a hinderance to our public servants.

An end to the obfuscation, back-room deals and the good 'ol boy system that has turned American gummint into a tool for the moneyed, corporate connected and powerful.

WE the PEOPLE are their #1 priority!
WE the PEOPLE are their #2 priority!
WE the PEOPLE are their #3 priority!
WE the PEOPLE are their #4 priority!
WE the PEOPLE are their #5 priority!
WE the PEOPLE are their #6 priority!
WE the PEOPLE are their #7 priority!
WE the PEOPLE are their #8 priority!...............

-T

I think we can all agree that all travel, lunches, golf, gifts, etc., should be summarily banned.

But what if the lobbyists give you no money, but promise to help you raise it?

So, you would ban the lobbyists from both The Heritage Society and the National Education Association?

How about lobbying from groups that may not hand out money but that promise to fund opponents (Focus on the Family, MoveOn.org., etc.) if you don't follow their dictates? Which of these do we ban?

Hajji,

EGGGGGGGGGactly.

"but promise to help you raise it"

No money to be raise under public financing of elections.

"but that promise to fund opponents"

If they can't give money they can't fund opponents?

Have you had your coffee today?

DJIA under the magical 13k mark.

Can we call it a crash yet?

Early Morning Jokes
by Tony Peyser

Rudy Giuliani admits not checking into Bernie Kerik's background thoroughly enough was a "mistake." A "mistake" is forgetting to feed your parking meter or not remembering to put the garbage cans out -- not hiring a guy to run the biggest police department in the U.S. who has both mob ties and mob suspenders.

China has stopped imports of a bead toy that contains a date-rape drug. In related news, fraternities across the country are planning Aqua Dots toga parties.

It was a curious moment last Friday: as Michael Mukasey was sworn in as Attorney General, millions of Americans were swearing at Democrats for approving him.

Arthur Bremer, the man who shot and paralyzed Alabama Governor George Wallace in 1972, has been paroled after serving 35 years in jail. It's generally believed that the Robert DeNiro role in "Taxi Driver" was based on Bremer and his diary. So, if you ever run into to Bremer, you may want to ixnay saying, "You talking to me?" to him.

President Bush visited injured veterans at a rehab center in San Antonio. It's kind of like a drunk driver showing up with flowers in the hospital room of people he ran over.

Duane "Dog" Chapman, the famous bounty hunter, lost his reality TV show because one of his kids released a tape to the media of him repeatedly using the "n-word." Chapman says he still loves the son who sold him out ... which is pretty much how "41" feels about "43."

Sen. McCain is trying to get a big loan to help out in the North Carolina primary. John, try not borrow from anyone who lost their life savings in the Silverado Savings and Loan scandal back in 1988. They're still kinda pissed off at you about that.

And finally ... a container ship struck the Bay Bridge last week resulting in a 58,000-gallon spill. Unlike most gays in the Bay Area, it looks like that oil may never come out.

Tony Peyser provides daily poems and weekly cartoons for BuzzFlash and also writes the BuzzFlash column, "Blue State Jukebox." He was a daily cartoonist for the L.A. Times from 1994 to 1997. You can e-mail Tony at tonypeyser@yahoo.com.

Monday Funnies Capt? Awesome!

Writers on strike leave the Late NIte Funnies on hold.

Ya' gotta laugh. Politics ain't fun if you can't get a laugh every once in a while. And if you can't take an epithet every now and again, stay out of the kitchen. That's not the "Democrat" way, eh? Those conservatives.... so quickly get their panties in a bunch. Now, which way did Happy go?

So, I take it from your response that you would ban both Focus on the Family and the National Rifle Association on the right - and the NEA and MoveOn.org on the left?

Specifics, please.

Pande!

We have been starving for some levity so I had to improvise.

DJIA under 13k? I doubt we will hear from the investor caste until some market recovery.