Posts with the tag lobbyist

Lobbyist

Lobbyist — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 16:49:28 EDT

Policy Advocacy/Lobbying Services

The approach is simple and demanding. You pick the issue, and Randy Cannon will represent you. Randy Cannon learns as much as possible about a client’s issue, applies his resources to develop a comprehensive political strategy, brings his policy expertise and experience to bear and works tirelessly to achieve his clients’ goals. Randy Cannon conducts background research to understand clients and/or their businesses so that he can effectively manage the issue at all levels and deliver winning message development, testimony preparation and presentations. He drafts legislation to advance the specific goals and objectives that will serve his clients’ interests most effectively.

As Obama Continues Push for Healthcare Reform, House Committee Approves Kucinich-Sponsored Measure to Keep Single-Payer Option Alive

Jason M. Christos — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 15:24:45 EDT

As Obama Continues Push for Healthcare Reform, House Committee Approves Kucinich-Sponsored Measure to Keep Single-Payer Option Alive

On Capitol Hill, Democratic leaders say they’re open to paring down a healthcare reform bill in order to sway “conservative” Democrats who’ve threatened to oppose the measure that would create a government-run public insurance option. We speak with progressive Democrat, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio). A House committee recently approved his amendment that would allow individual states to adopt a single-payer system. [includes rush transcript]... http://www.democracynow.org/2009/7/21/as_obama_continues_push_for_healthcare

Last call for:

Thomas S. Kelly — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 20:12:25 EDT

Last call for:

Lobbyist payouts available for your local favorite Anti-America D.C. politician to fight meaningful Health-care reforms in America.

They are going fast so get them while they last.

P.S. you’re welcome you lazy-capitalist-pigs, wink-wink.

Ending Pay-to-Play Culture in Washington, Now!

Mett — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 02:04:56 EST

I usually don’t take Republican makeovers very seriously, as most have simply tried to re-hash some version of trickle-down, small government, Reaganomics. But the other night I was watching an infomercial by Mike Huckabee on Winning Back the Middle Class that seemed to focus on changing Washington politics as usual.

Isn’t that supposed to be Obama’s line?

Well, with two cabinet picks who have admitted to failing to pay taxes and only admitting to their tax liability “after” the nomination process had begun, and another withdrawing due to pay-to-play type accusations resulting in an indictment, ethics and undue influence in Washington may actually be an opening for the Republicans, particularly if Obama does not get REAL campaign finance done in his first term.

So what exactly is REAL campaign finance reform…the kind that doesn’t create additional loopholes for influence peddlers?

Publicly funded elections for all federal elections, and “reasonable” Supreme-Court-proof limits on the free speech of so-called independent groups like 527s so that they cannot run campaign ads for or against a candidate within 90 days of a primary or general election would be REAL campaign finance reform.

If Obama does not get this done in his first term, much of his change agenda could be thwarted by the handful of special interest groups that have dominated the agenda in Washington for quite some time. And as stated above, he could create an opening for the Republicans to portray him as a “change is only a slogan to drum up votes” type of candidate while Washington continues business as usual.

Such an appeal to ignore empty change rhetoric will resonate with the very swing voter that put Obama over the top in previously red states like CO, NV, NM, IN, OH, VA, FL, and NC. This is therefore a critical issue for Obama to pay close attention to if he wants to hang on to these voters.

With an 80% approval rating, NOW is the time for Obama to push for this kind of reform, as there are enough Democratic and Republican votes, especially if one vote meant they did not have to face reprisals from these same special interest groups in subsequent elections. Obama’s popularity will not always be this high, and if he waits until his popularity slips, it may be too late to get this done.

Let’s take money completely out of politics now!

-Metteyya Brahmana

HOW DID OUR COUNTRY GET IN THIS MESS:

Alex Karoub — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 22:47:28 EST

Contact: Alex.Karoub@gmail.com

It has been my perception that what has driven some Americans increasingly in the past two decades has been personal greed; greed not for just money but for power, control, influence, domination, security, knowledge, ideology, ..., all for individual or limited closed association/club benefit. That is not only the mentality of individuals, but of people operating in government and business as well.

We now witness the results of greed by a select few:

Corrupt and special interest government officials who set themselves above as aristocrats regulating government for their own investments or hidden ownerships in companies and organizations. Many who also take bribes and illicit favors from corrupt lobbyists.
Laws are actually written/drafted by who? Do you really think your legislator, congressman, or senator sits down in front of a computer or uses his own pen and paper? Or, did you think it's his staff? It is lobbyists who actually do 99% of the work; work they have vested interests in, to see it is written the way their 'client' wants it worded. Do you as an individual have lobbyists employed by you?
Financial institutions that cheat and steal from the unsuspecting, far beyond the weak laws of usury. Trustworthy? Bank & 'Trust?' Wanna givem another bailout for cheating? It looks like lobbying paid off for the financial 'institutions' (we have all been taught to 'respect?' the term 'institution?', but maybe we are learning).
Insurance Companies that 'legally?' bribe law enforcement, judges, and congress/legislators with grants, equipment gifts, perks, and free trips in order to gain unprecedented influence/control -- everything from mandatory laws, to not or barely paying claims, to price fixing, to all sorts of corrupt and unfavorable methods imposed on individuals. Do most people realize that premiums (a name of 'respect?' for monthly payments you are charged) are used by Insurance Companies to pay for -- grants, equipment gifts, perks and trips as payoffs for public laws, regulations, and controls that the public does not want. It is a form of taxation represented/controlled by insurance companies, not taxation with public representation. It's a twisted form of taxation charged by insurance companies.
Manufacturing barons who import economic slave labor and outsource to slavery.
Pharmaceutical corporations that cover-up sickness and death with misinformation in order to push up profits.
Weapons manufacturers that promote violence, war, and enduring sickness.
Energy companies that monopolize production/prices and cause destructive environmental damage.
American Companies, or those using names, that import/offshore products who turn a deaf ear and blind eye to safety, quality, and poisons.
Service providers that care not about consumers but are strictly money driven, with less regard for employees; employees who suffer with unreasonable demands for performance and who are not paid a living wage.
Private educational institutions that cater to the wealthy who have abandoned the public. The concept for the masses of "let them eat cake"; they will eventually go away from malnutrition of education because it will make them perish; and, those who survive can be the servants.
Suburban Public School administrators in growing housing markets whose actual and hidden agendas are to serve land developers and government aristocrats. They play statistical number games made of fudge, intentionally choking out struggling students by actually encouraging students to drop out or be 'home schooled' by mom or dad. That's how suburban schools 'look' more attractive to potential home buyers, with faked academic 'success' -- faking the 'No Child Left Behind' statistics, a real game, using kids as pawns. But aristocrats brag, statistically they look like they have done a good enough job to re-elect them. And, most importantly to them, they can continue to reap the profits from either the land they own or are financially connected with.
Inner City School administrators in decaying areas that hopelessly cope with being under funded, attracting the poorest quality teachers. Children do not choose to be born into poor families, or choose uncaring parents, nor do they choose parents that are ignorant and uneducated. Do these kids have the hope of opportunity? They are pushed aside as the burdens of a greedy society, in hopes they are not seen nor heard from now or later in life -- good to be used as the pawns in wars, or workers for catering to the wealthy though.
Employees of city/county/state/fed. institutions (schools, universities, jails, prisons, leases/sales of buildings to Gov., contracted services, hospitals, VA facilities,...) who take kickbacks and gifts, in return for higher costs and sweetheart deals with companies often owned by or financially benefiting government aristocrats.
Major colleges and universities chasing the buck by catering to overseas students. They somehow brag of a 40% to 60% foreign enrollment, while American students grasp for help and aid.
Community colleges that are given the leftovers in funds, coping with unrealistic expectations of graduating students or preparing them for major colleges. Even with 100% tuition/books paid, it is unrealistic to expect students to juggle working full time jobs (for food and living) while going to school and studying full time. It is not surprising to see such an astronomically high dropout rate in America. Capitalist have made it clear to students, not to have hopes that are too costly; or, they will import already educated talent. Do wealthy capitalist require students in their families to work full time at low paying jobs while pursuing higher education's? Maybe they simply know it's a story made up for the 'less fortunate', like a fairytale dream, achieved by one to two percent and used as shining examples, stories told to pacify the masses. Those with capital also know, they can hire a well enough educated dropout at a reduced rate to do the job of a graduate, a real bargain.
…

We could each recite instances far beyond this short list, and it is all for greed. People’s greed has been rooting through our nation and causing so much destruction. Certainly money has been a primary instrument of their greed, but their other instruments of power, control, influence, domination, security, knowledge, ideology, … have all been used to chip away and damage each of us who together form our great nation. With renewed vision and focused determination we will heal and rebuild to become more active and much stronger.

To learn more details, you can read my other three blogs about 1) Educational Devastation, The Need for an Entirely New System, 2) The Auto Industry, A Few of My Personal Experiences, and 3) Invention, Innovation, and Education.

Blog members can reply here, or anyone is welcome to contact me at: Alex.Karoub@gmail.com

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY

WEBMASTER — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 02:26:14 EST

The Pickens Plan: For those who would like to become an active participant in a solution for our nations energy needs I urge you to join with T.Boone Pickens in his quest for a cleaner planet through alternative energy.

Also see Green Wave Energy: Green Wave was founded by Mark Holmes and was formulated for viable alternative energy solutions. Green Wave Energy is promoting state-of-the-art energy-saving products and services throughout the country.

Green Wave Energy understands alternative energy technology will become “main stream” when

individuals and organizations understand that alternative energy technology exists and
when people see the economic benefits of using alternative energy technologies

Call 949.645.1701 for information on how Green Wave Energy can help you save the planet.

Alternative Energy
Source: David Apperson

url: http://veterans.barackobama.com/page/community/tag/alternative-energy

America - Together (post election)

Alex Karoub — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 17:44:40 EST

..... Contact: http://Alex.Karoub@gmail.com

WHO IS THAT GUY BARACK OBAMA? HE IS US.

We have made historic headway by together pointing our nation in the right directions. After decades, we have America focused on the issues of fundamental importance. Now, each of us acting in concert can together move our country to lead the world to the fruitfulness of moral goodness. I have no doubts about my abilities and the abilities of fellow Americans to work smart and hard to achieve these goals.

Barack Obama has the visions, leadership, and integrity for us to correct and redirect our country to once again lead the world for the fruitions of good. Let's closely listen, learn, and move forward based on that which we know deep inside is good and which we can validate with our hearts.

I hope that those who had but a few reasons to support Obama, look further into the other issues more deeply. I found the more I explored, studied, and listened to Obama the more I found us in agreement. The couple of issues that I did not have depth of knowledge of, quickly became obvious in need. This was unusual for me since I have always refused to be any kind of a follower, and still am not. I find Obama to be a deep thinker who is articulate and inspirational; and, of most fundamental importance, Obama makes excellent moral sense.

Hopefully, our country has learned lessons from the past of mistakenly following leadership blindly, as was done with Nixon and Bush. There are leaders who are simply in it for themselves and will cater to individuals or groups in order to grab for their own benefit. Corrupt and bad leaders hide at all levels. This is especially true in city government as well as county and state government. The corrupt deals of politicians need to be exposed, and those responsible need to be weeded out in the coming local elections. Others need to be investigated by law enforcement and be prosecuted for illegal dealings; for deals they often make for their hidden personal agendas. Let’s look at the bad experiences of the past as bitter medicines, let’s eliminate the need for such bad medicine in the future. Let us use what we know is good to go forward.

I believe we have chosen wisely, not by greed and not by misguided retaliatory anger. I believe this time our country has chosen with open eyes, with each of us listening and examining our choice of leadership closely, driven and validated by our hearts.

I hope we can continue to make our efforts even more inclusive (in many more ways than I touch on here). Far right republicans will be stubborn to change, but we will need to include them to change if we are to succeed. Sure a few more will leave our country, but that is not the American way. No, we really don't need their false fronts of power, money, insider knowledge, or other trappings that they have taught many to 'respect?'. Let's recruit as many as we can, that's the American way, evolving and changing together as one nation. Try to be understanding as we move forward; by better understanding each as individuals and people with various desires and needs we will find ways to reach out with friendship and have them join our causes of good.

Be on the lookout, and root out bad leadership in government and business. Do not be intimidated by those who use the false fronts of power and give a false sense of security in order to lead. Be extra leery of those who say or imply ‘Trust me’; those who give a sense that they somehow omnipotently know better. No longer will Americans be dazzled by phony displays of brilliance or baffled by baloney. There are government aristocrats and business leaders who still believe in the old adage of: “If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, then baffle em with bullshit”. We can embrace complexity by demanding true, fundamental, and understandable explanations. We can root out falsehoods by not accepting double speak. We as Americans know how to grow ourselves by first believing in ourselves. Don’t be a follower. Don’t be a follower of followers.

However, when we find leaders who are good; a leader that thinks, speaks, and acts from their heart; one that is honest, has integrity, and leads by sincere examples; then we need to in a big way, join them, support them, and promote their causes of good. From much research, investigation, and scrutiny, I believe Barack Obama is such a person. I hope we search for and find many more who are similar, who we can add to service at all levels of government. We need to add/replace leaders in business with ones that have honesty, integrity, and show quality in leadership. We need more people in leadership roles who are moral, like Barack Obama.

Remember, we are not fighting a battle, we are the artisans and sculptors of the future for ourselves and generations to come. Rarely do societies have opportunities to make such dramatic moves forward as we now have in this opportunity of today. Take pride and practice in being inclusive as we stride forward. In moving forward, create opportunity not only for yourself, but also for all. Hope is a wonderful thing to behold; but without opportunity, hope can become but a dream never achievable. We can, will, and must, create opportunity.

In the coming year I hope that we do not lose our spiritedness, but instead continue to build and make headway. I hope we all continue our campaign for change in government and business. We will succeed in moving forward once again, it will take much effort and good oversight on the part of each of us. We will make great strides in the months and years ahead in order to achieve the fruitions of good. Let's keep our enthusiasm progressing through these coming toughest of times. Let us use the light of goodness and love to motivate us with historic momentum.

I have chosen Barack Obama because he best represents my deepest beliefs in America. Please take time to read the issues that Barack Obama has published on this website. Also, give your attention to see how he leads us to move our nation forward in the time ahead. Most importantly, be part of America's great future, participate in the greatness that together we will make. Participate!

We will each and all flourish, if we think, speak, and act, by using the love in our hearts.

Your reply is welcome. Contact: Alex.Karoub@gmail.com

MCCAIN DOING MORE THAN JUST PALLING AROUND WITH LOBBYIST FOR SADDAM HUSSEIN

Juli Norwood — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 01:40:26 EDT

Get this... The self proclaimed reformer cough crook cough John McCain, yeah you know the guy who says he's not apart of the washington politics as usual scene has just been outted as a typical corrupt washington politician that pals around with sleazy, greedy, corrupt lobbyists. Go Figure! ;-)

Boy you can't get any more Mavericky than that now can you. lol

The more I google and read about John McCain the dirtier I feel. Any who... back to the Sleazo Lobbyist William E. Timmons, Sr. whom John McCain has named to head his presidential transition team, he is also registered to lobby in 2008 for a wide range of companies and trade groups, including the American Petroleum Institute, the American Medical Association, Chrysler, Freddie Mac, Visa USA, and Anheuser-Busch just to name a few.

His registrations include work on a number of issues that have become flashpoints in the presidential campaign. He has registered to work on bills that deal with the regulations of troubled mortgage lenders Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae; a bill to provide farm subsidies; and bills that regulate domestic oil drilling.

On top of that it has recently been reported that Timmons has been lobbying for Saddam Hussein for 5 years. This slime ball stood to make 45 million from just 1 of the deals. Timmons claims to be a naive angel but that doesn't wash... no one and I mean no one works with and for giants in the industry without knowing something is a stinking pile of doo doo when they step in it! Beside he had Tongsun Park working in lock step with him and this character is well known for his notorious background. Timmmons knew exactly what he was doing and tried to lie to the Feds about it.

To read all about Timmons lobbying for Saddam Hussein click the link below.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/14/mccain-transition-chief-a_n_134595.html

What does this say about John McCain?

It reflects his true colors, he can try to slap lipstick on that pig all he wants it's still a pig. He supposedly wants us to believe that he is honest, that he is a reformer, that he is mavericky and yet he keeps proving to us time and time again that he associates with sleazy crooks, out right criminals, unsavory and unethical characters.

His own actions have been unethical and corrupt... I'm citing the keating 5, the sweetheart land deals etc.

He has the morals of an alley cat in heat!

He protesteth too much whilst pointing fingers at others... I suspect it his unsuccessful attempt to cover up his own illegal activities.

His life is full of stupid blunders, extra marital affairs, lies, uncontrollable anger, corruption, greed and ties to the kind of sleazy, unsavory people you wouldn't bring home to momma or admit to knowing to all of America... and it is all well documented and all over the internet. The internet is rich with detestable filth on John McCain. He can run but he can't hide!

Don't take my word for it google McCain with various terms added such as mob ties, sweetheart land deals, traitor, racist, enemy to POW families, corrupt, terrorists, nazi, scandal, against veterans, against women and children, etc etc and you will find tons of information on John McCain that he don't want you to know.

His Father and Grandfathers Reputations have protected John McCain by preventing the truth from coming out about all of his illicit activities in his life. Cindy's money gives him even more of a cushion from facing the consequences of his actions. Karma's a bitch John... trust me one day your past will catch up with you.

The resurrection of racism and incorporating it into his campaign is totally unfathomable and unforgiveable. There is nothing that this man won't do to serve himself.

He is unfit to be a senator muchless a president!

Juli Norwood

Talk is Cheap

Henry M — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 18:22:54 EDT

Now you can have Barack Obama say what you want him to say, even with only 2 weeks before election day! And you can make John McCain say what you want without being a right-wing fundamentalist zealot preacher, or a big lobbyist with lots of money.

http://www.slate.com/id/2202493?nav=wp

If you liked this message, then please have a look at my blog, http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/blog/henrymu and support and contribute to the campaign (it’s not over until the polls close): http://tinyurl.com/henrym4obamafundraising

Henry M

Missing Link

Jim — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 09:05:50 EDT

From all that is coining out about McCain's Campaign Staff of lobbyists, their links to various other lobbyists, the Bush White House, Karl Rove and others, it seems like there must be a direct link between McCain and Abramovich.

MAKE THE CONNECTION: Vicki Iseman(Lobbyist) and John McCain/Why is Keating Five Relevant TODAY?

The Pollitikat — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 09:17:26 EDT

I know that everyone is getting excited about the Keating Five controversy but lets not lose our focus. Why it is relevant today, well let’s think back to early February when the New York Times released an article questioning John McCain’s claims of being ethical. Many focused on his relationship with the young lady (Vicki Iseman) as possibly a romantic one, but the important little facts about that relationship is that the young lady was a lobbyist and John McCain wrote letters to regulators on behalf of Vicki Iseman’s client list.

http://www.nytimes.com/...

Learn about McCains relationship with Vicki and the relevance to the Keating Five and why it shows that John McCain is still unethical and has no character at all, he will continue to be corrupt and when he gets caught he tries to act magnanamus by quiting and then trashing his former associates. But as soon as things die down he goes right back to being the same corrupt, wreckless, immoral individual he has always been. This is a man that made a joke about a sitting presidents child, stood there and laughed when someone called Hillary Clinton a bitch, votes against veterans while declaring his love for them, screamed about experience and then selected Sarah Palin.

Guys we must write the media and make the connection because you know they will not do it without being pushed. They are going to sit right there at Keating Five and Ayers. Write to you local media and remind them of the New York Times story, because there is so much more there--there!!!

TAKE THE POLL ON DAILYKOS: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/10/6/74323/9819/5/621384

Gloves Off!! Fight Truth to Power!!

Nia "Hussein" J. — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 02:55:33 EDT

I've gathered some information that should help us fight back the smears and the lies. I agree that Obama needs to stay above the fray and keep the message on the economy. It's surrogates and supporters like us who have to fight back. We have come to far and worked to hard canvassing, phone calling, registering voters, convincing and informing undecideds, etc. for it to all go the way side like Kerry in 2004. We cannot afford another 4 years of the last eight. time is drawing close and we need this win. Fight back with truth. mccain and palin have allot of political skeletons that need to be forced out of the MSM closet. I've gathered some info, if you have more please share.

CNN truth report On Obama and Ayers:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMRON2GPXUA

Obama gives the go ahead to surrogates, to bring up Keating five and other associations:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/10/5/19317/4480/333/621072

The Obama campaign already has an ad related to it - make it viral

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHW-RO1_WN0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsI_0bV2CZo

Also bring Up Mccains lobbyist:http://www.mccainslobbyist.com

Donald Diamond:

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/23/it-goes-well-beyond-the-keating-five/

Richard Quinn:

http://politicalconsultantmisconduct.blogspot.com/2008/01/richard-quinn-associates-employee-of.html

George Gordon Liddy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6F3biK1Mb0&feature=related

Mccain Voted to protect Domestic Terrorist

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/10/06/mccain-abotion-bombers/

Lets also include the GOP's newest talent, Palin

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xmt0rLtgmK0

Top 10 Goals for Our Presidency in 2009

Jeffrey Quintero — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:26:46 EDT

PLEASE JOIN AND PROMOTE THIS NEW GROUP:Top10Goals

This group will focus on defining the -Top 10 Goals- for our next president to commit to achieving in 2009.

This could serve as the bases for creating a very specific, bottom-up originated, agreement between "we the people" and Barack Obama.

IMAGINE...

Is the Economy Debateable?

Henry M — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 17:57:03 EDT

McCain has admitted (and then denied!) that he is “not an expert on wall street” and “I still need to be educated,” and has recently stated that “the fundamentals of our economy are strong: http://tinyurl.com/mccaineconomics And yet McCain wants to call off the first 2008 Presidential Debate, which has been expected to show Obama as capable and McCain as debatable :-) in order to return to Washington and do the bidding of his banking lobbyist puppet-masters: http://tinyurl.com/mccain-mortages-lobbyists

In the mean time, McCain gets a chance to cram a little more before he’s asked difficult questions (some of which will be about economics!) in a live, fair, debate.

Henry M

McCain adviser Paid Two Million....

Nia "Hussein" J. — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 16:40:00 EDT

September 22, 2008Loan Titans Paid McCain Adviser Nearly $2 Million By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK and CHARLES DUHIGG

Senator John McCain’s campaign manager was paid more than $30,000 a month for five years as president of an advocacy group set up by the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to defend them against stricter regulations, current and former officials say.

Mr. McCain, the Republican candidate for president, has recently begun campaigning as a critic of the two companies and the lobbying army that helped them evade greater regulation as they began buying riskier mortgages with implicit federal backing. He and his Democratic rival, Senator Barack Obama, have donors and advisers who are tied to the companies.

But last week the McCain campaign stepped up a running battle of guilt by association when it began broadcasting commercials trying to link Mr. Obama directly to the government bailout of the mortgage giants this month by charging that he takes advice from Fannie Mae’s former chief executive, Franklin Raines, an assertion both Mr. Raines and the Obama campaign dispute.

Incensed by the advertisements, several current and former executives of the companies came forward to discuss the role that Rick Davis, Mr. McCain’s campaign manager and longtime adviser, played in helping Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac beat back regulatory challenges when he served as president of their advocacy group, the Homeownership Alliance, formed in the summer of 2000. Some who came forward were Democrats, but Republicans, speaking on the condition of anonymity, confirmed their descriptions.

“The value that he brought to the relationship was the closeness to Senator McCain and the possibility that Senator McCain was going to run for president again,” said Robert McCarson, a former spokesman for Fannie Mae, who said that while he worked there from 2000 to 2002, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac together paid Mr. Davis’s firm $35,000 a month. Mr. Davis “didn’t really do anything,” Mr. McCarson, a Democrat, said.

Mr. Davis’s role with the group has bubbled up as an issue in the campaign, but the extent of his compensation and the details of his role have not been reported previously.

Mr. McCain was never a leading critic or defender of the mortgage giants, although several former executives of the companies said Mr. Davis did draw Mr. McCain to a 2004 awards banquet that the companies’ Homeownership Alliance held in a Senate office building. The organization printed a photograph of Mr. McCain at the event in its 2004 annual report, bolstering its clout and credibility. The event honored several other elected officials, including at least two Democrats, Gov. Edward G. Rendell of Pennsylvania and Representative Artur Davis of Alabama.

In an interview Sunday night with CNBC and The New York Times, Mr. McCain noted that Mr. Davis was no longer working on behalf of the mortgage giants. He said Mr. Davis “has had nothing to do with it since, and I’ll be glad to have his record examined by anybody who wants to look at it.”

Asked about the reports of Mr. Davis’s role, a spokesman for Mr. McCain said that during the time when Mr. Davis ran the Homeownership Alliance, the senator had backed legislation to increase oversight of the mortgage companies’ accounting and executive compensation. The legislation, however, did not seek to change their anomalous structure as private companies with federal support.

The spokesman, Tucker Bounds, also noted that the Homeownership Alliance included nonprofit organizations like Habitat for Humanity and the Urban League. “It’s not controversial to promote homeownership and minority homeownership,” Mr. Bounds said. More than a half-dozen current and former executives, however, said the Homeownership Alliance was set up mainly to defend Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac by promoting their role in the housing market, and the two companies paid almost the entire cost of the group’s operations.

“They were financed largely, possibly exclusively, by Fannie and Freddie,” said William R. Maloni, a Democrat who is a former head of industry relations for Fannie Mae. “We thought it would be helpful to have someone who was a broadly recognized Republican to be the face of the organization, and that person became Rick Davis.” Mr. Maloni added, “Rick, for that purpose, turned out to be quite good.” (Several executives said Mr. Davis’s compensation was not unusual for the companies’ well-connected consultants.)

The federal bailout of the two mortgage giants has become an emblem of what critics say is the outdated or inadequate regulatory system that allowed the financial system to slide into crisis this summer.

At the time that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac recruited Mr. Davis to run the Homeownership Alliance in 2000, they were under new pressure from private industry rivals and deregulation-minded Republicans who argued that the two companies’ federal sponsorship gave them an unfair advantage and put taxpayers at risk. Critics of the companies had formed their own Washington-based advocacy group, FM Watch. They were pushing for regulations that would deter the companies from expanding into new areas, including riskier and more profitable mortgages.

Mr. Davis had recently returned to his lobbying firm from running Mr. McCain’s unexpectedly strong 2000 Republican primary campaign, which elevated Mr. McCain’s profile as a legislator and Mr. Davis’s as a lobbyist.

“You can say what you want about free-market distortions, but people like the system because it gets them into houses cheap,” Mr. Davis said to Institutional Investor magazine in 2000, adding that he would run the advocacy group out of his Alexandria, Va., lobbying firm.

The organization also hired Public Strategies, a communications firm that included former Bush adviser Mark McKinnon. Mr. Davis wrote letters and gave speeches for the group. In April 2001, he sent out a press release headlined, “It’s Tax Day — Do You Know Where Your Deductions Are? For Most Americans, They’re in Your Home.”

But by the end of 2005, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were recovering from accounting problems and re-examining costs, former executives said. The companies decided the Homeownership Alliance had outlived its usefulness, and it disappeared.

John Harwood contributed reporting.

Palin Interview Says A Ton About McCain

Michelle — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 13:01:41 EDT

This week, Sarah Palin gave her first unscripted (although highly prepared for)interview, nearly two weeks after accepting her Republican vice presidential nomination. Although the interview spoke volumes about Palin and her inability to lead our nation, that is not my focus. Rather, my focus is on John McCain and how Palin’s interview is evidence of why he is unfit to serve as President of the United States of America.

In her interview last night, when asked if Obama should have picked Hillary Clinton as his running mate, Palin replied derisively, “I think he's regretting not picking her now, I do.” (Los Angeles Times, Sept. 13, 2008) Of course, what Palin failed to mention is that Barack Obama did not pick Hillary because, rather than focus on what would bring the most “wow factor” during this election or what could possibly get him a few more votes in the here and now, Obama focused on choosing a vice presidential running mate that would make the best president. After careful review of all of the potential VP candidates’ credentials, Obama realized that Biden has the Senate, foreign policy, national security and economic policy experience to successfully lead America.

McCain, on the other hand, chose Palin precisely for that “wow factor.” Seeing that Obama had chosen Biden and not Hillary, he hoped to create a media frenzy (which he did) by choosing a female running mate. Hoping to galvanize voters that might have been in that Clinton camp while, at the same time, appeasing the Christian conservative base that McCain has so much trouble connecting with, he settled on Palin despite her utter inexperience. McCain did not pick Palin because she would make the best president – that is clear. No, he chose her because she could possibly bring him the most votes right now and getting into office is all that McCain cares about right now. In choosing Palin, McCain failed America and it’s people – he is not planning what is best for America’s future, he is only planning what is best for John McCain right now.

If elected, should John McCain be unable to serve his entire term as President, McCain leaves us with Sarah Palin as President. Below is a an outline of Palin’s weaknesses, weaknesses that McCain knew Palin had when he chose her, but weaknesses that he was willing to overlook in an effort to get that extra vote; weaknesses that show McCain was not putting his “country first;” and weaknesses that we, as the American people voting in this election, cannot allow ourselves to overlook.

Foreign Policy is Foreign to Sarah Palin

Aside from a trip last year to Kuwait with a stop in Germany, in her 44 years of life Palin has not traveled outside the continent of North America, only having visited Mexico and Canada. (abcnews.com, Sept. 11, 2008) In the dangerous world we live in today, how can we have a president who has never even been to the very countries that are our allies, or even more importantly, our potential enemies?

When pressed during her interview, Palin admitted that she had never met with a foreign head of state. Of course, she only admitted it after attempting to fudge that she had – this would have been yet another lie to the American people had Charlie Gibson not caught it. (abcnews,com, Sept. 11, 2008)

When asked by Charlie Gibson if she agreed with the "Bush Doctrine," Palin was clearly, and embarrassingly, stumped.(abcnews.com, Sept. 11, 2008) I guess no one prepped her on the Bush Doctrine in the two weeks she spent in Alaska with McCain’s top policy advisors preparing for this interview. (New York Times, Sept. 11, 2008) Apparently the Bush-Doctrine of a preemptive strike on another nation that we believe poses a threat (ahem…Iraq!) was not important enough for her to be prepped on. That should tell us something.

Asked how the proximity of Alaska provides insight into Russian actions, shereplied: "They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska." (abcnews.com, Sept. 11, 2008) Unless Palin is some sort of superhero and she can actually see Russia’s actions when standing on this island, then no, that does not help to answer the question at all.

Palin’s War-Focused Mentality

During her interview, Palin stated “that Georgia and Ukraine should be admitted to NATO and that the U.S. should be prepared to go to war if Russia invades Georgia again.”(The Wall Street Journal, Sept. 12, 2008) She then went on to say that we cannot repeat the Cold War after, thankfully, winning the Cold War during the Reagan administration– the Cold War was actually ended three years after Reagan left the White House. (Los Angeles Times, Sept. 12, 2008) I guess none of the six colleges that Palin attended over six years taught her about the Cold War. (Associated Press, Sept. 4, 2008)

Palin also "said that she believed a nuclear Iran presented a threat to 'everyone in the world' and that if Israel's existence was threatened by those weapons it had a right to defend itself." (abcnews.com, Sept. 11, 2008). When asked if we would cooperate with Israel in that event, Palin replied that “We cannot second guess the steps that Israel has to take to defend itself,” implying that we would cooperate with an Israeli decision to take out Iranian nuclear facilities, thus going to war with Iran in support of Israel. ( abcnews.com, Sept. 11, 2008)

Palin’s Disregard for the Environment

Palin "also reversed her stand on the cause of climate change, telling ABC News that she believes 'man's activities certainly can be contributing to the issue of global warming.' Less than a year ago, she said the opposite."(Los Angeles Times, Sept. 12, 2008) If Palin, against all scientific evidence, believes that global warming isn’t primarily man-made, how can Palin work to provide solutions to ease global warming? The solution must stop the problem at the root – of course, despite the volumes of scientific evidence proving otherwise, Palin conveniently believes the root lies elsewhere, making reducing global warming, should she lead our nation, difficult at best.

Despite the fact that McCain disagrees with US drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), Palin adamantly supports the idea. In fact, she has gone so far as to sue the U.S. Department of the Interior for it’s May ruling to list the polar bear species as threatened on the endangered species list. The decision is the result of nine U.S. Geological Survey Studies that find 2/3 of the world’s polar bear species population -and ALL of Alaska’s- will disappear by mid-century because of ice loss. Because for as long as the polar bears are listed as an endangered species we cannot drill in ANWR, Palin is ruthlessly aimed at removing the bears from the endangered species list, calling the ninegovernment studies highly speculative and questionable, insisting their populations are stable. Apparently, Palin prefers to put the interests of big oil ahead of that of our planet and its people, specifically, the environment and people of Alaska, her home state. Not exactly the best quality in a possible future president, is it?

Caution – Social Agendas May Differ

When asked about abortion, Palin replied: “I am pro-lfe. I do respect other people's opinion on this also, and I think that a culture of life is best for America.”(Los Angeles Times, Sept. 13, 2008)

“On stem cell research, the McCain campaign released a radio ad Friday touting his support for stem cell research the Bush White House -- and Palin -- opposes. Palin said she ‘owes it to Americans’ to explain her personal opinion which ‘may end up different than what the policy in an administration might be.’”(Chicago Sun-Times, Sept. 13, 2008)

So, on the issue of abortion, it is both McCain and Palin’s personal opinion that women should not have the freedom to be able to choose to have an abortion in America. Yet, they both feel it proper to overturn Roe v. Wade if elected and make their personal opinion the law that all Americans must follow, whether they agree with Palin and McCain or not. And on the issue of stem cell research, because McCain and Palin disagree, Palin’s personal viewpoint (that stem cell research should be outlawed) will not be vigorously pushed into policy by the administration. This doesn’t seem like a government of the people and for the people – seems more like the government of McCain for the people that agree with McCain. After all, even Palin’s viewpoints don’t influence McCain so how can we, as the American people, stand a chance of having his decisions influenced by our needs? And the inconsistencies among McCain and Palin mean that should Palin need to take office, we will have a president with a different social agenda than the one she is replacing. An America that changes at the whim of its leaders is not the democratic and free America that our forefathers worked so diligently to found.

Palin Loves Earmarks, Actually

Palin likes to claim she is a Washington outsider, always opposing earmarks, but as Charlie Gibson exposed during their interview:

She was a vigorous supporter of the “Bridge to Nowhere” (even wearing a t-shirt supporting the cause), a bridge slated to be built with $398 million in federal funds to a small island with only 50 residents, a project that is now the poster child for needless government spending.

This supposed “Washington outsider” hired a powerful Washington lobbyist in order to get the funds for the “Bridge to Nowhere,” the same bridge McCain ads say she opposed.

After Congress abandoned the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere” and it became a national embarrassment, then Sarah Palin changed her stance to that of opposition, but Alaska still kept the $223 million it had received to build the bridge that never came to be.

Although McCain ads tout McCain and Palin as “mavericks” fighting against earmarks, under Palin, the state of Alaska, the second least populous state in the U.S., received $155 million in earmarks for 2008; Illinois, Obama’s state and one of our most populous states in the U.S., received only $22 per person for 2008. That is ten times the amount of earmarks per person for Palin and Alaska– not such a “maverick” when you look at the numbers, eh?

This year alone, this “maverick” requested $3.2 million in earmarks to study the genetics of harbor seals and the mating habits of crabs – the same type of earmarks that McCain/Palin in their speeches and ads have said they will fight if elected. By selecting Palin as his running mate, McCain stands in support of Palin’s history, her excessive use of government ear marks, her ties to powerful Washington lobbyists, actions that prove neither McCain or Palin are or will be the “maverick” agents of change they repeatedly claim they will be.

McCain, in choosing Sarah Palin, has done a disservice to America. Not only has he picked a candidate that is inexperienced in matters of foreign policy and national security, issues that are crucial to the continued safety of the American people, but he has also picked a candidate with a history of, even in the sparsely populated state of Alaska, working with lobbyists, supporting earmarks, abandoning important environmental issues, and failing to abide by established ethical standards. McCain has chosen “wow factor” over who would make the best President, he has chosen “wow factor” over who is best for America and it’s people. When he made this decision, he wasn’t thinking about the family that just had their home foreclosed on, the single mother that just lost her job, the elderly couple who can’t afford to heat their home this winter or the parents taking on third jobs to pay for their child’s cancer treatment which is not covered by insurance – no, McCain was thinking about how he could best manipulate the American people to get himself elected. When McCain chose Sarah Palin, he put McCain first and his country second. We can’t make the mistake of electing someone who has forgotten the American people even before he has been elected.

Disaster Looms in Georgia; an appeal to Obama and Biden

Dee — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 00:26:28 EDT

I was very encouraged by Sen. Obama's response to the crisis in Georgia, as opposed to John McCain's war-mongering. I want to call on this campaign to go a step further.

The comment of the Georgian President that he appreciated McCain's line about "we are all Georgians" was very fine, but it's time for more than words characterizes a huge concern that must be shouted to the world, and underline the bottom line of McCain's campaign.

Randy Scheunemann (sp?) was, until March, working for the Georgian government as a lobbyist. Keith Olbermann raises the question: did the Georgian President think he was buying McCain's support when he invaded the Georgian capital?

Sen. Obama, Sen. Biden, PLEASE, expose this scandal, call McCain out on it, shred the curtain of media silence that has shrouded McCain's campaign and allowed him to escape unscathed while he has said and done outrageous, if not legally, morally and ethically reprehensible things.

This is my HOPE. I think it's the hope of a majority of your supporters, that the "pass" that McCain has been enjoying MUST come to an end. We are counting on you to bring that end about.

The American People really must know what McCain is about. If you won't do it, who will?

Respectfully

McCain Jabs DC Lobbyist Corp?

ZapDuff — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 10:52:05 EDT

For all the effort the people at Politico.com have put into establishing their credibility as a viable news source, one of today's showcase articles diminishes those accomplishments. McCain calls lobbyists 'birds of prey' is billed as an interview in which "McCain vows a lifetime ban on lobbying for members of his administration."

For me, as a curmudgeonly media critic, the words in that article fell short of deserving the promotion it got as the results of an interview. It really seems more like a case of two reporters taking dictation from a crafty politician... reporters barely able to ask a question unless it was an invitation for John McCain to read stump speech talking points from his notes. Why send reporters to such an opportunity when a stenographer could have collected what readers got?

McCain's Campaign Paid For By Lobbyists

Madera Strong - Team Co-ordinator For City of Madera — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:52:55 EDT

McCain's campaign is paid for by lobbyists and he will work for lobbyists (not you) if he is elected. In fact, McCain was sleeping with lobbyists (literally).

This is the "old politics" and we need change.

....

McCain's Position on Russian-Georgian Conflict Parrots His Campaign Advisor's Lobbyist Ties To Georgia

William — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 22:07:29 EDT

McCain has 134 lobbyists on his staff. One of the most prominent is Randy Scheunemann who has been on the payroll of the Georgian government and the Burmese Dictatorship. Not surprisingly, McCain is giving carte blanche to Georgia and is putting Scheunemann's financial relationship before that of the United States. Isn't his what George Bush has done for the last 8 years?

McCain - the men and women behind the scenes

Barbara — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 14:15:46 EDT

Is it true that McCain doesn't speak for McCain? I think so. See http://www.mccainslobbyists.com and you decide.

McCain "s Sex Scandal and Fleecing of America

Madera Strong - Team Co-ordinator For City of Madera — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 07:25:47 EDT

Use the following link to see the Wahington Post's article about McCain's alleged girlfriend and his illegal conflict-of-interest activities for lobbyists, especially this "girlfriend."

All elected officials must disclose outside income, gifts, etc. in an attempt to prevent corruption, bribes, etc. Did McCain report the sex?

The telecommunications lobbyist and McCain were allegedly sexually involved when McCain was chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee and a powerful senator, since he had been in office so many years.

It is illegal for McCain to have written letters to the FCC in favor of his "girlfriend's" lobbyist clients.

Character is revealed by how you act when no one is looking. Based on this information, McCain's character is corrupt. He is greedy and has BAD JUDGMENT. McCain has a long-time reputation for being short-tempered and "attacking" in nature.

McCain is not fit to be president. MczCain is greedy and selfish, so he can not be trusted. McCain has poor judgment and would continue to abuse our economy if elected (he is already doing it as Senator).

PLEASE VOTE FOR OBAMA

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/25/AR2008022502421.html

McCain's Lobbyist-Laden Group: International Republican Institute Gives Donors Access

jgabriel — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 09:12:01 EDT

The NY Times describes the International Republican Institute, which McCain heads, as a "revolving door for lobbyists and out-of-power Republicans."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/28/us/politics/28IRI.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

$8 From 8 For 08

J J Clark 93614 — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:18:50 EDT

Donate $8 And Then E-Mail This To 8 Others Who You Think Will Donate!!

(Cut And Paste This In You E-Mail)

Can Ordinary People Out Fund Lobbyists?$8 From 8 For ‘08(We want To Sweep The Globe With This E-Mail!) Let’s face the facts; the Change necessary to right our Country’s ills is enormous. The next President is going to need the full support of the U.S. House and Senate, and a sufficient Democratic plurality to guarantee passage of difficult and controversial Legislation, Legislation designed to get our Nation back to work, out if Iraq, and untangle the horrific mess left by the Bush Administration. Hundreds of millions of dollars are going to be needed by Senators and Congressmen up for re-election. Many of these re-election battles will be strengthened by an Obama landslide. In addition, the infusion of money, advertising and support from the Obama Organization could make a big difference, especially in tight races, and keep Lobbyist money and especially their negative influences out of Washington! We all know that the real battles in Washington are in the halls of Congress, not on the Chamber floors! Every American is going to be asked to make sacrifices in one form or another, so we may as well get acquainted with additional sacrifice. Therefore, starting today, I want to propose to you a truly radical, yet simple, approach to fund raising. I am asking you, for the good of our Nation, to send just $8 today to the Obama Election Campaign at this link: https://donate.barackobama.com/page/contribute/pf?outreach_page_id=48768Then, more importantly, send this E-mail on to at least eight (8) others, send it to every E-Mail address you have, send it overseas, let’s get it moving throughout the World. I am sure there are Millions of people on this planet hoping for a rebirth of American values and a reversal of American economic and political policy! You might consider donating $8 for every eight (8) E-Mails you send!

This may be the most critical time, to date, in our Nation’s short history; let’s not throw this opportunity away; we must use everything at our disposal, including a good ‘ol fashion Chain Letter Promotion to effect this Change!

Yes We Can, And Will, Joe Clark Coarsegold, CA P.S. Do the math, just Eight (8) levels deep will produce over ONE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS in $8 donations, Globally at the Ninth (9th) level over ONE BILLION DOLLARS!!! (WE CAN DO IT!)

10 things you should know about John McCain...

WeDemocrats — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 17:56:34 EDT

Unfortunately this is but a tip of the iceberg!

1. John McCain voted against establishing a national holiday in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Now he says his position has "evolved," yet he's continued to oppose key civil rights laws. *1

2. According to Bloomberg News, McCain is more hawkish than Bush on Iraq, Russia and China. Conservative columnist Pat Buchanan says McCain "will make Cheney look like Gandhi." *2

3. His reputation is built on his opposition to torture, but McCain voted against a bill to ban waterboarding, and then applauded President Bush for vetoing that ban. *3

4. McCain opposes a woman's right to choose. He said, "I do not support Roe versus Wade. It should be overturned." *4

John McCain's profligate campaign advisor Charlie Black "concedes" that Obama is a patriot

William — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:20:12 EDT

John McCain's profligate campaign advisor Charlie Black "concedes" that Obama is a patriot.

More proof that money & lobbyists continue to damage our government

Barbara — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 10:49:47 EDT

On a web site, Clean Money - Clean Elections - a citizen web site that monitors the money trail of ALL politicians posted a copy of the letter that was mailed to Federal Election Commission on June 9th 2008. The summary of the letter:

The first matter involves payments made earlier this year by a lobbying firm, the Loeffler Group LLP, to Susan Nelson, National Finance Director for the McCain campaign. The second issue is the reduction of a campaign invoice by over $100,000. The invoice was from a firm partly owned by McCain campaign manager Rick Davis. Based on the facts included in this letter, there is reason to believe two election law violations have occurred.

See http://www.campaignmoney.org/mccainfec for the full letter and also links to send your belief to your local reps and newspapers that this kind of illegal marriage of money and politicians has to stop.

Most Exciting News Since Iowa

Ryan Kauffman in Portland — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 22:57:07 EDT

The pundits rarely understand or even recognize the seminal moments of American history as they happen unless there are explosions, large crowds, or clear winners and losers. In other words they need easily marketable events to sell to their consumers. It is the reason they missed out on the historic nature and obvious strengths of the Obama campaign a year ago and why they understood the importance of Iowa. More importantly it is why they missed the bus today.

When Barack Obama and Howard Dean decided to renounce all lobbyist and PAC money to the DNC I heard the death knell for the modern era of political campaigning. Obama already proved that a radical message of change resonates with the American people. He defeated the mammoth political machine known as Hillary Clinton! We are 16 months, 35,000,000 votes and hundreds of millions of dollars removed from the start of this campaign but stop and think for a minute at just how amazing an upset this really was.

I can only speak for myself, but Barack's stance toward's lobbyists is the reason I jumped the Hillary ship and donated what I could to this campaign.

Between the new "Obama Rules," Dean's 50-state strategy, and our amazing ability to generate clean cash the Republican Party and John McCain are trapped. They cant stick with the lobbyists because the American people won't stand for it. Nor can they renounce it. They desperately need the money to combat the charisma of Barack Obama. But ironically, if they cave to popular demand now they will appear to be following the democrats. They will lose all credibility and independence on the issue. Their choices are few. They can stick with the lobbyists and lose or renounce the lobbyists and leave McCain out to dry. Either way, we win.

But, as I mentioned at the top, this anti lobbyist strategy is difficult for the echochamber to market so it is our responsibility to publicize. This is huge! Way bigger than winning the nomination, we've known since April about that. And its way bigger than an African-American or a Woman winning the Presidency. Both would happen eventually. Lobbyists are the slime that has permeated and destroyed our government and their grip on it will only strengthen as time goes on if we do not act now.

This is our time.

Inspiration

Andrea from Chandler, AZ — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 22:26:37 EDT

Inspiration.

In one word, this is why Barack Obama has my vote. No one can disagree that he moves people, he doesn’t give us hope in America; instead he reaffirms the hope that has taken a back seat to pessimism in our government. He doesn’t tell us that he will change America; he tells us that WE can change America. Make no mistake; it will be extremely difficult to reverse decades of lobbyist influence, foreign policy that has turned much of the world against us, and climate damage caused primarily by the Age of Industrialization.

We all have something to complain about, whether it be fuel prices, corporate greed, lobbyist policy, homelessness, the list goes on and on. How do you propose a change? Most I’ve talked to refer to a revolt, and in that, I get really agitated. How would Americans revolt? And better yet, after decades of overindulgence, apathy, an incorrect opinion that we are inherently better than the rest of the world, and the most pathetic display of family values and child rearing even seen in human history, what right do we have to even be angry? We are the cause, folks, and now we bitch about the result. Honestly, if you didn’t see every bit of our social problems coming, you are an idiot. Turn off the damn TV, whether your news comes from FOX or CNN, get away from the Wolf Blitzers and the Hannity and Colmes’ and understand that they are hired to make money for the network. They will spin the issues until you’ve lost sight of what those issues are. So, back to the issues:

Bring up Barack Obama. com

Barack Obama's Plan
Washington Lobbying
• Centralize Ethics and Lobbying Information for Voters: Obama will create a centralized Internet database of lobbying reports, ethics records, and campaign finance filings in a searchable, sortable and downloadable format.
• Require Independent Monitoring of Lobbying Laws and Ethics Rules: Obama will use the power of the presidency to fight for an independent watchdog agency to oversee the investigation of congressional ethics violations so that the public can be assured that ethics complaints will be investigated.
• Support Campaign Finance Reform: Obama supports public financing of campaigns combined with free television and radio time as a way to reduce the influence of moneyed special interests. Obama introduced public financing legislation in the Illinois State Senate, and is the only 2008 candidate to have sponsored Senator Russ Feingold's (D-WI) tough bill to reform the presidential public financing system.
• Create a Public “Contracts and Influence” Database: As president, Obama will create a "contracts and influence" database that will disclose how much federal contractors spend on lobbying, and what contracts they are getting and how well they complete them.
• Expose Special Interest Tax Breaks to Public Scrutiny: Barack Obama will ensure that any tax breaks for corporate recipients — or tax earmarks — are also publicly available on the Internet in an easily searchable format.
• End Abuse of No-Bid Contracts: Barack Obama will end abuse of no-bid contracts by requiring that nearly all contract orders over $25,000 be competitively awarded.
• Sunlight Before Signing: Too often bills are rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them. As president, Obama will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days.
• Shine Light on Earmarks and Pork Barrel Spending: Obama's Transparency and Integrity in Earmarks Act will shed light on all earmarks by disclosing the name of the legislator who asked for each earmark, along with a written justification, 72 hours before they can be approved by the full Senate.
Now, will that automatically reform our Government. Hell, no. But it is my hope that we will, and that Obama is the candidate that will back the American vote in 2010 for candidates that don’t take lobbyist money. But again, you see, it’s up to us to read the records, check the database, educate ourselves just a little bit more. You may miss an episode of American Idol. If that’s the price of reasserting ourselves as the backbone of our government, it’s a pretty damn small price to pay, in my opinion.
Obama will get hell from this in both the House and the Senate, because let’s face it, they like being well kept. But if the American people can rally behind him, if we can be inspired to get off our asses and get involved in our governments, I believe that each one of these ideas are attainable.

Want to know McCain’s plans? His site is www. johnmccain. com
On the same issue, he says
America deserves and demands a government that serves the country, not itself. Most people believe that elected leaders are more interested in the perks and privileges of office than in public service, and that too often the special interest lobbyists with the fattest wallets and best access carry the day when issues of public policy are being decided.

John McCain has fought the good fight against the practices that alienate the public from their elected leaders. He has fought for public disclosure of those who lobby lawmakers for a living, and to prohibit them from providing gifts to elected officials.

He has fought for greater transparency regarding the official activities of lobbyists, disclosure of those who arrange for lawmakers' travel, and require members to pay full charter rates when using corporate aircraft.

He has fought the "revolving door" by which lawmakers and other influential officials leave their posts and become lobbyists for the special interests they have aided.

He has fought for an independent ethics office in Congress to help restore the public's faith in the integrity of the legislative branch.

Democracy is Not for Sale

The American people have been alienated from the process of self-government by the overwhelming appearance of their elected leaders having sold-out to the big-moneyed special interests who help finance political campaigns.

As John McCain has said, "Americans believe that political representation is measured on a sliding scale. The more you give the more effectively you can petition your government." It is no coincidence that the most influential lobbyists with the greatest access in the nation's Capitol are also the most prolific political fundraisers, and that incumbents attract money in far greater volumes than most challengers.

Most Americans understand that competitive elections in a free country require money. Since campaigns require spending funds to communicate with voters, they know we can never take money completely out of politics, nor should we. Americans have a right to support the candidates and the parties they endorse, including financially if they so choose.

But what most Americans worry about profoundly is corporations or individuals with huge checks seeking the undue influence on lawmakers that such largesse is intended to purchase. That is why John McCain has fought to enforce long-standing prohibitions on corporate and union contributions to federal political parties, for sensible donation limits, disclosure of how candidates and campaigns are funded, and the diligent enforcement of these common sense rules that promote maximum public participation in the political process and limit opportunities for corruption.

John McCain understands that in America the people are sovereign, and deserve a political process worthy of the sacrifices that have been made by so many to keep us free and proud. As President, John McCain will see to it that the institutions of self-government are respected pillars of democracy, not commodities to be bought, bartered, or abused.
His ideas are good, but in my opinion, largely what we’ve tried before and have found ineffective at this time.

YOU get what you vote for!

DocMobley — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 17:23:17 EDT

A vote for McCain is a vote to overturn Roe vs Wade, a vote to send someone's child or grandchild to die in an unwinnable war in Iraq, a vote for more of the same Washington lobbyist-run policies of the past, a vote to continue spending billions a month in Iraq vs at home on education and US infrastructure. You get what you vote for. Need more data - talk to parents who have loss kids in this senseless war.

Obama '08

McCain Campaign Caught in Another Lobbyist Conflict

Bill Marjenhoff — Wed, 28 May 2008 09:28:57 EDT

McCain campaign co-chair Phil Gramm was being paid by a Swiss bank to lobby Congress about the U.S. mortgage crisis at the same time he was advising McCain about his economic policy. News of Gramm’s involvement as a paid advocate for the banking industry, simultaneous with his unpaid work on McCain’s economic policies, comes as McCain’s campaign continues to reel from the purge of four other lobbyists. Two weeks ago, McCain banned lobbyists from advising him on the same subjects covered by their lobbying work. Gramm lobbied the Senate in the second half of 2007 regarding the Helping Families Save Their Homes in Bankruptcy Act. The bill would have let bankruptcy judges rewrite mortgage terms for Americans facing foreclosure so they could repay their loans and keep their homes. The banking industry opposed this measure. The bill failed. More here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24844889

Supporting the cause!

corb — Wed, 21 May 2008 11:46:01 EDT

Free anti-McCain sticker: http://officeofstrategicinfluence.com/mccain/

Anti-McCain website: http://johnsidneymccain.com/

All around pro-democrat lobbyist: http://officeofstrategicinfluence.com/

Obama Didn't Want My Money

obamarama — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 00:42:53 EDT

Obama Didn't Want My Money - Updated w/link to letter [Daily Kos]

by Borell Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 10:12:52 AM PDT

I just had the strangest experience. A presidential candidate gave me back my donation, told me would not accept it because of what I do for a living, and it left me more committeed to the candidate and conviced that he is the person that must be the next president.

I went to the mailbox and found a letter from the Obama Campaign. Enclosed was a check for $100, the return of my contribution from earlier this month along with a letter explaining why it would not be accepted.

Borell's diary :: ::

You see, I am a registered lobbyist for a non-profit organziation. We are a non-partisan, non-political membership organziation, we do not have a political action committee and strictly observe a policy of non-particpation in any event that even remotely appears political. I serve as their legislative rep, trying to ensure that expertise of our membership is heard by public officials on issues related to their area of expertise (public safety).

I guess given the fact that I was not a corporate/industry lobbyist, I never really considered that Obama's no-lobbyist money ban would apply to me, but it did! The letter thanked me for my interest in the campaign, but stated flately that my donation was not acceptable.

It's not often you get told that you are persona non grata and end up praising the person who exiled you. But that what I am doing. Obama actions are living up to his words. Through the actions of his campaign he is demonstrating that his values are real and his commitment is certain.

Another aspect that is quite impressive to me is that the Obama campaign has a mechnism set up to check each donation, even one as small as mine, against the lobbyist database, and then return it.

If I ever doubted the sincerity of the Obama Campaign, this action removed any questions.

I know my donation is not going to make a difference one way or another, and I hope that I am not the type of "corrupt lobbyist" that has infested washington.

Obama, and his campaign, are committed to bringing about change. They are doing this in both large and small steps. Refusing my money is a small step, but it spoke volumes to me. It showed me Obama means what he says and backs it up with action. It shows me that no detail is to small and that his organization is top notch. It strengthened my commitment to see him elected President.

I guess I just can't use my money to do it:).

p.s.: As a side note, last year my spouse had set up automatic monthly payments to Hillary (nothing big $10/month) but after switching to Obama, had to battle with the Clinton campaign to cancel the automatic payment. I find it ironic that one campaign won't take my money, the other won't give it back!

Updated to add: I though we had finally stopped the payments to the Clinton Campaign, but after checking with my spouse, it turns out they are still taking the payments 3-4 months after we asked them to stop.

Updated: Couldn't figure out how to post the image of the letter on the site. So below is a link. If nyone can figure out how to post in the comments, pls feel free. Thanks

http://s297.photobucket.com/...

Mark Penn & the Stealth Corporate Campagin

A New & Better Day! — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 14:41:34 EDT

Mark Penn and the Stealth Corporate Campaign

Remember, just a few weeks ago, one day before the Ohio primary, on March 3, when Senator Clinton - with an assist from Canadian officials - made a mountain out of Canadian press reports that an unpaid economic advisor to Senator Obama had reportedly met with a low-level Canadian diplomat?

Here is what she said:

“If you come to Ohio and you go give speeches that are very critical of NAFTA… and then we find out that your chief economic adviser has gone to a foreign government and basically done the old wink-wink – ‘Don’t pay any attention, this is just political rhetoric’ — I think that raises serious questions…
“I would ask you to look at this story and substitute my name for Sen. Obama’s name and see what you would do with this story… Just ask yourself [what you would do] if some of my advisers had been having private meetings with foreign governments.“

Now we get to find out.

The Wall Street Journal reports:

Clinton Aide Met on Trade Deal
Penn Held Talks On Colombia Pact Opposed by Senator
By SUSAN DAVIS
April 4, 2008; Page A3
Hillary Clinton’s chief campaign strategist met with Colombia’s ambassador to the U.S. on Monday to discuss a bilateral free-trade agreement, a pact the presidential candidate opposes.
Attendance by the adviser, Mark Penn, was confirmed by two Colombian officials…

Wait. The plot thickens!

He wasn’t there in his campaign role, but in his separate job as chief executive of Burson-Marsteller Worldwide, an international communications and lobbying firm. The firm has a contract with the South American nation to promote congressional approval of the trade deal, among other things, according to filings with the Justice Department…
Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates, Mr. Penn’s campaign-consulting firm, received more than $10 million in payments from the Clinton campaign as of the end of February, according to federal election filings…
A spokesman for Colombia’s President Álvaro Uribe said the ambassador met with Mr. Penn to discuss the bilateral agenda…
The spokesman said he didn’t know if Mr. Penn was representing Sen. Clinton or Burson-Marsteller, which signed a $300,000, one-year contract with the Colombian Embassy in March 2007 to work on behalf of the trade deal and anti-drug-trafficking initiatives, according to the Justice Department filings.

Mark Penn is not - as in the case that Senator Clinton cited on March 3 - an unpaid issues advisor, but, rather, the commander-in-chief of the Clinton campaign: the chief strategist, pollster, message czar, and the highest paid member of her campaign staff.

I can’t remember a presidential campaign in my lifetime in which the top strategist moonlighted for corporate accounts during the heat of the primaries (if that’s really what he was doing with the Colombian ambassador, as claimed: note that the Embassy told the Journal that it didn’t know which hat Penn was wearing). The conflict of interest is staggering. Add to that press reports about how former campaign manager Patty Solis Doyle went to Senator Clinton and begged her to fire Penn, but it was Solis Doyle, not the man in charge, that was cut loose as scapegoat for the campaign’s ailments.

Somewhere in Pennsylvania there is a factory that employs Americans at union wages. Somewhere in North Carolina and Indiana, too… The “free trade” agreement that Penn was paid $300,000 to shepherd to passage would open the door for the company that owns the factory to move it to a country where if a worker tries to start a union, chances are he or she will be assassinated. The company will be able to get the same work done, in that case, for slave wages, and without any of those pesky environmental, safety and health regulations that protect the worker in Pennsylvania.

Clinton’s March 3 challenge to the press corps - “”I would ask you to look at this story and substitute my name for Sen. Obama’s name and see what you would do with this story” - is eerily reminiscent of when a certain Colorado senator running for president in 1988 denied reports about his private life and urged reporters: “”Follow me around. I don’t care. I’m serious. If anybody wants to put a tail on me, go ahead. They’ll be very bored.”

Of course, this scandal doesn’t involve sex… just the wellbeing of workers and their families across the United States, with the sword of another dangerous “free trade” agreement dangling over their heads.

Update: Ambinder makes a good catch:

Incidentally, Penn has said that he has time for only two clients: Clinton and Microsoft. Now, perhaps, he has three.

Who Really runs our country?

Dale from Hoopeston, IL — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 21:11:51 EDT

Some of the largest key players in this presidential election campaigns are people in the business of buying and selling influence. These people are on both sides of the institutional fence. In this post will start to show how deep these people have rooted themselves in to our political process to a point were they are creating agendas which have turned in to terrible policy decisions made for the American people.

The question is, Who really runs our country?

The first thing we have to know who the players in this election.

Mark Penn - Chief Hillary Clinton strategist, and the CEO of Burson-Marsteller[1].

Burson - Marsteller is a lobbyist firm. Their client list includes CountryWide Financial[2], Black Water [3], Abu Dhabi Investment Authority[4], Saudi Arabia after 9-11[5], Exelon[6], Columbia [7], as well as Phillip Morris, Occidental Petroleum, Bristol-Meyers, Entergy (nuclear power), Lockheed Martin, Texaco, AT&T, Allergen (makers of Botox), Greece, Taiwan, Cyprus, Virginia Tech, Doha16. Qatar (to try to get the 2016 Olympics there), Comcast, Sony Ericcson, Ikea, the National Fisheries Institute, Visa International and many, many others.[8]

Charilie Black - One of John Mccains top Strategists - Chariman of BKSH & Associates [9]

BKSH & Associates is also a lobbyist firm. Now what makes BKSH & Associates so odd, is that is is a subsidary of Burson-Marsteller.[10][11][12]The company that Mark Penn is the CEO of.

Now what does Burson - Marsteller do? Well I will let their own website tell us that.

BKSH & Associates Worldwide provides the Burson-Marsteller family with elite government consulting, public affairs, and strategic lobbying capabilities. The firm's professionals design and execute government strategies on the federal and state levels, which affect public policy and enhance business development and practices around the world.
The firm uses a bipartisan approach, led by Charlie Black, one of the country's leading Republican political strategists and Scott Pastrick, a senior Democratic strategist, former Treasury Department official, and former Treasurer of the Democratic National Committee. BKSH team members have managed "front-page" issues and have worked quietly on behind-the-scenes projects for clients including Fortune 100 companies, multinationals, trade and industry associations, foreign governments, state governments, and municipalities.
Through integrated efforts with Burson-Marsteller; Marsteller; PSB; and DI, BKSH is able to meet specific government relations needs for its clients, including public affairs counsel from the local to federal level, strategic campaign leadership, and widespread, long-term relationships with political decision-makers.

This is the most amazing thing to me. This company is not even trying to cover up this up, but actually is proud of this. Wonder how long or how deep it goes? Well let me quote their website for that.

A Bipartisan Team
BKSH uses a bipartisan approach. Our team includes Democrats and Republicans who have had distinguished careers as senior staff in the U.S. House of Representatives, the U.S. Senate and the Executive Branch. The company’s professionals have been involved in most of the significant legislative issues in the past 20 years.
Our team also includes senior strategists from the Democratic and Republican parties who are veterans of many political campaigns, including:
The 2004 and 2000 campaigns of President George W. Bush
The 2004 Presidential campaign of Senator John Kerry
The 2000 Presidential campaign of Vice President Al Gore
The 1992 and 1996 campaigns of President Bill Clinton
The 1996 Presidential campaign of Senator Bob Dole
The 1992 and 1988 campaigns of President George Bush
The 1980 and 1984 campaigns of President Ronald Reagan [14]

The about us page goes on further to tell us the their Big Picture.

The Big Picture
BKSH comprehensively views a client’s concern. Even the most basic objective is potentially impacted by a multitude of constituencies and factors – some within the government, some in the media, others throughout the private sector. Therefore, it is the firm’s practice to develop an integrated approach that incorporates government relations, communications and public relations. BKSH can also help the client form coalitions with allied associations, companies, and interest groups to impact a common government relations goal.

and the bottom line

The Bottom Line
In today’s world, characterized by tight budgets and corporate downsizing, BKSH & Associates Worldwide understands that it must show real value for the client’s bottom line. The company encourages the client to view its fee not as an expenditure, but as an investment. BKSH is able to become an invaluable part of the client’s long-term strategy rather than an ancillary. We set specific goals upon which our performance may be measured. The company becomes an invaluable part of the client’s long-term strategic planning. [14]

This company not only acknowledges this is occurring, but also talks about how hiring them will improve your financial status, or push your agenda. The company also brags about how it has been in involved in the Republican party since Regan campaign, and start having people on both sides of the fence from when Bill Clinton started running. The company goes far to say that they have top Republican Strategist Charlie Black, and Top Democratic Strategist Scott Pastrick and will use a bipartisan approach on "Front Page Issues" or working quietly behind the scene.

The question is, Who really runs our Country? Vote for the Candidate that has said No to lobbyist money.

Please go through my citations. Check for the Accuracy of what I am saying. If you see any mistakes, or have any questions, or comments please e-mail me or post a comment. I only want the truth in this blog.

1. Burson-Marsteller, "Abous Us Mark Penn http://www.burson-marsteller.com/About_Us/Global_Leadership/Lists/GlobalLeadership/DispForm.aspx?ID=1&nodeName=Global%20Leadership&SubTitle=Mark%20J.%20Penn (accessed March 30, 2008).

2. CNN, "Countrywide to launch PR campaign(2007), http://money.cnn.com/2007/10/03/news/companies/countrywide_pr/index.htm (accessed March 30, 2008).

3.Border, J, & Risen, J "Blackwater Mounts a Defense With Top Talent(2007), http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/01/washington/01blackwater-sub.html?pagewanted=print (accessed March 30, 2008).

4. Burson-Marsteller, "B-M in the News(2007), http://www.burson-marsteller.com/Newsroom/Lists/BMNews/DispForm.aspx?ID=3627&nodename=B-M%20in%20the%20News&subTitle=ADIA%20Hires%20Burson%20for%20Global%20Work (accessed March 30, 2008).

5. Guardian UK, "Fur flies as Greenpeace grandee takes PR shilling(2002), http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4334181,00.html (accessed March 30, 2008).

6. Stein, S. "Mark Penn Tied To Controversial Nuclear Firm http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/14/mark-penn-tied-to-controv_n_86722.html (accessed March 30, 2008).

7. US Department of Justice, "Pursuant to the Foreign Agents Regisitration Form OMB NO. 1105-0003, http://www.fara.gov/docs/2469-Exhibit-AB-20070503-5.pdf (accessed March 30, 2008).

8. Shear , M & Birnbaum, J "The Anti-Lobbyist, Advised by Lobbyists(2008), http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/21/AR2008022101131_pf.html (accessed March 30, 2008).

9. BKSH & Associates, "Charles R. Black, Jr http://www.bksh.com/charlie-black.html (accessed March 30, 2008).

10. USA today, "Blackwater aided by PR giant(2007), http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-10-05-blackwater-pr_N.htm (accessed March 30, 2008).

11. Burson-Marsteller, "Intergrated Solutions http://www.burson-marsteller.com/INTEGRATED_SOLUTIONS/Pages/BKSH.aspx (accessed March 30, 2008).

12. Birnbaum, J. "A Few Degrees of Separation From Hillary Clinton's Top Adviser(2007), http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/19/AR2007021900972.html (accessed March 30, 2008).

13. BKSH & Associates, "Integration with the Burson-Marsteller Family http://www.bksh.com/integration-with-the-burson-marsteller.html (accessed March 30, 2008)

14. BKSH & Associates, "About Us http://www.bksh.com/about-us.html (accessed March 30, 2008).

We Have a Choice

The Trombone-Wielding Jackass — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 12:40:25 EDT

Never in my lifetime have we, as Americans, been offered the priviledge to be a part of such history as we are during this election. Unfortunately, it seems that many are happy to waste said opportunity.

As Senator Obama so eloquently put it during his monumental speech yesterday:

"...we have a choice in this country. We can accept a politics that breeds division, and conflict, and cynicism. We can tackle race only as spectacle...or in the wake of tragedy...or as fodder for the nightly news. We can play Reverend Wright’s sermons on every channel, every day and talk about them from now until the election, and make the only question in this campaign whether or not the American people think that I somehow believe or sympathize with his most offensive words. We can pounce on some gaffe by a Hillary supporter as evidence that she’s playing the race card, or we can speculate on whether white men will all flock to John McCain in the general election regardless of his policies.

We can do that.

But if we do, I can tell you that in the next election, we’ll be talking about some other distraction. And then another one. And then another one. And nothing will change"

We have a choice, ladies and gentlemen, and we have been presented with a historic opportunity.

We are being given the opportunity to take a stand against fear-mongering, against smear campaigns, against corporate greed, and against, not a lobby-dominated Washington, but a lobby-owned Washington. We are being given the opportunity to sow the seeds of a new American politics - and a new America.

However, there are people - even within our own party - who continue to fight against this opportunity. They want to continue the exploitation and spread of fear, and they want to feed the growth of the politics which is only willing to present the issues that stand entirely aside of the true problems that face our beloved country.

Chances like this come few and far between, and we may not get another like it within our lifetimes. I, for one, want to be able to someday look back upon this time and not only say that I was a part of something great, but to say that I was a part of something great that changed our lives, our country, and our world for the better.

We Have a Choice, ladies and gentlemen, that could change everything. Let us not look back on this time and say that we tried; let us look back on this time and say that we did.

YES. WE. CAN.

Shame on you, Geraldine Ferarro.

Gina-Louise from Northampton, MA — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 16:43:02 EDT

Oops. Did I plagiarize, Mrs. Clinton?

While we were all agog about Eliot Spitzer, news broke that Geraldine Ferarro made a ludicrous and extremely offensive statement to the Daily Breeze.

"I'm on Hillary's finance committee. I've done a fundraiser for her here at my firm. And I went and worked the phone banks before Super Tuesday. I have to tell you, this is a very emotional campaign for me," Ferraro said.
When the subject turned to Obama, Clinton's rival for the Democratic Party nomination, Ferraro's comments took on a decidedly bitter edge.
"I think what America feels about a woman becoming president takes a very secondary place to Obama's campaign - to a kind of campaign that it would be hard for anyone to run against," she said. "For one thing, you have the press, which has been uniquely hard on her. It's been a very sexist media. Some just don't like her. The others have gotten caught up in the Obama campaign.
"If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position," she continued. "And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."

Right. Because Black men hold such a privileged place in this country. So privileged, according to Ms. Ferarro, that they rank above White men in the advantages they enjoy in the United States.

Allow me to school you for a moment, Ms. Ferarro.

African American men, while only 13% of the population, comprise 49% of the prison population.
Due to this, and discriminatory disenfranchisement felony laws, 13% of African American men who are free cannot vote.
African American men's incomes have declined over the past 30 years.
50% African American men in their 20's were jobless in 2004.
African American men are less likely to go to college, and if they do have only a 35% graduation rate
In 2006, the poverty rate for African Americans was 24.3%, double the national average.
African American men have the worst health and the highest death rate of all races/ethnicities and both genders.
African Americans received the largest percentage of subprime loans, and will suffer the most foreclosures and loss of wealth due to the unscrupulous loans.

So you explain to me how it is that you think it is extremely easy for a Black man to become President of the United States, Ms. Ferarro.

Geraldine Ferarro, you should be ashamed of yourself. I understand that it might be hard for you to see the inequality from way up high on your post as principal to the Lobbying firm Blank Rome Government Relations LLS, and on the Board of Goodrich Petroleum, but it is there.

And Hillary Clinton, you're not off the hook. I call on you to "Reject and Denounce" this offensive, and factually insane statement.

[Originally posted on http://www.knittingliberally.com/?q=node/59]

Let's not Clinton make us change our tone

Bruce — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 18:19:20 EST

Hope, change, no lobbyist, Yes we can. That's what Clinton doesn't like to hear, that's what she is afraid to hear. Let's not shut up.

Yes we can do it.

But like in a soccer game, it isn't enough to defend, but to counter-attack: NAFTA, Irak, her healthcare plan, her tax return...

NAFTA, NAFTA, NAFTA again, even she gets mad at us.

Let's not forget her contradictions, her ridiculous 35 years of experience. Her 80 countries, like Jules Verne's world tour in 80 days.

Drive her saying more nonses, let's have her losing her calm, let's make her know olderness doesn't mean experience.

sheer big number, $55 million, makes executive leadership apparent

jonathan | cvg — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 16:37:46 EST

a couple days ago, i wrote a blog entitled "which senator has executive experience?"

i received an email to day from OBAMA FOR AMERICA... can you believe we raised $55 million dollars in february?!! even with lobbyist and special interest contributions, republicans and clinton have never touched on OBAMA's new record. $55 million from united, average americans is what i deem true, never-before-seen executive management and leadership. running a successful multi-million dollar enterprise is something the other two senators left in the race can't claim or deny.

the chicago tribune reported, "the total came from contributions from nearly three-quarters of a million donors, including about 385,000 who were donating for the first time. vrtually all of the money - $45 million – was raised online."

a couple days i had already begun asserting this argument:

none of the senators running (McCain, Clinton, OBAMA) have outright executive experience. so, by what do we judge one's ability to lead or manage? the logical choice is by the candidates' campaigns which represent multi-million dollar enterprises... larger than a small business. analysts have drawn this conclusion also. OBAMA is clearly the best qualified leader by many respects including his ability to run cultivate a multi-million dollar enterprise and accomplish what he has done in just more than a year. OBAMA may very well be recorded as having built and managed the greatest presidential campaign in history. OBAMA achieved, in a short period of time, what most politicians fail to do in a lifetime.

again, $55 million from united, average americans is what i deem true, never-before-seen executive management and leadership. running a successful multi-million dollar enterprise is something the other two senators left in the race can't claim or deny.

if only a country could be run so well.

~ j

here is the email i received:

Jonathan --

I want to add some more news to David's note about the state of the race.

As you know, we've won 27 of 41 contests and have maintained our commanding lead among pledged delegates.

But today I want to share another staggering number: supporters like you donated more than $55 million to this campaign in the month of February.

That's a humbling achievement, and I am very grateful for your support.

No campaign has ever raised this much in a single month in the history of presidential primaries. But more important than the total is how we did it -- more than 90% of donations were $100 or less, and more than 385,000 new donors in February pushed us past our goal of more than 1,000,000 people owning a piece of this campaign.

From the beginning, this campaign has always been funded by a movement of grassroots supporters giving whatever they can afford. And unlike Senator Clinton and Senator McCain, we have never taken money from lobbyists or PACs.

Senator Clinton has decided to use her resources to wage a negative, throw-everything-including-the-kitchen-sink campaign. John McCain has clinched the Republican nomination and is attacking us daily. But I will continue to vigorously defend my record and make the case for change that will improve the lives of all Americans.

Despite your generosity in February, I need your help to continue this battle on two separate fronts.

Please make a donation of $100 today:

https://donate.barackobama.com/themath

Thank you for your support,

Barack

Strategery ... hee hee hee

bL@6gerer — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 17:18:19 EST

1. Emphasize that the Republicans are going to nominate a person, who although sometimes misguided, puts his country first, sometimes opposing some or many people in his own party. The Democratics also need a person who puts country over cronism. Then talk about Hilliary's dirty lobbyist money. Also, the super delegates hear the same message. If he's still thinking about offense and not just about defending the National Security attacks, he probably realizes this.

2. Address the National Security issue by getting probable cabinet and department hires to speak on his ability as Commander-in-Chief. I suspect he already knows this.

3. The same talent that has "inspired" now must be able to "build confidence". I suspect he already knows this, also.

I hope he delivers the goods.

bL@6gerer

which senator has executive experience?

jonathan | cvg — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 16:03:20 EST

the truth?

none of the senators running (McCain, Clinton, OBAMA) have outright executive experience. so, by what do we judge one's ability to lead or manage? the logical choice is by the candidates' campaigns which represent multi-million dollar enterprises... larger than a small business. analysts have drawn this conclusion also. OBAMA is clearly the best qualified leader by many respects including his ability to run cultivate a multi-million dollar enterprise and accomplish what he has done in just more than a year. OBAMA may very well be recorded as having built and managed the greatest presidential campaign in history. OBAMA achieved, in a short period of time, what most politicians fail to do in a lifetime.

THE TRUTH ABOUT OBAMA AND HIS SENATE RECORDS:

Barack Obama has passed more progressive legislation in his lifetime than Hillary Clinton. As an Illinois Senator he passed over 200 of the bills he wrote. These bills include:

1. A bill that expanded healthcare to over 100,000 people in Illinois.

2. A bill that set up community health centers to serve underserved populations.

3. A bill that provided the earned income tax credit to thousands of Illinois families.

4. A bill that reformed the death penalty that had sent innocent people to death row

5. A bill that banned gifts and meals from lobbyists.

I will also point out this link to a PDF published based on the NEW YORK TIMES that illustrates OBAMA's Illinois record clearly.
http://manchester.ucsd.edu/misc/obama-state-senate.pdf

Finally, I will point out that Barack OBAMA was so well accomplished and productive as a state senator that OBAMA won his US Senate seat by the largest margin of victory in congressional history... now what was his about nil?

While Hillary Clinton has spent more time in the U.S. Senate, Barack Obama has gotten more substantive legislation that affects the American people passed while he's been there.

1. A bill with Senator Richard Lugar which bans the development of nuclear weapons.

2. A bill that created a public database where average Americans can see how the government is spending their money.

3. A bill that provided important assistance to address the situation in the Congo.

4. A bill that Nancy Pelosi calls "one of the toughest ethics reform" bills in this history of the Congress.

Anyway you cut it... as the US Senator, Obama authored/co-sponsored more bills in his first two years than Clinton achieved in her first two years or in her last two years of her first term... either way... what was this about nil?

On a final note, keep in mind that when it comes to EXPERIENCE:

Barack Obama will have held elected office for 12 years before becoming President. Hillary Clinton will only have held office for 8 years.

While Clinton claims experience from her husband's presidency, she will not release her White House papers to let us know specifically what that experience is. Meanwhile, policies she once championed, she now disagrees with, i.e. "Don't Ask Don't Tell" and NAFTA

Barack Obama will be older than Bill Clinton, Teddy Roosevelt, and John F. Kennedy were before they took the presidency.
Hillary Clinton voted for the Iraq War, while Barack Obama opposed the war from the start.

Hillary Clinton was the last Democrat to support the torture pledge.

Obama voted to ban the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas. Hillary Clinton voted against the ban. Cluster bombs have a high failure rate and are often mistaken by children for toys. They are indiscriminate and result in thousands of civilian deaths.

Barack Obama has gotten more anti-poverty legislation signed into law in his lifetime than Hillary Clinton has. He passed numerous bills during his work in Illinois.

Barack Obama passed the toughest ethics reform legislation in the U.S. Senate since Watergate.

The League of Conservation Voters gave Barack Obama a higher score on his environmental voting record than all the other Democratic nominees.

The Washington Post gave Barack Obama an A- for his economic stimulus plan and gave Hillary Clinton a C+.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jG0PfADEbDs

remember clinton promised health care reform 16 years ago

jonathan | cvg — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 15:49:51 EST

i relate to barack because my colleagues are generally older than me. hence, my colleagues could be dubbed more "experienced." yet it is commonly my dedication and ingenuity that tops their results time and time again.

we do not have to fail miserably to first succeed. we have to be extraordinary and dedicated at formulating solutions before the challenges first thwart our effort... i think we must contemplate the strategies and think from outside the box.

hillary simply has never united diverse backgrounds and opposing parties with the sheer magnitude obama has succeeded at doing so in just more than a year. it only took him a year to surpass the support she accumulated in nearly 20 years. and, she should not be embarrassed. she is still a smart, strong woman. but, honestly, few politicians could do what obama has done in both his career and his campaign.

i think achieving support and success in favor of executing on your ideas is not always based in compromise... it's the power of persuasion... convincing others to back your strategy... and having the support base or popularity to do so.

DON'T VOTE THE SAME AND EXPECT DIFFERENT RESULTS. I AM NOT DELUSIONAL, NOR ARE THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS WHOM VOTED FOR OBAMA SO FAR. WE SEE THE TRUTH.

i don't accept that the best choice for me is proven failure, time-tested readiness (age), or compromised principles. neither should you.

http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid353515028/bctid1411847659

Experience

Barack Obama will have held elected office for 12 years before becoming President. Hillary Clinton will only have held office for 8 years.

While Clinton claims experience from her husband’s presidency, she will not release her White House papers to let us know specifically what that experience is. Meanwhile, policies she once championed, she now disagrees with, i.e. "Don't Ask Don't Tell" and NAFTA

Barack Obama will be older than Bill Clinton, Teddy Roosevelt, and John F. Kennedy were before they took the presidency.

Barack Obama has passed more progressive legislation in his lifetime than Hillary Clinton. As an Illinois Senator he passed over 200 of the bills he wrote. These bills include:
1. A bill that expanded healthcare to over 100,000 people in Illinois.
2. A bill that set up community health centers to serve underserved populations.
3. A bill that provided the earned income tax credit to thousands of Illinois families.
4. A bill that reformed the death penalty that had sent innocent people to death row
5. A bill that banned gifts and meals from lobbyists.

While Hillary Clinton has spent more time in the U.S. Senate, Barack Obama has gotten more substantive legislation that affects the American people passed while he’s been there.
1. A bill with Senator Richard Lugar which bans the development of nuclear weapons.
2. A bill that created a public database where average Americans can see how the government is spending their money.
3. A bill that provided important assistance to address the situation in the Congo.
4. A bill that Nancy Pelosi calls “one of the toughest ethics reform” bills in this history of the Congress.

Hillary Clinton voted for the Iraq War, while Barack Obama opposed the war from the start.

Hillary Clinton was the last Democrat to support the torture pledge.

Obama voted to ban the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas. Hillary Clinton voted against the ban. Cluster bombs have a high failure rate and are often mistaken by children for toys. They are indiscriminate and result in thousands of civilian deaths.

Barack Obama has gotten more anti-poverty legislation signed into law in his lifetime than Hillary Clinton has. He passed numerous bills during his work in Illinois.

Barack Obama passed the toughest ethics reform legislation in the U.S. Senate since Watergate.

The League of Conservation Voters gave Barack Obama a higher score on his environmental voting record than all the other Democratic nominees.

The Washington Post gave Barack Obama an A- for his economic stimulus plan and gave Hillary Clinton a C+.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jG0PfADEbDs

The Senator, The Christian Broadcaster's Lobbyist, and The Saudi Exodus

Erik — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 18:12:51 EST

Question: Why did Christian broadcaster Paxson Communications (aka ION) provide a charter plane to hustle Saudis out of the US after 9/11, and did John McCain get to use it too?

(NOT 9/11 CONSPIRACY)

As per the official 9/11 commission report, the Saudi's were give permission to leave the US on charter flights while the rest of US airspace was closed. The second plane, leaving Las Vegas carried a Saudi Prince and his party on September 20th 2001. This plane, has been identified in the report as Chartered Flight B 727-21, Tail Number N727PX. This plane is a private Boeing 727 owned by Paxson Communication a.k.a. ION Broadcasting.

Paxson Communications (as it was known during the time period concerned) owned this plane; a private corporate jet. Curiously, this tail (N-number) ID does not exist, and is available according to the FAA.

Chartered Flight B 727-21, Tail Number N727PX
On September 20, 2001, 18 members of the party of Saudi Prince Abdulmajeed Bin
Abdulaziz departed from Las Vegas, Nevada, for Stanstead, England.84 They
underwent the same vetting process as the 69 people on the flight the day before.

http://www.9-11commission.gov/staff_statements/911_TerrTrav_App.pdf

Now, the question is, was John McCain given access to this plane through his relationship (professional or otherwise) with lobbyist Vicki Iseman?

If anyone has a picture of John McCain debarking or embarking from a plane with this tail number (N727PX) please post. Possiable time periods would surround his letters to the FCC and his 2000 Presidential bid.

This latest photo from airliners.net has given many a creepy feeling.

For more imformation click democraticunderground.com.

Clinton: self over party over country

dd — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 16:32:09 EST

This story about the ties between Sens. Clinton and McCain's advisors is really remarkable. That someone whose main voting block is the bedrock of the Democratic party would behave in such a way is unbelievable. If you think about it, her whole strategy is ultimately self defeating.

John McCain's hypocrisy on ethics and integrity - please sign formal complaint

Marion Young — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 11:36:50 EST

This just in from Howard Dean, Chairman - Democratic Party:

"There was a lot of talk last week about John McCain's blatant hypocrisy on ethics and integrity in Washington.
Here we go again.

McCain is now breaking the law by ignoring the campaign spending restrictions for the Republican primary that came when he asked for federal matching funds -- funds he used as collateral on a loan that helped keep his campaign going.

But now that the lobbyist and special interest money has started pouring into his campaign, he's trying to back out of the promise he made just a few months ago. They're feeding so much cash into his bank account, this "reformer" wants nothing to do with federal campaign finance laws anymore.

That's why today, we're filing a formal complaint with the Federal Election Commission demanding that John McCain be held to the campaign finance laws. Trying to back out shows a total lack of integrity and honesty -- he made a deal with the American people to to abide by the law, and in return, he was guaranteed taxpayer money that he used to back a loan.

I'd like you to add your name in support of our complaint, and ask as many people as you can to sign on. American taxpayers made a deal with John McCain -- now that he's flush with lobbyist cash, he wants to pretend that it never happened.

Sign on right now:

http://www.democrats.org/McCainBusted

Here's the background on the situation.

A few months ago, John McCain applied for and was approved to receive federal matching funds. Because he couldn't find enough people to fund his campaign, he was also forced to apply for a $4 million line of credit, which he secured by using the federal matching funds as collateral.

By taking the federal funding, he agreed to spend no more than $57 million until the Republican convention. But so far, his campaign has spent at least $49 million -- leaving him with less than $10 million to campaign with through September.

Now that he's won the nomination and has the support of the Republican lobbyist and special interest machine, he's trying to ignore that the whole thing ever happened. He recently wrote a letter to the FEC telling them that he was backing out, even though the FEC is very clear that any request to withdraw from the agreement must be approved; you can't just change your mind and take it back -- legally, you have to be given permission.

McCain isn't asking because he knows he'll never be granted permission, and he doesn't want to have to accept the funding restrictions he agreed to when he used the money as collateral for a loan. He's ripping a page right from George Bush's playbook: ignoring the laws when they aren't convenient and hoping no one will notice.

Stand up and show him that hundreds of thousands of people have noticed -- he can't change the rules in the middle of the game because he doesn't like how things are going for him:

http://www.democrats.org/McCainBusted

Using government programs when it's politically convenient and breaking the rules when it's not ... remind you of anyone?

Just like George Bush, John McCain thinks he's above the law. McCain poses as a reformer, but seems to think reforms apply to everyone but him.

Time to send him a message.

Howard Dean"

I've signed on and I hope you will too...Marion

What happened in Austin?

A from Marshall, TX — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 01:01:30 EST

Okay, Barack got slammed in Austin. I think his insecurities and false promises are finally coming out. They were also described by Sen. John Mccain as "eloquent but empty calls for change that promises no more than a holiday from history and a return to the false promises and failed policies of a tired philosophy that trusts in government more than people." Another thing is his false staements about having no red or blue states, we are the US states, when he sides exclusively with left-winged democrats. Why say he does not support lobbyist when he has been for the past mere three year of experience he has? Allow me to quote another article "He says yes to the lobbyists of the AFL-CIO when they demand card-check legislation to take away the right of workers to have a secret ballot in unionization efforts, or when they oppose trade deals. He won't break with trial lawyers, even when they demand the ability to sue telecom companies that make it possible for intelligence agencies to intercept communications between terrorists abroad. And he is now going out of his way to proclaim fidelity to the educational unions. This is a disappointment since he'd earlier indicated an openness to education reform. Mr. Obama backs their agenda down the line, even calling for an end to testing, which is the only way parents can know with confidence whether their children are learning and their schools working. These stands represent not just policy vulnerabilities, but also a real danger to Mr. Obama's credibility and authenticity." If Obama cannot navigate his way through Washington, how is he going to manage our country in foriegn relations? Lets face it, he has no experience. If we vote for Obama, we might as well put a blindfold on and prance around for the next four years because with the fasle promises and a lack of experience, who knows what we will get? I will gladly support a black candidate, I think it is a big step foward for our country, but I do not think Barack is the guy we need.

Democratic Debate in TX: Proud to be part of the "Delusional"!

Michele Grooms — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 23:00:37 EST

Of course I watched the debate tonite...looked forward to it. There were a few moments I thought, "Well let's all just hug and sing "'Kumbaya'". I was getting a bit aggravated. If we are going to debate, then let's debate. No need at all to mudsling, but I think it's vital to make the differences known especially to those on the fence. Who else loved UNIVISION's Jorge Ramos? This man knows how to ask a question. He did not let Hil keep on babbling (or if she did) he came right back to the question. Gracias Jorge.

It amazes me that Clinton considers herself to be able to work across party lines. Moreover, how can anyone think she will be a leader the world will come to respect if she will not speak to anyone unless they meet "A-Z" criteria and then some? Sounds like she and Bush have more in common than she might realize. Perhaps it is Mrs. Clinton who needs the infamous "reality check"? Obama is exactly right: The next prez is going to have to work that much harder in showing diplomacy to others because of the last eight years.

I also find it intriguing that when push comes to shove Clinton can simply just throw Bush's name around to get a "shoe-in" applause. How many times does she have to mention the obvious negatives vs. Obama to get some cheer coming her way? Seriously look in the transcript to see the numerous references. Another point that I'm going to get off my chest since I'm rambling and it's my blog and I can (and yes I know this is a run on sentence) is that if she does not want to be running as Bill's wife then 'tis best not to make mention of he/nor his administration in speeches, debates, etc, etc. If you are going to run, run on your own. Enough said.

Back to debate tonite! As expected, I was not surprised with Sen. Obama's ability to deflect the negativism away and steer and stay on point. Could this be a sign of a good leader? Hmmm.

Ugggggghhhhhhh (sorry it's the only word that will come to mind) with Hillary. Did anyone else want someone with a big mallet to come out of the ceiling and hit her on the head (not to hurt her, just to get her to stop babbbling). Enough already with her resume.

There are times when I think Obama could become almost borderline pacificist in these debates, but just when I think that he makes a stinger of a comment that is Muhammad Ali-like (get the "stinger" metaphor?) is eloquent, substantial and subtle but not too subtle and yet still not a personal attack really, know what I mean? Good. What a true diplomat, true leader and true next president of our country!!!

How sad that Clinton had to mention plagiarism w/Obama's speeches. She got booed on the Xerox comment and deservedly so. Are you kidding me? Obama handled that non-issue with such grace and finesse. IMO to undecided voters that only shows that she is hurting for votes.

Also interesting- though not surprising- was the question about the Democratic Party nomination process basically re: superdelegates and Hillary's "whatever happens, happens" attitude (interesting since she has so many more sd's...would that attitude be the same if the tables were turned? Hmmmm...) and Obama's supplication that it would be a shame if it wasn't the public that was truly represented.

One last thought, Hillary got to close the debate...I thought we might see tears again (sniff, sniff)...did anyone else think that her speech at the end was sincere or had moments of sincerity? It's just she is so the "politician". I could see perhaps at one time in her career, IMO that she truly did want change and wasn't "playing politics". It's just not now.

Lastly a quote from opening of brilliant Obama regarding lobbyists:

"The problem we have is that Washington has become a place where good ideas go to die. They go to die because the lobbyists and special interests have a strangle-hold on the agenda in Washington. They go to die in Washington because too many politicians are interested in scoring political points rather than bridging differences in order to get things done.

And so the central premise of this campaign is that we can bring this country together, that we can push against the special interests that have come to dominate the agenda in Washington, that we can be straight with the American people about how we're going to solve these problems and enlist them in taking back their government.

You know, Senator Clinton mentioned Barbara Jordan, somebody who was an inspiration to me and so many people throughout the country. And she said that what the American people want is very simple: They want an America that is as good as its promise. I'm running for president because I want to help America be as good as its promise.

Thank you very much."

Thank you, Senator Obama

For Next Debate: Eliminating Lobbyist's influence is necessary first before attacking healthcare problems.

Santiago Contreras — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 00:16:22 EST

In order to have a chance at eliminating our healthcare problems, your administration must first eliminate the influence of Lobbyists in Washington. You will have no chance of making a difference if interest groups continue to have the power in Washington that they do now.

The healthcare problem will also only be resolved after we secure our borders. Until then, emergency care spending will only increase with time due to the increase in illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants also will be the category that will require the most amount of support in a Universal Healthcare program. If the amount of Illegal immigrants keeps increasing, you will never be able to afford your Universal Healthcare program.

Keeping these two ideas in mind, there are two necessary steps before acheiving a successful Universal Healthcare program:

1. Eliminate the influence of Lobbyist

2. Secure our borders

Only then you should start reaching for Universal Healthcare. Until then, you will be swimmin against a violent current, and waste billions of tax payer's money.

I strongly believe that that mentioning clear details about how exactly you plan on achieving Universal Healthcare is a must in the next debate, and these are the two necessary first steps before attempting to achieve it.

Everyone knows that Hillary is controlled by Lobbyists and she takes the most amount from them. She was bought off when she attempted to fight them in the 90s. This is an important point to bring up to win the upcoming debate.

Bankers Gone Wild! But there is HOPE!!!

Gabriel — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 13:28:02 EST

Bankers Gone Wild!!! But there is HOPE

Response to NewsWeek article, February 7, 2008

Credit card companies take advantage of consumers.

Bank of America inherited this practice of unwarranted punitive rate hikes when they acquired MBNA. MBNA perfected this loan sharking scheme that is now widely practiced by almost all credit card issuers today. They have developed a formula partially based on FICO that determines whether the card holder is able to payoff card balance if their rate is raised up 30% in some states.

Many factors can target card holders for rate hikes:

Late payments BOA or other creditors
New revolving credit* Slow balance reduction rate
Request for line increase
New credit inquiries

As mentioned in the article, consumers can freeze there current rate by submitting a JSN (Just Say No) letter to the card issuer. Very few consumers know about the "Just Say No" to rate increase letter. Truly as the article says, the JSN is most often mistaken for promotional junk mail. The alert of the pending rate change is also delivered as an embedded small print message on the statement. Also, it is often the case that service representatives either don't know or pretend ignorance about JSN. The timing of the JSN offer and return deadline is made purposely short by card issuers.

Card issuer’s claim of risk management is pure bunk. Greed is the only driver of this calculated scheme. Doubling or tripling rates undoubtedly unsettles the financial footing of the card holders. The true risk they are managing is the customer’s propensity to pay off or charge off based on rate increase. The bullet points above are used in their formulas to calculate payoff risk. Credit card companies have risk management teams that intervene when customer receiving rate increases to stop paying or threatens stops paying. Their job is to push creditors to credit counseling services that manage debts by reducing minimums and possibly arranging rate reductions. Using these services can potentially adversely affect the card holder’s credit rating. Banks gain by avoiding discharge and reflecting a more favorable accounting of their delinquency rates.

This consumer nightmare is made possible by the billions the financial industry has invested in lobbying our congress. BOA is reaping their reward for the investment they made in lobbying our government. Big businesses has had their way with us. Our government will allow big business do anything for a profit with little regard for consumers. The current mortgage crisis is just another glaring example. Mobile phones, cable, pharmeucetical, oil industry, just to name a few of the conspirators that have spent billions lobbying to screw us. "For the People and by the People" no longer applies to America. Clearly our government is "For business and by business". "In Greed we Trust" is our true creed of our current government. Wall Street matters alot more than Main Street.

But there is HOPE. The only presidential candidate who refuses to take money from lobbyist - Barack Obama! His pledge to challenge the influence lobbyist have on our government, truly gives me HOPE. John Edwards is the only other candidate to take a stand. HOPEfully Obama will choose Edwards as a running mate to fortify the fight to return our government to "the people".

No president can take on lobbyist alone. The presidential effort has to be joined by a grass root movement "by the people" to demand that companies like BOA treat consumers fairly.

I truly believe in Free Enterprise, but balanced by humanity and fairness. BOA is a clear example of how the balance of power between government, business, and "the people" is out of whack.

i’ll vote republican before i’ll vote clinton

jonathan | cvg — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 01:55:44 EST

full disclosure: i'm a registered independent. i support a multi-party system and believe so deeply to that end that i voted for the green party candidate in the year bush stole the election from gore. gore fairly won the popular vote, and i have admired gore since reading his book as a highschool senior. yet, i supported my greater desire to see a third party win 5% of the popular vote in order to receive federal funding like democrats and republicans. i voted against the establishment to usher forward change. afterall, i am a registered independent. that means i vote based on the candidate. i vote with my conscious.

i believe that when two parties are financed by the same special interests/lobbyists, which is largely corporate america, then the nuances between the two parties are not as drastic as the american people are led to believe. why? ultimately, the donors are owed favors and even when they donate more to one party or candidate than the other... ultimately, they donate to both and demand the same type of result from both parties.

this year is different. my candidate, barack obama, is a proven leader at every level of government and in community service. he has refused special interest contributions and will act in favor of the american people, not just corporate america. unlike any candidate in my lifetime, he inspires me to believe that the time for change is now. i am not alone. he breaks records in every state that casts votes. in south carolina, history was made when a "republican state" experienced more voters in the democratic primary than in the republican primary. had it been a general election, barack obama would have won a state that has long voted for republican presidents.

i have been asked whether i prefer obama or simply oppose clinton. for the love of god, i prefer obama! i will vote for the leader who will make the states united and make my country a place to be proud of again. i will vote with my conscious. obama is the best qualified leader for the job. however, because i educated myself on both candidates, i have ample reasons not to vote for hillary clinton or the clinton dynasty. in fact, i'll vote for republican before i'll vote clinton.

my preferred candidate list should they have run in 2008:

barack obama

al gore

ralph nader

john edwards

colin powell (republican)

hillary clinton

as it turns out, hillary clinton does not make the top five. while she has reason to ask obama to be her running mate on the sad chance she wins the nomination, analysts and i agree that obama does not need clinton to win a general election. the vast majority of clinton supporters will vote for barack obama when he wins the nomination. unlike clinton, barack obama is poised to beat the republican candidate. obama supporters, some of whom have never been inspired enough to participate in the voting process or whom are independent, may not support hillary clinton. these inspired supporters of obama may choose to sit out again or vote mccain... should hillary clinton win the nomination. for years, the youth promised they would "rock the vote" and yet, until this year, they never showed up.

who is she kidding? hillary clinton is a political mastermind, but she also has a long track record of political calculation to appeal to popular opinion. a track record even a mastermind can not erase. today, she speaks passionate about unions and the working class. yet, before becoming first lady, hillary clinton supported Wal-Mart's position against unions. in addition, abc news reported clinton allegedly aided the launch of misleading social campaigns of the early 90's at wal-mart like women in management, green commerce, and made in the USA. tisk tisk.

there is also her investments in companies that were in direct contradiction to what she claims to be her current convictions as a presidential candidate. yes, just when hillary and bill were gearing up for this race for the white house, they unloaded several investments from their portfolio in companies that would have invited criticism. but, what would have been wiser as a presidential hopeful who had been prepped and groomed since bush stole the election from gore was to never have invested in companies contradicting her political platform... you know... since these are her honest social convictions dear to her heart, she says.

my favorite may be the notion that she is an equal agent for change in spite of her inability to unite or inspire like my candidate, barack obama. the truth is that she accepts tremendous sums of special interest/lobbyist contributions (twice as much as mccain and romeny combined) and barack does not. which candidate do you think owes a few favors. in fact, despite health care reform being so important to hillary, that industry is among her top contributors to both of her senate races and her current presidential nod. i wonder how affordable she will make health care costs for us since the health care industry has been so generous to her? i wonder if these contributions have anything to do with her sudden silence after coming to the white house in 1992 promising to do the things she is still promising. money makes people do the darnest things. that is why i am proud of my candidate's stance against washington lobbyists and special interest contributions.

someone indicated that he did not believe that hillary clinton accepted huge contributions from the health care and pharmaceutical industries dating back to her first campaign for the senate. what is there not to believe? it's a matter of public record. as first lady, hillary clinton was extremely outspoken, and her largest pet project was to chair the reform of the united states health care system. after at least a year of no progress, hillary clinton shut up. our health care system was not fixed or improved... not after eight years of opportunity. yet, those same special interests she spoke against and said she wanted to regulate have since written her two senate and presidential campaigns extraordinary checks. that's why you will hear comments about capitol hill serving special interests. it's why americans are cynical about politics in general. no one can debate with me whether hillary has accepted the funds. again, its public record. and, unless you are delusional, you can't argue the contributions do not influence her or lead to compromised decisions in, at least partial, favor of the companies entangled in the health care we pretend to want to reform... positively change.

people attempt to argue that obama does not support universal healtcare. i heard clinton and edwards debate the definition of universal. it stands to reason that the proposed "univeral healthcare" from the clinton dynasty is nothing more than mandated healthcare with only the very poor earning subsidies to offset the high costs. others will be fined like in new hampshire or have their wages garnished. hillary clinton is misusing the ideology behind universal healthcare which is successfully practiced much differently throughout europe, canada, and cuba! watch the movie sicko. it is a entertaining way to discover what real universal healthcare offers. barack obama's plan is truer to the ideology behind universal healthcare by assuring low-cost policies so affordable that no one would rather pay a fine. obama has been the only candidate to offer a reasonable health care plan that drives down costs, provides relief for anyone under 25 who may have education costs, and mandates coverage only for children.

let us not forget that in the recent cnn debate between only obama and clinton... obama remained consistent and true to his original decision to oppose the vote allowing bush to invade iraq. on the other hand, hillary never once admitted she made a mistake or used bad judgment. she claims that she never expected bush to misuse his power to go to war. yet, the language in the "permission slip" that congressed passed was clear. but to be fair, who reads all of a document before we sign it, right? apparently she did. in her speech regarding the vote to support war, she admits that it "was one of the toughest decisions" she had to make since it may lead to war. but wait, didn't she try to mislead the american people into thinking that bush abused his power and she never intended for the vote to lead to war?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

like barack said. it's important to be right on day one.
the momentum. the movement. the change. the time is now.

don't blindly vote based on race or gender. don't blindly vote for "experience" unless you understand the truth behind what that "experience" has been. registered voters must soon select the candidate that will effectively usher in a new post-bush era and heal the nation... internally and externally. please be wise and research your choice. as a young professional, i am up against colleagues more experienced and many times the same age as my parents. they have experience, but it has never made me less innovative or less of an asset. and many times, ok... almost always... my efforts were spot on. i have been the one that could get the job done.

likewise, obama is spot on.
obama will get the job done. obama will really meet our needs.

don't discount barack obama and his judgment nor his impressive experience and proven leadership at EVERY level of government. his efforts in just more than 12 months have matched more than a decade of grooming and preparation by the forces in support of the clinton dynasty. DON'T SUCCUMB TO BRANDING... a familiar name. i usually would not speak against branding, but, as a marketer, i see pass it. don't buy into the hype that she is "experienced" when her record is often reeks of shiiite.

we may find different things important, but for me, i have never seen a candidate that has been consistent and outspoken on all of the political and social issues important to me. there's a 64 page "blueprint for change" and highlights of his overall stance on the major issues at www.barackobama.com simply click on the issues tab on the top menu. if you think that hillary is the only candidate with a plan, you are mistaken. you might have heard that after a debate in relation to an answer to a specific question or you may have heard such a claim from the clinton campaign. but, i'd ask for you to research for yourself. with the internet, identifiying reputable resources is at our fingertips.

i listened to dozens upon dozens of speeches and read the candidates platforms (available online). barack obama and i agree on iraq, lgbt rights, health care and the environment. either candidate will stimulate the economy... it won't be difficult thanks to bush 2, just like it wasn't difficult for bill after bush 1. so therefore, which candidate has fought for and will motivate the american people to rally for change? the difference between the states and europe is that in a country like france, the people rally for change and the governement is always reminded that they work for the people. our government thinks they control us because we are not smart enough or care enough. obama is the only candidate in my lifetime that rallies people and motivates them to participate. with the people behind him, we can make a positive change now. we will remind the congress and the senate who they work for and what we want! obama will not fight alone. and you can trust him because the worst thing anyone in clinton's camp can leak about him is that he experimented with drugs or has a non-christian father. wasn't bill clinton the one who didn;t inhale? ok, right. meanwhile, hillary clinton has been accused of numerous crimes in the last two decades which always seem to fade away.

obama began his career as a community organizer. his campaign in just under a year has rose up and proved a awesome force to be reckoned with. in contrast, hillary clinton has been groomed for the 2008 presidential race for more than a decade. she began with the unofficial blessing of the press and democratic party. no one could have predicted or expected barack obama to organize and inspire grassroots campaign activity unlike most of us has seen in our lifetimes. no one would have wagered a bet that enough people would unite to make him a front-runner in the 2008 presidential race in under a year. but... he has. it's that same energy and brilliant leadership that we lack in the united states. former democratic presidential nominee and united states senator, john kerry endorsed obama's candidacy because he is uniquely situated to inspire millions of Americans to join together and come together in a movement to demand real change in washington. don't tell me you don't think obama can do the job. unions, notable politicians, educators, celebrities, and i say YES WE CAN.

be smart. vote smart. usher forward change. support barack obama.

who knows when someone will be willing to stand against the establishment and motivate real change and progression into the 21st century again. believe... and yes we can.

~ j

Dealing with the Truth, The toughest task for a President

Leif from Warren, MI — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 10:13:16 EST

I'll state why I Like Obama. From the time I heard him speak at the Democratic rally for John Kerry, he made an impression on me. Then he decides to run for President with the Change slogan. This is very effective and it's what we really need. I constantly hear him stating that Washington will not be ran by lobbyists. This is a very important issue. Even though he doesn't really discuss the nitty gritty of what all this means. So I'm going to give some examples of what lobbyists have done over the years and what they're constantly trying to do now.

Alot of us Americans can agree that our food isn't very healthy. They put so many man-made chemicals in them that they're causing all types of sickness. Let's take on high fructose corn syrup as an example. This junk has been proven to cause all types of diseases to the body, particularly diabetes. But did you know that the company that makes it already knew this and they signed on Donald Rumsfeld so he could lobby in Washington so they could get it approved. And they did. Now look at the rise in diabetes.

This directly plays into the lobbyists for health care providers and hospitals. The sicker we are the more money they make, these are lobbyists working hand in hand. Why do you truly think they want to prevent universal health care. They lie to make us think it doesn't work. It's all about the money and excuse my language, but it's about damn time someone is calling them out and challenging them, letting them know the buck stops here.

Im proud to say that I'm voting for Obama, this guys got balls!

Anytime a man can stand for what he truly believes in and look those monsters dead in their eyes and tell them, "you can have a seat at the table, but you can't buy them all" is a man standing on principles and morals. I get so tired of politicians jumping around questions and not really dealing with what Im dealing with in life. Show me that you truly hear me, that's all we want. America is tired of the same old rhetoric from politicians.

I feel that from what I've seen from Barack, he's a father first, then a husband, then a politician and he makes his decisions respectively. If it's something out there that'll affect his kids, he's gonna deal with it head on.

So let's rally around this guy and let's vote for "Change". Let's keep it honest, up to this point in my 36 year life, the government hasn't done nothing for me. I even had problems after the first Gulf War and the government wasn't there for me. We can't allow them to keep doing this to us, they did it to the Vietnam Vets, the Gulf War vets and we refuse to let them do nothing for our soldiers returning from this Iraq war.

Let's stand for "Change"!

Who is Jim Demmers?

Estevan carlos from Los Angeles, CA — Sun, 06 Jan 2008 14:20:33 EST

I think we all deserve to have Obama be upfront about this as I'd still like to maintain my support for him.

Is there any explanation about Obama's claim regarding Jim Demmers in the NH debate?

Time Article

Clinton Discussing the remark

Integrity and a poker face

Tom Hayes, working for change — Mon, 24 Sep 2007 09:22:50 EDT

A long-time acquaintance inquired in email last night why I'd support Senator Obama's candidacy. I found a timely AP Story that correlates with my perspective as I surveyed the news this morning. What follows is essentially the response I sent. It doesn't tell the whole Obama story, but it packages an illustrative anecdote.

According to a provocatively titled article by Christopher Wills, a writer for the Associated Press:

As a presidential candidate, Obama doesn't accept political contributions from lobbyists or political action committees. But as a legislator, he took thousands of dollars from the groups represented by some of his poker buddies. AT&T in its various incarnations, for example, gave more than $13,000 over the years.
Still, Obama routinely voted against the communications giant's interests. He opposed SBC Communications Inc. — as AT&T was then called — on a major initiative in 2003 that would have increased costs for the company's competitors.
Poker night also included a lobbyist for the Illinois Manufacturers' Association, and the game eventually was moved to the association's office. Obama often voted to raise taxes and fees for businesses.
Players say the poker game affected legislation only by building relationships, and lobbyists might get a more respectful hearing for their arguments.
Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070924/ap_po/obama_poker

Between that and the rest of what's written I see confirmation of the union of integrity and well-grounded principles I want in our President - a man who listens, who builds necessary bridges to allow persons representing disparate positions and goals to cross the divide separating them.

Barack Obama's not going say, "I didn't inhale." He's not going to adopt the protective coloration of a regular ol' Texan despite being born in Connecticut, attending Phillips Academy in Massachusetts, a degree from Yale, and so on. Obama's human, and he personifies the best of what that means.

Did I persuade my associate of my wisdom supporting Senator Obama's candidacy? I don't know yet.

Some will claim to be scandalized by 'gambling' revelations even on this petty scale; I'm reassured and encouraged, frankly. I'm glad that the man I want elected as our next President is human, thoughtful, creative, down to earth, and able to meet unfluential, persuasive lobbyists without losing his integrity or losing sight of his goals.

Edwards slams Clinton and the establishment elites

questor — Thu, 23 Aug 2007 17:49:30 EDT

Edwards slams Clinton, 'establishment elites'

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/23/edwards.clinton/

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- John Edwards didn't mention a chief Democratic presidential rival by name, but it seemed clear whom the White House hopeful was targeting in a fiery speech Thursday in New Hampshire.

The former U.S. senator from North Carolina, who finds himself lagging significantly behind Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in most national polls, told New Hampshire voters to reject "establishment elites" and "outdated answers ... rooted in nostalgia."

[[[ That's why I support Obama - he will not default to the status quo. ]]]

"The trouble with nostalgia is that you tend to remember what you liked and forget what you didn't," Edwards said. "It's not just that the answers of the past aren't up to the job today, it's that the system that produced them was corrupt -- and still is."

[[[ It is perhaps more accurate to say the old system is a closed system of monopolies that is breaking part and the potential new system is a global enterprise made up of many community owned enterprises, small businesses and regional political leaders who are accountable and respond directly to Americans. ]]]

[ snip ]

But Edwards said voters shouldn't replace "a group of corporate Republicans with a group of corporate Democrats." Seeming to take a page out of Republican talking points from the '90s, he added, "The American people deserve to know that their presidency is not for sale, the Lincoln Bedroom is not for rent, and lobbyist money can no longer influence policy in the House or the Senate."

Following President Clinton's 1996 re-election, Republicans accused him of improperly allowing top campaign donors to spend a night in the White House, arguing the practice amounted to "renting" out the Lincoln Bedroom.

Democrats have also charged President Bush of the same practice.

Edwards also said, "We cannot triangulate our way to real change," a veiled reference to the ex-Democratic president's political strategy of attempting to fashion a "third way" on issues to appeal to members of both political parties.

Edwards, who previously has attacked the former first lady for accepting campaign donations from lobbyists, continued his criticisms of the practice Thursday, decrying "the politicians who curry [lobbyists'] favor and carry their water."

The senator from New York has defended accepting $400,000 in campaign donations from lobbyists, saying at a recent presidential forum, "A lot of these lobbyists, whether you like it or not, represent real Americans. They actually do. They represent nurses, they represent social workers -- yes, they represent corporations that employ a lot of people," she said.

The Clinton responded to Edwards' speech by saying "angry attacks on other Democrats won't improve Senator Edwards' campaign."

[[[ Yeah, real " angry ". Try again, Carville and Matalin. ]]]

Change from Politicians doing Big Business Biddings

Julia from Cincinnati, OH — Sat, 18 Aug 2007 11:28:30 EDT

I want a politician to answer with specific words. dont play games. The middle class is hurting because you politicians sold your souls to Big Businesses to allow them to write how they will proceed with business, stifle wages, and retake benefits. Deregulation caused this as well add to it NAFTA and CAFTA. U want a polotician to be honest and forthright then follow through on your promises. Its funny that those running for office promises anything to get a vote from the American citizen, then once elected the elected official get their marching orders from Big Business. The Middle Class is being squeezed because our elected official allow Big Business to do the squeezing and got paid for their inaction by Big Business. Look at Gas, Health Care, banking, Mortgage, Food, Clothing....every facet of our lives our elected officials turn over to Big Business. Read Allstate Insurance and the Mckinsey Report. Read your house insurance policy and check to see if your insurer will pay 100% replacement costs or "extended replacement costs." Dont listen to your insurance agent as they are on the side of their employer.

Chatting with New Hampshire Voters

Michael Negron — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 11:56:39 EDT

Barack sees huge crowds wherever he goes, especially here in New Hampshire. But yesterday, Barack met with voters in smaller, intimate get-togethers, engaging in a more in-depth conversation about the future of our country.

At each stop, Barack told voters that progress on health care, the environment, and other issues will depend upon a president having the “urgency and willingness to take on the special interests.” Barack’s record of cleaning up government proves he has the experience and credibility to change the way politics works in Washington. He has walked the walk.

Eight local residents gathered for an early breakfast at Jesse’s in Hanover. Barack kicked off the meeting by promising to do more listening to voters in small settings because “people are feeling that their voices aren’t being heard in Washington.” The conversation ranged from health care to faith in government, and Barack listened closely as folks shared their stories.

After an hour-and-a-half with Barack, Michael, a Dartmouth medical student, said he felt very fortunate for the opportunity. He added, “I feel like he connects easily with people and listens intently to what you tell him.”

Around lunchtime, Barack met with six residents of Keene on the outdoor patio at Lindy’s Diner. Not even a summer burst of rain could sidetrack the free-ranging discussion on the full gamut of issues. Barack persuasively talked about how real change was not only a possibility, but an absolute necessity. “We’ve got a politics in Washington that isn’t working for the people anymore, and we’re going to have to build a movement to overcome the status quo.”

Karlene was part of the small group and confessed to me that Barack has “had me since his 2004 DNC speech. But every time I see him talk, I walk away amazed.”

After his discussion, Barack congratulated the Railroad Team, winners of this weekend’s Hoops.Action.Change. 3-on-3 basketball tournament. He signed basketballs for the players and shot around with them for a few minutes.

Despite the summer storm that drenched attendees as they entered the building, Barack was then enthusiastically received by over 350 at a rally inside the Keene Recreation Center. He fired up the crowd and spoke movingly about how change in America always comes from the ground up. He painted a picture of “Bloody Sunday” in Selma, Alabama in 1961 as a time when millions of Americans watched their TVs, saw an urgent need for change in their country and rose up to demand that their voices be heard. As he does so often on the trail, Barack inspired the crowd with reminders of what we have already achieved in our history as Americans and dared them to dream of the fundamental change we can now accomplish together.

Barack ended his day with an energized crowd of nearly 800 in Nashua for a town hall in front of a pond lined by willow trees. As the sun began to set behind thin white clouds, Barack continued his dialogue with Granite Staters. As always, the crowd asked tough questions, demonstrating a sophisticated grasp of politics and policy.

Barack answered each question head-on offering detailed, honest responses. David from Nashua, and undecided voter leaning Barack’s way, loves Barack’s willingness to take so many questions from the audience. After listening to him speak thoughtfully on questions about terrorism, Iran and Iraq, he said, “he’s someone that I can really see as a true commander-in-chief.”

Barack knows that New Hampshire voters like to “kick the tires and take candidates out for a test drive,” and promised to return soon to keep listening to the urgent needs of every day citizens.

Well Produced Videos on YouTube Help Drive the Message!

vette58 — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 05:42:37 EDT

Johnathan has done it again. Two well produced videos are available on YouTube focusing on Barack's response at Daily KOS to Hillary concerning Lobbyist donations at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-i5mGij_YRg and concerning Barack's leadership ability at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHIBok83AQg. I've also sent them to some of my undecided friends.

The Mantle of Reform

JEP — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 10:57:50 EDT

For weeks I've been meaning to write something here about the need for Barack Obama to make reform a centerpiece of his presidential campaign. Fortunately, he went ahead and did just that, without my prompting, at his Reform Town Hall Meeting in Iowa. So my post ends up being partly a pat on the back, but it's also a call for more.

Obama's speech was delivered at a middle school named for Theodore Roosevelt, and Obama took the opportunity to talk about how that old-school reformer helped break up monopolies and put an end to the "Gilded Age", in which power and money became concentrated in very few hands. Given Karl Rove's admiration of that era, Obama's casting himself as a modern Teddy Roosevelt is especially fitting.

I sincerely hope this wasn't just a speech for the occasion, though, because I would like to see Barack Obama make political reform his #1 campaign issue. He has a strong track record in Illinois and Washington of focusing on congressional ethics, especially with regard to gifts from lobbyists. Given the timeliness of that issue with the Abramoff case and the FBI just today searching Republican senator Ted Stevens's house, Obama's experience and credentials on this issue must be emphasized.

Reform is an issue where Obama has a strong advantage over Hillary Clinton. It was Obama who agreed with McCain to limit campaign spending in the general election. And it definitely means something that Hillary Clinton gets the lion's share of the $4600 checks, while Obama is vastly ahead of the pack in small donations.

Of particular importance, Obama refuses to accept money from corporate PAC's and lobbyists, while Clinton continues to take almost any kind of money she can get. I would like to see Barack Obama make a direct public challenge to Hillary Clinton on this point:

"Won't you join me in saying 'no' to corporate PAC money and donations from lobbyists?"

If she refuses, America sees that Obama has a clear edge in the clean fundraising department. If she agrees, Obama was the leader on this issue, Hillary the follower, and some of her dirty money edge is erased. Ideally, I would like to see this challenge made in a head-to-head debate, rather than through a press release, so the Clinton campaign has a harder time dodging the issue.

I would also like to see Barack Obama set forth a comprehensive blueprint for election reform and ethics reform - one that goes well beyond simply ensuring that votes are counted and that lobbyists aren't allowed to offer certain types of gifts. Obama should become the candidate who is serious about reducing the role of money in American elections, advocating the sort of "clean money" campaign finance reform that has worked in Maine, Arizona, and elsewhere. He's already a co-sponsor (with Feingold and Specter) of Durbin's Senate Fair Elections Now Act, which calls for just this type of solution. Here's a video of Obama explaining his support. All that's needed is to draw attention to Obama's leadership on this issue.

Obama's strength on reform has the potential to help him with voters from all across the policital spectrum, especially the independent-minded swing voters who have been drawn to candidates as diverse as Perot, McCain, and Nader in past elections. Obama is the Democrat who is best able to claim the mantle of reform, and this could be his greatest advantage in his quest for the White House.

Links for Information on Lobbyist Payments to Legislators

Lisa Beyer — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 00:36:30 EDT

Based on the following blog comments which can be found here, I felt it important to share the following information.

(Post 1) By Obama-logue Jul 1st 2007:
Yes...Hillary DID take contributions from the insurance industry. Unfortunately, Michael Moore has stated in two interviews that I know of ("Now" on PBS and on "Larry King Live") that he "thinks" Barack Obama has taken in just as much. A bunch of us have already sent emails to Michael Moore and have notified Barack's campaign about this. I'm not sure why Michael Moore is out there spreading this mis-information, but he is. Hopefully, at some point, Barack will correct him.

(Post 2) By Jay Jul 1st 2007:
Can you cite the instance where Obama has taken insurance industry money?

(Post 3) By Obama-logue Jul 1st 2007:
That's just it, I don't think he has. And Michael Moore didn't offer any proof of what he was saying, even prefacing his statement with "I think". He's speculating. And, for whatever reason, painting Hillary and Barack in the same light on this issue.

(Post 4) By J. Lowe Jul 1st 2007:
Let me play devil's advocate, because I dont know the answer. Is it possible that M Moore is talking about funds received for his previous elections? After all, he has been researching this movie a long time, and Obama's "citizens only" campaign started with this election cycle.

(My Response to These 4 Posts) Lobbyist Payments to Legislators By Lisa Beyer Jul 1st 2007:
Check out these links for information on lobbyist and industry contribution payments to legislators. Hillary FAR exceeds Barack. These are very informative sites. Please share with family and friends!

Open Secrets: Top Recipients of Lobbyist Payments from Health Industry

NY Times article shown in SiCKO: Once an Enemy, Health Industry Warms to Clinton

Public Citizen Congress Watch: Lobbyists contributed $103 million to lawmakers since 1998

To read the entire press release, click here.

To read Public Citizen President Joan Claybrook's statement, click here.

To read the report, click here.