"Lobbyists on Obama’s ’08 payroll"

[SaveElmer]

Lobbyists on Obama’s ’08 payroll
By Alexander Bolton and Brittney Moraski
December 20, 2007

Three political aides on Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) payroll were registered lobbyists for dozens of corporations, including Wal-Mart, British Petroleum and Lockheed Martin, while they received payments from his campaign, according to public documents.

The presence of political operatives with long client lists on Obama’s campaign contrasts with his long-held stand of campaigning against the influence of special interests. Obama has even refused to accept contributions from lobbyists or political action committees (PACs).

Jen Psaki, an Obama campaign spokeswoman, said no member of Obama’s staff has lobbied since taking a full-time role with his campaign.

As it turns out, Obama is not alone. His rivals’ campaigns, as well as the campaigns of Republican White House hopefuls, have hired staffers who reported lobbying activity this year.

While many lobbyists are planning to travel to Iowa and New Hampshire after Christmas to stump for their favored candidates, others have taken more committed roles. At least 40 current and former lobbyists have received payments from top-tier presidential campaigns, according to public records that show K Street’s infiltration in the race and offer hints about who may wield influence in the next administration.

Leaving a job temporarily to join a presidential campaign can enhance careers in the influence industry, said veteran lobbyists.

“I can remember my finest hour was taking two months’ leave in 1964 to help the Johnson campaign,” said Tom Quinn, a lobbyist at Venable LLP who temporarily left the Treasury Department to work for former President Lyndon Johnson’s reelection bid. “It puts you on the checklist as having been part of the team. You get to know the players, the people who get to run the government.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/lobbyists-on-obamas-08-payroll-2007-12-20.html

[liberalnurse]

1. Obama just plain old lies.

I hope this information is shared during the Caucus!

[wyldwolf]

2. this is just a hit piece from the corporate shadow forces aligned against Obama. Pay no attention

[SaveElmer]

3. Well...

duh!

:sarcasm:

[Evergreen Emerald]

4. how much don't we know about Obama?

He says one thing, and then we find out another. He complains of Clinton's tactics and does the same thing. He cries victim and then accuses Clinton of playing the victim.

I just don't see what the attraction is to Obama

[wyldwolf]

5. Let's paint his portrait and compare it to the "progressive" litmus tests of DU

1. "progressives" complain about the welfare reform of the 90s yet Obama says Clinton and the Republicans in Congress were right.

2. "progressives" complained about Bush's attempt to label Social Security as a "crisis" and to partially privatize it yet Obama also says it's in crisis and he believes in "companion savings accounts" to social security.

3. "progressives" complain about lobbyists. Obama claims he has nothing to do with them yet we now see he does.

4. "progressives" complain about corporatism yet Obama proudly proclaims he believes “in the free market, competition, and entrepreneurship, and think no small number of government programs don’t work as advertised….”

5. Obama also criticizes the Democratic party for being weak on moral values, he speaks of the naivety of the 60s “progressive” movement, he endorses the death penalty, and, what may be the most lethal stab to the heart of his netroots base, declares “a lot of liberal(s) value(s) rights and entitlements over duties and responsibilities…. Reagan offered Americans a sense of common purpose that liberals seemed no longer able to muster.”

Now, what other Democrat could get away with that on DU?

[Cameron27]

6. Yep

he's said all that and more, and I don't know how he gets away with it anywhere, not only here on DU.

[SaveElmer]

7. Funny no one is leaping into Obama's defense...

Where are they all?

[redqueen]

15. "I just don't see what the attraction is to Obama"

Me neither.

[bvar22]

8. A pox on both of the "Corporate Houses".

I just LOVE IT when Hillary partisans criticize Obama for his Corporate Ties.






The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[wyldwolf]

10. we're not criticizing Obama for his Corporate Ties.

We're criticizing him and his supporters for their hypocrisy.

[bvar22]

12. And willfullly BLIND to your own.

[wyldwolf]

13. nope. For me to be hypocritical on this, I would have to be criticizing Obama for corporatism.

I'm not. I'm criticizing him for lying about it and his supporters for playing along.

[bvar22]

14. I stand corrected.

Hillary doesn't hide her connections to Lobbyists, CEOs, Media Conglomeration, Armaments Industries,
Wall Street, and the Health Insurance Industries.








A you suggest, Hillary is OPEN about who she represents.
She has stated that the "Lobbyists" will have a seat at her table.

My bad.
Mea Culpa.


"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans. I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans, family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."---Paul Wellstone

[wyldwolf]

17. Obama, however, tries to hide it.

[JackORoses]

22. so you approve of and support Hillary's Corporatism?

[CyberPieHole]

18. I don't have a problem with Clinton's corporate support...

Obama talks of "change" and of "hope" (or "hoping for change")...he is a hypocrite and so are his supporters. Hypocrisy is the issue.

[DURHAM D]

25. I hope you didn't post this thinking it offers Obama

some sort of defense.

It does just the opposite.

Same shit different candidate.

[bvar22]

29. Read the WHOLE thread.

Here.
I'll help.
It started with Post #8:

A pox on both their "Corporate Houses"

"I just LOVE IT when Hillary partisans criticize Obama for his Corporate Ties."





The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

I am amused and amazed at the rampant duplicity when Hillary partisans attack Obama, and vice versa.
On Issues, Policy, and Corporate Backing there just isn't much difference.

One is Black, and one is a Woman, but America will look pretty much the same under a Hillary or an Obama administration.
:shrug:

[babylonsister]

9. The Clintons, Mark Penn, Lobbyists, and Conflicting Interests.....some disturbing stuff

Lest anyone forget...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3863913


The Clintons, The High Priest and Conflicting Interests

While he was in China in the past summer to meet with potential clients, he allegedly met with individuals from the Turkish government. The meeting was about an upcoming bill in the U.S. House that would have called on President Bush to declare that the killing of up to 1.5 million Armenians by Ottoman Turks after World War I constituted genocide. The Turkish government was adamantly against the bill and had already hired multiple American lobbying groups to lobby the Congress against the bill. Following the meeting, he called his firm back in Washington DC to asked them to begin writing a preliminary proposal to pitch an offer to the Turkish government to lobby the Congress to kill the genocide bill. The name of his company was Burson-Marsteller - the 5th largest PR and lobbying firm on earth - and he was its worldwide president and CEO. His name is Mark Penn, and he is now serving as Hillary Clinton's top political strategist.

Senator Clinton is the only top tier candidate on the democratic side who openly receives money from lobbyists for her campaign. While many seem outraged about this fact, most people are not aware of the extent of influence and history of relationships and dealings between the Clintons and lobbyists, and the inevitability of their continued influence in policymaking should Hillary become president.

But Penn's involvement in Hillary's campaign is inconsistent with the party's stated mission. He has been intimately involved in running or lobbying for big corporations on issues that are directly contrary to the interest of consumers and average Americans throughout his life. Before he came to the White House in the 90s, he worked for Texaco - a major oil company - and Eli Lilly, which is a major pharmaceutical firm


Throughout the past seven years, Mark Penn has continued to keep one foot in his corporate lobbying firm and another foot in Hillary Clinton's campaigns. Under his leadership, Burson-Marsteller has followed the same corporate mentality of not including the public's wellbeing as a factor in deciding what projects to undertake. B-M boasts in its website that the company recognizes its "obligations to all who have a stake in our success, including shareowners, clients, employees, and suppliers."


In a recent interview with Charlie Rose, President Clinton agreed that voting for Obama - who doesn't get money from lobbyists and whose campaign lobbyists are not running - would be like "rolling the dice." But Mark Penn's life-long commitment to special interests, his intimate involvement with the Hillary Clinton campaign and the influence he will have to push his corporate agenda from within a Clinton White House should be yet another factor to lead any sensible voter to realize that supporting Hillary would be equivalent to raising the bet in the middle of the game knowing you are holding the losing set of cards.


Read full article at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-sedaei/the-clintons-t...

[wyldwolf]

11. The Hypocrisy of Hope: Lobbyists on Obama’s ’08 payroll

[Evergreen Emerald]

16. are you only opposed to corporate ties when it is Clinton?

Where is your outrage? Where are your 100's of posts on the subject? Or is your outrage reserved?

Double standards

[SIMPLYB1980]

20. Well said Evergreen.

K&R

[SaveElmer]

21. It does seem to be the MO of the Obama campaign...

eom

[CyberPieHole]

19. Great post. Kick and recommend for Obama's hypocrisy. n/t

:kick:

[Laurab]

23. Post #12 was very enlightening - one thing HRC is winning for sure.

I think everyone should see it. It truly speaks 1000 words.

Obama has lobbyist's on his payroll, but they aren't lobbying while on it - 3, I believe was the number. In politics, where many businesses overlap, it doesn't appear to be unusual: "As it turns out, Obama is not alone. His rivals’ campaigns, as well as the campaigns of Republican White House hopefuls, have hired staffers who reported lobbying activity this year."


I believe HRC has multitaskers on HER payroll, and is quite proud of that fact. There IS a difference.

[SaveElmer]

24. Certainly you recognize the hypocrisy...

Of railing against Lobbyists while providing them employment...

[Laurab]

31. Oh, certainly I do

and it's so nice that Hillary embraces them, rather than rails against them. Employing three people who have been employed as lobbyists isn't quite the same thing as embracing lobbyists, though.

Post #12 says it all for me.

[bvar22]

32. !

:thumbsup:

[DURHAM D]

26. Once again the facts reveal - Obama is as pure as the driven slush. n/t

[rucky]

27. I'm not seeing how this would help Hillary

Y'all seem to be running scorched earth on Obama, and Edwards & the second-tier are the ones to benefit.

[Maven]

28. New kind of politics eh?

Heh.

[Alamom]

30. Say it ain't so. He said "Not in my Whitehouse" for the last couple of months.

:sarcasm: I guess campaigning is
different....




Source: Des Moines Register
Sen. Obama (in November)

I've done more to take on lobbyists than any candidate in this race; they haven't funded my campaign, and they won't get a job in my White House.



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3845952

Not 'in my White House'

December 16, 2007
MASON CITY, Iowa -- White House hopeful Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) was forced to revise a critical stump line of his on Saturday -- a flat declaration that lobbyists "won't work in my White House" after it turned out his own written plan says they could, with some restrictions.

In Maquoketa on Thursday night Obama said: "I am running to tell the lobbyists in Washington that their days of setting the agenda are over. They have not funded my campaign. They won't work in my White House."

After being challenged on the accuracy of what he has been saying -- in contrast to his written pledge -- at a news conference Saturday in Waterloo, Obama immediately softened what had been his hard line in his next stump speech.

They "will not run my White House," he said in Charles City on Saturday night, hoarse from speaking so much during the day.


Source:
http://www.suntimes.com/news/sweet/699806,CST-NWS-sweet16s1.article



edsp

[MethuenProgressive]

33. 3 Obama henchmen also registered lobbyists for WalMart, BP, Lockheed Martin

"Three political aides on Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) payroll were registered lobbyists for dozens of corporations, including Wal-Mart, British Petroleum and Lockheed Martin"

With more experience, Obama might learn not to employ these kinds of people.