The leftists of the nutroots went gaga when Barack Obama claimed that he'd stand against taking money from lobbyists with his campaign for president and so did the media. It was because, of course, he was for a "new era" in politics. He is for "change." Isn't he special, the nutrooters and media sigh contentedly.
Well, apparently Obama's standard of a "new age" in politics doesn't carry too far into his campaign. Obviously Barack Obama has no real power over the Party from which he claims to head because the Democratic National Convention is being funded by... you guessed it... lobbyists.
As the New York Times reports, the man being tapped by the DNC to head the fundraising for their national convention is well connected lobbyist Steve Farber.
Mr. Farber’s vast contact list could prove crucial in raising the millions of dollars needed by the Denver host committee to showcase Senator Barack Obama and the Democratic Party in August in Denver. But Mr. Farber’s activities are a public display of how corporate connections fuel politics — exactly the type of special influence that Mr. Obama had pledged to expunge from politics when he said he would not accept donations from lobbyists.
And where is the media reporting this hypocrisy? Where is the media to highlight the empty promise that is Obama's "change" message? After all, who can doubt that if such a major contradiction were occurring in the GOP candidacy, the media would be on it like white on rice!?
Well, so much for getting the influence of lobbyists out of politics, eh Mr. Obama? And so much for the media bothering to notice.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Hypocrisy, thy name is
July 16, 2008 - 10:17 ET by motherbeltHypocrisy, thy name is Obama (last name Democrat)
All that talk about the "little people" was just for the primaries...hey, now he has to "compete" with the Republicans so all bets are off, eh?
Obama's campaign theme:
Change that keeps on changin'!
Shoot 'em all; let God sort 'em out! - Marge Simpson
Change we can't fathom
July 16, 2008 - 10:42 ET by rogue9772Like any good politician...his promises become null and void the Wednesday after the election.
He just cimply caters to whichever audience he thinks is listening.
The true Obama is seen with his elitist friends - those bitter whites cling to their guns and religion. He's embarrassed of America because we're not multilingual.
I still think he'll wind up winning because people will vote out of fear of being labeled racist. because if he loses you can guarantee racism will be the charge hurled for 4 years.
okay lets stop this
July 17, 2008 - 09:42 ET by docbSteve Farber was one of three community leaders to bring the Convention to Denver...They worked for over a year, along with elected officials, to secure the convention bid. This was long before Obama was even in the process...He. Farber, has been the CHIEF FUNDRAISER for the Host Committee from the announcement of selection of Denver in JAN/Feb of 2007!!!!That was the position he chose for himself---Obama had NOTHING to do with it....
You , motherbelt nor the author of this piece, do not know what you are talking about. This is another attempt to discredit where no connection is there.
I am from Denver and have worked on this with the now CEO and the Host Committee the whole time...THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS IN THE AUDACITY OF THE LIE....
Lobbyists
July 16, 2008 - 10:21 ET by KC MulvilleConsider this. You've just elected someone to Congress because he promised to cut taxes, but as soon as he gets to DC, he changes his mind and raises them. Or, your district has an incumbent who's been there for twenty years, and is so entrenched that he runs unopposed. How do you influence your representative after he's elected?
Or, most likely, a candidate has a variety of positions on different issues, some of which you agree with and some you don't. You may like a candidate for his stance on the war, but you don't like his stance on abortion, or whatever. When you elect him, he immediately ignores the position you voted for, and promotes the issue you didn't like. With a two-party system, there's no way to make distinctions between platforms. Therefore, if you elect a Democrat, you're forced to swallow the whole Democrat agenda, which forces you to mandate positions you don't want. How can you specify which issues are important to you, and which way you want your representatives to vote on those issues?
Yes, I know about the corrupting power of money. But if a senator claims that he won't listen to lobbyists, he's telling you that he doesn't want to be influenced for the next two years, and he doesn't care why you voted for him. In other words, he's admitting that he doesn't want to listen to you, either. And if a group of industry professionals advocating for a specific issue can offer facts and analysis to justify their position, he's telling you that he won't listen to facts and analysis.
The one concern is if a representative puts his vote "up for sale" to the highest bidder. But we know how to detect that kind of corruption, because if the candidate's rationale for supporting an issue doesn't make sense, or if he can't explain or defend his position, that's the evidence that his position is based on money. But if he can defend his position, and he was going to vote that way anyway, his vote wasn't up for sale in the first place.
Therefore, refusing to take money from lobbyists is a hollow gesture. What displays honesty and prevents corruption is if you can explain and defend your position. And not to put too fine a point on it, if you can defend your position, you don't flip-flop on it. You don't parse your words. And let's face it, our Democrat friend from Illinois has a lot of trouble explaining specific positions, and he can flip-flop more than fish out of water.
I need to find a few of
July 16, 2008 - 10:56 ET by Hunter12I need to find a few of these stupid business owners. People who can take a dollar and turn it into thousands. Men and women who are so smart, they can anticipate trends and create businesses to fill niches before the average person sees a need, but are so stupid, they give away millions and get nothing in return. Those guys giving Charlie Rangel all that money should turn my way. He's not influenced at all, just ask him, but if they give me that money, I'll go out and tell people how wonderful they are and how great their products are. [Don, I'll even tell people it isn't a comb-over and "Your're fired!" was your idea.] Get something of real substance for those dollars.
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." - Sir Winston Churchill
NYT- Mr. Obama’s
July 16, 2008 - 14:56 ET by JDWNYT- Mr. Obama’s well-publicized statements denouncing special interest
money have done little to dampen Mr. Farber’s efforts. In Mr. Farber’s
view, money to the convention — an issue Mr. Obama has not address eddirectly — is different from money to the candidates themselves.
Obama's hypocritical, spin, and inability to confront real issues have been omitted from the news media. The general public not only wants answers but assurances as to who Obama is. The voids in the news media have created declines in circulation, lower advertising, fewer donations, and less confidence. Even so, ugly big business contributions are happily accepted.
JDW
SAPPY NEWS
DAILY WAVE
The hypocracy isn't only about Lobbyists, it's also about
July 16, 2008 - 16:53 ET by Dee Bunktransparency. He claims that the Bush Admin and the Clintons were too secretive and he's going to be open.
Please! He is the King of secrecy and the back door. He's as sneaky as they come. He says he won't take money from Federal Lobbyists but then he gets around it by accepting it from their local affiliates (State lobbyists). Now he's getting around it in a way that even makes the contributions tax deductible by a loophole.
He's getting rid of politics as usual alright, his dirty tricks are off limits for criticism. People can't complain about things they are not aware of.