Roll Call is reporting that during the typical Friday afternoon document dump -- a practice used to hide actions that might prove somewhat embarrassing to the White House -- the administration quietly announced that some of the former restrictions on lobbying ballyhooed about during the late campaign have been lifted. And now, we have to wonder: will the media notice this sudden change? I mean, a whole day has gone by and so far only Roll Call has mentioned it.
In any case, let special interests ring, baby!
Roll Call (see here, but subscription is required) says that the administration lifted bans on lobbyists that have some part of spending "stimulus" funds. So now getting hooks into bloated federal spending is open season for the very lobbyists that Obama pretended to disdain only months ago.
So much for hopinchange.
The ban on oral communication now applies only to competitively bid applications on the stimulus package and it applies equally to lobbyists as well as non-lobbyists, according to a White House blog post written by ethics official Norm Eisen.
Additionally, the administration is still also pretending at "transparency" because one of the new rules is that there be "immediate internet disclosure" of this renewed contact that lobbyists are to have with federal agencies. Not that such a thing is anywhere near de rigueur at this point... but, um, you know how hard The One is working, right?
So why the reverse? According to Roll Call:
The decision to change the policy follows the 60-day review period that the Obama administration set for the Office of Management and Budget to review the new lobbying rules. Several watchdog groups and lobbying entities, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American League of Lobbyists and the AFL-CIO, raised concern over the recently imposed rules.
So, I guess the hopinchangieness wasn't as hopey and changie as it was once imagined? So, let this posting serve as a notice to the Old Media that they might wanna look into this little story.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Once again ...
May 30, 2009 - 10:18 ET by KC MulvilleYet another campaign promise has proved ill-suited to actual governing. I'm flabbergasted.
Sooner or later, this administration is going to have to admit that many of the most controversial decisions of the Bush years were made because there were few happy choices. By nature, all terrorism and war decisions are difficult. They're almost always decisions that you'd rather not take, but you're forced to do them because of circumstances. Campaigns skip the circumstances and compare the decisions to ordinary peacetime, in which light they always look bad. This is a campaign promise about domestic policy and performance, but the same principle applies. For all the demonizing about lobbyists, it stands to reason that lobbyists are often the people who know the most about the issue, and you want their experience at the table.
You hear the media proclaim how professional this White House is, and yet we see more and more examples of policies that they had to reverse because they didn't realize what the consequences were. Hey guys ... that's the definition of amateurism. It doesn't matter whether they speak nonsense "smoothly;" nonsense is nonsense.
Phlegmatic pragmatism
May 30, 2009 - 10:54 ET by metaphorsbwithuWell la-dee-da ...
If push comes to shove, the MSM will simply marvel at Obama's pragmatism, say this new policy allows him more flexibility, and compare his ability to change his mind against Bush's "hard-headed" habit of not admitting a mistake. His more callous supporters will simply note that this was campaign rhetotic and say, "All politicians lie." Obama will never apologize for anything except not doing enough and the media will never hold him responsible for anything bad that happens as a result of his actions.
metaphorsbwithu
You nailed it, metaphorbwithu
May 30, 2009 - 11:38 ET by GalvanicThat's just what the MSM will do.
And some of the True Believers in the MSM will still assert that this is the most transparent and ethical Presidential Administration ever, and that Obama is transforming the way business gets done in Washington.
Is ANYONE surprised?
May 30, 2009 - 11:05 ET by SlyrrI knew the moment that Matthews said it was 'his job' to make Obama look good that our odious president-select was lying about banning lobbyists from his crime lab. Matthews admitted to the world that his program is bought and paid for by Democrats, and that therefore, he takes US taxpayer money as bribes for his favorable coverage. He is, by definition, a whore - a man who sells himself to others for money and/or power.
And you can bet the judges who dropped the case against the black panther thugs are also on the take, either for cash, or they were bullied and blackmailed by Obama into letting his mobster buddies go unpunished. After all, Obama has already proved that he'll use the power of his office as a weapon to punish his political enemies.
The man is a crook, who came from a mob town that's synonymous with corruption, crime, blackmail and bribery - and he's carried all of that corruption with him to the white house. He had a chance to prove that he could be a great man - a true black leader.
But he's proved instead that he's nothing but a petty criminal who is obsessed with power, money and revenge. Those of you who are outraged, remember all of this for 2010 - we have to throw the Democrats out of power in the house and senate to slow down his criminality as much as possible!
Gingrich laid the
May 30, 2009 - 11:49 ET by Lord ElicaniGingrich laid the foundation - if someone in this day and age in Congress picks it up and runs with it, there's a good chance we could see a Hill shift in '10.
"And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears
fought are still at issue around the globe – the belief that the rights
of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of
God."
- John F. Kennedy
That's My Hope
May 30, 2009 - 12:33 ET by HoosierEmNow that's the kind of hope and change us conservatives and independents need. If democrats stay in total control 2010, then there is very little hope.
Especially after Obama corrupts the census.
May 30, 2009 - 13:44 ET by needleEspecially after Obama corrupts the census.
Impunitas semper ad deteriora invitat.
I Must Object
May 30, 2009 - 16:59 ET by JustAl. . . to this uncalled for insult to whores.
As for the formal admission that His "O"lliness has lied about lobbyists, well considering that he has lied about everything except his desire to "spread around" other people's money, why should the MSM cover it? It certainly isn't news to anyone who has occasionally glanced at this crack filled facade.
I'm so... shocked...
May 30, 2009 - 11:10 ET by KJ_sezI'm so... shocked... zzzzzzzzz
Obamintaion is consistent in saying one thing and doing the exact opposite. I'm sure the Obamabots will conveniently say that they're "just being more patriotic, like Joe" when income taxes are raised for anyone making more than $25,000 a year, too. I wonder if they all knew that "change" included destroying the U.S. economy and the federal reserve note, alienating our long-time allies, emasculating the military, continuous abuses of power, high-level corruption and graft, and endorsing a perpetual state of indentured servitude to the federal government.
Probably not, but most of those that voted for TOTUS don't understand most of what I just wrote, either.
Pravda
May 30, 2009 - 12:09 ET by boomerconPravda has an article with a perfect description of America's rapid decline into Marxism.
Absolutely shameful that any foreign news outlet, but most especially Pravda, would accurately perform the sworn duty of our own "free press".
Will it really take us 70 years to undo this mess, this...Obamination?
It's his arrogance.
May 30, 2009 - 13:44 ET by GregEIt's his arrogance. Popularity is so high, they have been very bold in disregarding campaign promises that got him the presidency. Oh, wait a minute........no.........campaign promises didn't get the presidency, only his sharp speaking, great temperament, and his race combined with those things got him the presidency, in the party of racists. I think they know this. I think they know that they were voted into office on a pop culture mentality, and flipping on what were once thought of as important reasons for getting the votes, actually aren't so important...........and likely never were. And for that reason, flipping is no big deal.
"...the administration
May 30, 2009 - 14:09 ET by Cortillaen"...the administration quietly announced that some of the former
restrictions on lobbying ballyhooed about during the late campaign have
been lifted. And now, we have to wonder: will the media notice this
sudden change?"
Granted, this is Obama officially reneging on his word, but it's not exactly any sort of change given that he never honored the supposed restrictions from the start.
More of my thoughts
"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near to you." - Miyamoto Musashi
President Obama is a man of his word, so I would be absolutely
May 30, 2009 - 14:35 ET by Rush Fanshocked if this information regarding his lifting of the ban on lobbyist is true. I just don't believe President Obama would go back on his word.
After all, President Obama has kept his word on changing George Bush's policies on detention, immigration enforcement, terrorism, extraordinary rendition, warrantless wiretapping and Secrecy, indefinitely detaining terrorism suspects without trials, ban on torture and the legality of surveillance programs.
You say what? You're telling me that all the links I cite show that President Obama's policies on those issues are the same as the Bush administration? You're telling me that President Obama has not kept his word on changing those policies? Does that mean Obama lied while campaigning for the presidency?
Well, as Emily Litella would say on Saturday Night Live: Never Mind!
-------------------------------------------------------
“The Democrats live in a world of fakery, fraudulent phoniness. We live in a world of reality." ~ Rush Limbaugh
LOL
May 30, 2009 - 15:07 ET by Warner Todd HustonGood one!
Be sure and visit my home blog PubliusForum.com.
RF... Your post covered
May 30, 2009 - 15:46 ET by bigtimerRF...
Your post covered it all regarding O and his constant lies.
The msm will continue to play his game and look the other way...after-all, they got him in there....they're not about to take him out.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
The 'Ole One-Two
May 30, 2009 - 17:02 ET by JustAlGive them hope. . . then change.
JA... Yep...nothing like
May 30, 2009 - 17:12 ET by bigtimerJA...
Yep...nothing like political whoring to the max.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Oh my, such language!
May 30, 2009 - 20:50 ET by FastEdI like the "give 'em hope, then change" - I'm thinking there needs to be something changed, as there seems to be a smell coming out of DC that I hope we won't smell too long.
Unfortunately, there isn't anyone strong enough, (yet) that will pick up the flag and run against this social experiment activist and bring back the country we grew up in, and if that means being a little bit conservative, then so be it - ; )
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
Speaking of the msm and
May 30, 2009 - 16:40 ET by bigtimerSpeaking of the msm and O....anybody read this...or this?
Regarding the 2nd link I think O is giving Chavez a run for his money taking over the air-waves.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
The first link is scary,
May 30, 2009 - 22:14 ET by motherbeltThe first link is scary, bt, not only because of what it portends, but because the people here really think that because the "right" people will be running things, it will really work this time.
I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows. -Bart Simpson
The second one does not bother me
May 31, 2009 - 06:14 ET by TheHistorianI'd love to see him do a 3-hour show like Rush, Hannity, Levin, and Quinn do every day. Obama has not demonstrated any ability to communicate ideas verbally without a script. If we put him on the radio for four days, think what his approval rating would do
As far as the first clip, the real problem is that none of this is being covered by our so-called impartial media. If Obama ever turned around quickly, 80% of the media would have broken necks.
How is that hope and change thing doing?
That Pravda blog/article
May 31, 2009 - 11:36 ET by metaphorsbwithuBT, I sure wish someone of stature on the left would be confronted with the contents of that Russian blog. My guess is that the response would be that the blogger is a shill for Fox-News.
Amazing, though, that there seems to be more awareness of what is actually happening here across the globe than within our own borders.
metaphorsbwithu
More of Obama's habit of...
May 30, 2009 - 18:12 ET by PrairieSkymaking a hasty and grand declaration about some new policy that he is putting in place, and then after discovering that this vaunted new policy was either not a good idea to start with, or he's just changed his mind, he quietly reverses himself. Does this man ever think things through, before he does them? Take Gitmo for example...All we heard during the campaign was that he was going to close Gitmo...blah, blah, blah...And immediately upon entering office, he in fact did sign an order stating that he would close Gitmo within a year. Now, after finally taking the time to really think this through and realizing that there is no good alternative as to where to put the terrorist detainees if he does close Gitmo, he's backing away from his own order. This is another example of Obama's reckless incompetence...pure and simple.
Is this the "change" that people thought they were voting for?
"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan
Yep he thinks it through.
May 30, 2009 - 20:17 ET by GregEYep he thinks it through. He even told us. So it is said, so shall it be, sayeth the messiah.
March 24 press conference....
QUESTION: But on AIG, why did you wait -- why did you wait days to come
out and express that outrage? It seems like the action is coming out of
New York and the attorney general's office. It took you days to come
public with Secretary Geithner and say, "Look, we're outraged." Why did
it take so long?
OBAMA: It took us a couple of days because I like to know what I'm talking about before I speak
GregE...I remember this and...
May 30, 2009 - 20:40 ET by PrairieSkyhis response was completely absurd...He likes to know what he's talking about?? It took Obama days to know if he was "outraged"? Geez, what a joke...Just more of the same lamea$$ crap that we've been fed from the beginning by this empty suit pretender.
"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan
What HAS he ever thought through?
May 31, 2009 - 06:05 ET by TheHistorianI would like examples of his thought-through policy. For this being the brightest-ever President with an IQ which is purported to be Mensa class, he sure has not demonstrated any of this vaunted intellect. I can't figure out if he knows how to pour water out of a glass with the instructions printed on the bottom. The only thing he has done right is get elected, and we have McCain to thank at least as much for that as we do Obama.
"What experience and history teach is
this - that people and governments never have learned anything from history,
or acted on principles deduced from it."
G. W. F. Hegel
Re Brightest-Ever President?
May 31, 2009 - 10:11 ET by slickwillie2001I also see ZERO evidence of any great intellect in the Bamster. I'd like to see SAT scores for him and the SAT admission requirements for blacks and whites and Asians at the three schools he attended. If he was a Republican it would have already been released or leaked. Like that's going to happen.
Take away affirmative action and I doubt very much if he would have been admitted to Columbia or Harvard, let alone graduated.
You Left Out His Category on the SAT Requirments
May 31, 2009 - 12:11 ET by JustAl. . . foreign student. Dollars to donuts that is why he is spending so much to keep those school records out of sight, the foreign students are probably more sought after than the minorities and he had to be an Indonesian citizen (not dual citizenship) to be adopted by his step father.
Rush was right: All Obama
May 30, 2009 - 21:02 ET by HockeyKidRush was right: All Obama statements come with expiration dates.
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
Loooks like he is supporting Rush
May 30, 2009 - 22:54 ET by sevenTo be honest, leaving new York and electing Obama have been a windfall for Obama. The correct/right wing is getting radio audience they never imagines.
Please edit your comment
May 31, 2009 - 06:00 ET by TheHistorianYour comment makes no sense. When did Obama leave NY? Do you mean Rush?
Prufreding are hard...
Obama's expiration date
May 31, 2009 - 05:58 ET by TheHistorianon all of his statements issometime after they are entered into theTeleprompter. This guy will never keep a promise, because he never has. His promise on second amendment, open administration, publication before signing, withdrawal from Iraq, tax cuts, balanced budgets, all are recoverable, and all are simply lies that he has not been made to pay for.
Based on our experience so far, Slick Willie has been out-Slicked.
How's that hope and change thing working?
So the lobbyists
May 31, 2009 - 09:16 ET by RESTLESS 1lobbied against the lobbying rules???
Yup, seems right. >:/
"This
liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about
basically taking over and the government running all of your companies."-Maxine Waters 2008
Too typical
May 31, 2009 - 12:07 ET by ironchefofmunchiesStories like this are what drive me the most batty.
How Obama is constantly allowed to say one thing (and preen in the adulation for it) and then to turn around and do the opposite (with no follow up of the change and no repercussions) is just too much for me to understand.
It makes me doubt the rationality of Obama's supporters.