Top Comcast Lobbyist Hosting Hillary Clinton Fundraiser

[rbnyc]

http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Top-Comcast-Lobbyist-Hosting-Hillary-Clinton-Fundraiser-134215

The company's best chance at getting the current net neutrality rules scrapped lies in a 2016 President willing to appoint a new FCC boss who'll gut the rules.

Clinton supported the FCC's decision to reclassify broadband ISPs as a utility under Title II in order to enact tougher net neutrality provisions. Personal political contributions are of course Cohen's prerogative, but it remains unclear how Cohen squares supporting a net neutrality supporting Presidential candidate when he's been at the forefront of trying to dismantle real net neutrality protections for years.

Cohen manages to consistently skirt lobbying rules -- by pretending he's not a lobbyist. The cable executive has given himself the title of "Chief Diversity Officer" at Comcast to skirt laws requiring that employees who spend 20 percent or more of their work on lobbying or related activities have to formally register as a lobbyist in Washington.

To be clear, I see HRC's position is generally supportive of net neutrality and counter to Comcast's interests. However, as a fundraiser, I know that it weakens my organization's capacity to adhere to mission when we marry our revenue streams to interests that oppose our mission. In other words, we don't take money from people who don't support what we are trying to do, because it puts our mission in jeopardy to do so.

The real substance of this maneuver is something to explore. But it serves as a trust-eroding politics-as-usual practice that does not bode well for the essential political change we need, which centers around decimating the influence of the corporate lobby.

[PoliticAverse]

1. Smart corporations raise money for both sides in a two party system...

(usually a bit more for the side they prefer though).

[rbnyc]

5. But why do we take it for granted...

...that our public servants should just go along with smart corporate strategy?

[PoliticAverse]

9. Who takes it for granted that they should? n/t

[rbnyc]

10. I think that anyone who doesn't challenge it...

...is saying that it's okay.

[Snotcicles]

2. Bill Clinton is an old friend. Remember The Telecommunication Act he signed in 1996? nt

[rbnyc]

6. Yes.

That's a serious problem.

[Scuba]

31. Ding, ding, ding. We have a winner.

[Duckhunter935]

3. not very surprising

They expect repayment of some type if she is elected.

[rbnyc]

7. Of course they do.

So I think if she is serious about representing the people, she shouldn't engage them.

[artislife]

4. Meanwhile Bernie and Elizabeth are doing this

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/07/10/bernie-sanders-cable_n_7772806.html

[rbnyc]

8. That's what I like to see. nt

[BrotherIvan]

11. +1 This is what it looks like when a candidate

does not have investors and shareholders.

[rbnyc]

13. we need to move from shareholder interest...

...to stakeholder interest.

[BrotherIvan]

14. That's a good way of putting it

How on earth people can say, "Well it's ok this one last time," when we all know exactly what happens is just madness.

[rbnyc]

16. ...the actual definition of insanity. nt

[davidpdx]

30. +2

Until candidates stop taking donations from the 1% the process is going to remain tainted.

[Man of Distinction]

12. Anyone who's for Hillary needs to take a close look at this..

This is exactly why I don't support Ms. Clinton.

[BrotherIvan]

15. It's the perfect example of "Do as I say, not as I do"

[Divernan]

17. Or "Believe my words; ignore my deeds."

[Evergreen Emerald]

18. Yeah I hope she gets a bunch of money from them !

Every little bit helps.

[George II]

20. This article appeared more than three weeks ago (June 18) Wasn't it important enough then?

Or is it now important because Sanders just came out against cable charges?

[rbnyc]

21. Is it no longer important because it was last month?

Give me a break. There are probably about one thousand really important things happening right this minute as well. I might not have a chance to talk about all of them, and I might not talk about some of them until next month.

[George II]

24. The event is over and done with....but of course it coincidentally came out here today...

...that Sanders (and Warren) are asking for an investigation of cable and internet prices.

[rbnyc]

25. even though you were clear...

...it took me a minute to get your point because that correlation wasn't my intention. But I understand you are saying the story itself was promoted with strategic timing.

I think that is how dialogue is created, by raising points and counterpoint that are related.

And regardless of the related Sanders/Warren effort, I think it's essential to challenge the influence of corporate money in politics. Fundraisers hosted by corporate lobbyists last month, contributions taken from Citigroup years ago, these things remain relevant.

I think it is our job to demand our political leaders disentangle themselves from this system of legal bribery, and I don't understand why we aren't all demanding that of our candidates no matter who they are.

[rbnyc]

22. I get it.

I'm being strategic about when I talk about particular issues so I can get the most bang for my buck, and that's not okay. But being strategic by adhering to establishment politics is fine.

[Ichingcarpenter]

23. its called optics

and when you see the big picture
your opinion is blind to connecting the dots

[totodeinhere]

28. Yes that's why it's important now. The OP is comparing the fact that a Comcast lobbyist hosted

a Clinton event three weeks ago while Bernie and Liz have just called for an investigation of that same industry. It's the contrast between Hillary and Bernie that is important. not the timing of the Comcast sponsored event.

[onecaliberal]

26. How will she repay them? They will expect repayment.

Because you better fucking believe they aren't contributing out of the goodness of their heart.

[Jefferson23]

27. Recommend. n/t

[jwirr]

29. I'd say this is a really bad move on the part of Hillary. A good reason not to vote for her.