Edwards goes after Obama and Hillary in lead up to IA debate

[rinsd]

By RICK KLEIN
Aug. 17, 2007
BLOOMFIELD, Iowa

<snip 1st paragraph>

Edwards said in an interview with ABC News aboard his campaign bus that Obama's statement that lobbyists would "have a seat at the table" under his administration misunderstands the nature of their power over Washington business.

"I disagree with that," Edwards said on board the "Fighting for One America" bus, as he and his campaign entourage traveled between campaign stops in Iowa. "The idea that lobbyists for insurance companies, drug companies, oil companies, are going to voluntarily give away their power is a fantasy. I don't think it will ever happen. I think the only way we're going to bring about change is to take them on head-on, and to defeat them."

Edwards Blasts Clinton, Obama

Edwards had sharper words for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., suggesting that she would bring her own group of "Washington insiders" if she were elected president.

"I'm not going to replace one group of Washington insiders with another group of Washington insiders," Edwards said when asked about Clinton's relationship with lobbyists. "There's a very clear distinction in terms of what I want to do to bring about the change. Sen. Clinton continues to raise money from (lobbyists), and I think we should say no to that. I mean, Sen. Clinton has been part of Washington for a very long time."

Hillary & Obama's responses are at the link

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/Decision2008/story?id=3492733&page=1

[saracat]

1. Go Johnny Go ! Get those rat bastards lobbyists! He is the ONLY major candidate

with the guts to "clean house"!

[SaveElmer]

2. DU members who are registered lobbyists...how do you feel being called Rat bastards?

eom

[saracat]

3. No lobbyists should have a seat at the table or be able to "buy

influence" If the shoe fits......DU or not!

[SaveElmer]

4. Lobbyists don't buy anything...

Lobbyists can't give any more to candidates than anyone else...

You are confusing lobbyists with those that hire them...

The problem is not lobbyists, though those are the people that make for a quick and dirty punchline from the candidates...the problem is campaign finance reform...

So rather than generalize about a whole class of people, the vast majority of whom are honest, and who do speak for segments of society, for a cheap punchline, Obama an Edwards could address the real underlying problem...but I guess that doesn't make a good commercial...

[saracat]

5. Ha!Ha!ha! ha! ha! ha! Does the name "Jack Abramhoff" ring a bell?

Lobbyists can't "buy" anything? Are you out of your mind? Who do you think Duke Cunningham took money from? Get a grip.Why do you think Pelosi instituted "ethics reform" ? And you are seriously seperating "Lobbyists" from thiose that hire them? You cannot believe they are sperate.Do you know how much they are paid? BTW, my Grandfather wasone of the greatest lobbyists of all time for the MPPDA and the legislation he "bought" still stands.Don't even try to BS this.

[SaveElmer]

7. Bad apples in every profession...

Do you judge all athletes on the behavior of Michael Vick...

The FACT is lobbyists cannot legally exceed the donation limit of anyone else...if they do it is illegal and they are prosecuted...

I have a very close relative who is a lobbyist an hasn't "bought" a damned thing...

The money influence is NOT from the individual lobbyists themselves but from those they work for...again an issue of campaign finance reform, not demonizing a class of people because it is easy to do so...

In addition, this kind of dishonest rhetoric lumps all classes of lobbyists together...I wonder if the AFL-CIO is gonna like Edwards and Obama trashing their lobbyists...it's a gimmick...luckily one that is not working...

[saracat]

10. "lobbyist is lobbyist" and they are all in a "class together"

You think the AFLCIO and AEA lobby hasn't 'bought" influence.My god man, that is a lobbyists job.That is what a lobbyist does.If your relative hasn't bought anything, I assure you he "buys lunch".He isn't a lobbyist.

[SaveElmer]

12. So you stick with your contention that lobbists are Rat Basterds?

eom

[saracat]

13. Absolutely, except for "citizen lobbyists" or those that are not paid.

And believe me I have many friends who are "paid lobbyists and they will not agree.But it is time for this to stop and that profession to be closed down.Lobby for free and for what you believe.No more lunches and tickets to events No more trips.Nada.

[The Backlash Cometh]

16. You're lawyering the occupation.

Conduits are sometimes worse than the customer. The customer will demand things, the lawyer and lobbyist delivers. It takes chutzpah to do something you know crosses the line, even if you're just the messenger. And, btw, they don't make the big bucks just being messengers.

[trayted]

17. Corporate lobbyists, special interests, like the ones who wrote the Drug Bill and Energy Policy

[SaveElmer]

18. Again...it is the companies that hire lobbyists

That are the problem...it is a quick and cheap hit to simply bash lobbyists...

The fundamental problem is campaign finance reform

[trayted]

20. That's like saying "the mob boss is the problem, not his hitman with a gun to your head"

Both are problems for "you" in that situation, and one is up in your face about it.

The corporate lobbyist "is" the business that hires him.

Is George Bush the problem, or the school of thought that produced him? I'd say there is no difference. Bush is the ideology, and the lobbyist is the interest that he lobbies on behalf of.

Even the least sophisticated thinkers in America get that at a "gut level," so I assume that you are "spinning."

[SaveElmer]

21. There is nothing wrong with lobbying...

And lobbyists in the normal course of their job are not breaking the law...

Again, it is a cheap hit on the lobbyist profession in which the vast vast majority are honest and conduct themselves with integrity...

Concentrate on the problem...you could get rid of lobbyists tomorrow and it would have exactly NO effect on the problem of money influence in politics...

[trayted]

23. There is "something" wrong with lobbying with money, which is, "bribing" politicians

There is nothing wrong with lobbying, in a theoretical sense. Sure, I can lobby my Congressman, and so can you. I could lobby on behalf of a teacher's union, but that's a lot different than buying favor.

The definition of lobbying is "an organized attempt by members of the public to influence politicians or public officials."

The definition of lobbying is not "buying favor." We shouldn't even call that "lobbying." We should call the Supreme Court wrongheaded for saying that "money" is the way corporations speak, which laid the foundation for corporate lobbyist being able to bribe politicians with campaign contributions.

Yes, we need campaign finance reform, because right now it's a vicious cycle based on "money," which is why those with the most "money" buying favor from politicians, is a huge problem.

If a lobbyist lobbies on behalf of a corporation without money, then I have no problem with that, but when they buy favor because they have the most money, that's a huge problem.

[frogcycle]

6. as with damned near every topic

semantics can be fatal

there are lobbyists and there are lobbyists

The very expression "to lobby" for something refers to advocates who hang out in the lobby and try to influence the politicians for their particular cause

some lobbyists can be constructive - if they attempt to persuade through making a case for their point of view. The money aspect is where the whole concept goes to hell. Buying support vs. winning someone over to your point of view with facts are quite different.

The latter are rat bastards; the former are legitimately petitioning the government for something they believe in - or are paid to represent. I have no issue with, say, a rail industry paid lobbyist trying to educate congresspeople that supporting the rail companies in expanding intermodal service can cut oil imports and be good for the country. But if that lobbyist sends the congresscritters on a cruise, or to play golf in Scotland, and says "we want you to back off on safety standards because we want to make more money" - well that is rat bastard time.

[saracat]

11. And "citizen lobbyists" who are paid by noone are in a different catagory entirely!

[frogcycle]

15. agree

"the former are legitimately petitioning the government for something they believe in -or are paid to represent."

[billyoc]

9. Pretty good. I know who the rats are. n/t

[jsamuel]

8. rec'd

[bvar22]

14. I agree with Edwards!

[Forkboy]

19. I think a dinstinction needs to be made.

I have no pity for a corporate lobbyist whose only purpose is to increase the profit of those he works for,and in turn himself,with no regard at all to the general well being of the people,which is the image,mostly earned,that people have of lobbyists,and why Edward's message will strike a chord with many.But,there are people lobbying for a lot of causes that are for some truly good reasons,and I don't want to lump the two together for a sound bite public.

All the candidates should try to clarify this point when they speak of the issue.I think a combination of campaign finance reform and a willingness on the media's part to say who is lobbying for who would do wonders.If lobbyists want to ditch the shady rep then a lot of them need to stop acting shady. :)

[jillan]

22. I love the line from Robin Williams in "Man of the Year"

Politicians should be like race car drivers and wear the emblems of who is sponsoring them all over the clothes...it would make things alot easier :)

[trayted]

24. I guess he stopped short of saying that Hillary Clinton represents the status quo

If I was him, I'd say it. He wants to represent citizens instead of the status quo. We need change, not a status quo candidate, who characterizes change only as her gender, meaning that Kay Bailey Hutchinson as President would also represent change, according to Clinton's formula.