At YearlyKos:John Edwards Challenges Dem Candidates to Reject Lobbyist Donations. Hillary Refuses.

[ultraist]

Run time: 02:42 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pK6ttdmO0d8   Posted on YouTube: August 05, 2007 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: August 05, 2007 By DU Member: ultraist Views on DU: 3452

 
The YearlyKos convention was "Edwards country!" http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/08/04/bloggers_say_it_again_they_lik.html

Edwards threw down the gauntlet by challenging all candidates to reject donations from federal lobbyists. Edwards never has or never will accept donations from Washington lobbyists.

Watch the video to see how Hillary responded to Edwards' challenge.



For more on this: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/5/03215/91786

And check out David Sirota's article on how Edwards frames the debate: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/5/152110/2881

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. Refraining from taking lobbyist money is one way we can differentiate ourselves

from Republicans and their culture of corruption. Since Abramov, most people I know view any money from any lobbyist as being tainted.

[ima_sinnic]

2. Good for Edwards!

--as Kucinich is marginalized and ridiculed and falls by the wayside, as the DLC and repukes intend, and if Al Gore or Wesley Clark do not run, then I will probably vote for Edwards in the primary.

If Shillary is the nominee, I will write in Al Gore or just not vote at all.
Hillary vs a repuke: what's the difference?
Those who want her apparently are happy with the status quo and want things to continue just the way they've been. Same s**t, different figurehead.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

3. I want Edwards. I don't like the things I'm hearing Sen. Clinton say. nt

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[benny05]

4. I was there

And those comments resonated with the progressives.

Did you all know he also walked the picket line with the Unite Here folks before he went to the Forum?

Yeppers..

[penguin7]

5. Edwards still wants Wall street money though

[zazzle]

41. News Corp fundraiser for Hillary raked in almost $1 million -- Hillary/Murdoch08

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117966081.html?categoryid=18&cs=1

[earthlover]

6. Pardon the sarcasm...but....

Hillary just said that she would not put donations from Washington lobbyists off the table...SARC (getting to be a pattern here...nukes are definately on the table, talking with foreign countries whom we don't like is off, now donations from lobbyists share the table with nukes....)

Hillary said that anyone who would not take donations from Washington lobbyists would be naive and frankly irresponsible....SARC

Hillary said that donations from Washington lobbyists is a "personal matter" sorta like her views on religion....SARC

Hillary said that she would not comment on donations from her friends....SARC

Meanwhile, Hillary's echo chamber said that Hillary's position on lobbyists should not be attacked by naive, irresponsible and inexperienced people. They remind us that Hillary is in it to win, and that resistance would be futile. End sarc.

[dk2]

7. right on

Edwards sounding so GOOD ! Best choice 2008!

[Gloria]

8. To rant like that right in front of Hillary---bless him even if he can't

stop her

[williesgirl]

9. Edwards is sure looking better to me. Please, please don't nominate Hilliary. rec'd

[penguin7]

10. Wasn't he just posturing?

Presidential primary candidates can't take money from lobbyists?

Can they?

[Vincardog]

11. Presidential primary candidates can't take money from lobbyists? Hill said she does

and She WILL CONTINUE TO.

[penguin7]

12. HUH?

[Vincardog]

52. Did you watch the clip?

[ashlarah]

13. Of course they can.

Here is a link of lobby information: http://www.opensecrets.org/lobbyists/index.asp

Hillary's numbers: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/indus.asp?id=N00000019&cycle=2008 (note the $413,140 from lobbyists) and
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.asp?id=N00000019 Given the cakewalk coverage she has received from the media, I find it noteworthy that her top contributors (PAC money) include CableVision Systyms, Warner and Viacom: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.asp?id=N00000019&cycle=2008 Why are they supporting her so strongly, both financially and with positive exposure?

Contrast to Edwards' numbers: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/indus.asp?id=N00002283&cycle=2008 (no lobbyists)
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.asp?id=N00002283&cycle=2008 Edwards' top contributor is ActBlue. http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.asp?id=N00002283&cycle=2008

Obama's numbers: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.asp?id=N00009638&cycle=2008
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/indus.asp?id=N00009638&cycle=2008
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.asp?id=N00009638&cycle=2008 Viacom and Time Warner are on his top contributor list, as well.

I think we can read Edwards' top contributor (ActBlue) as evidence he is getting a response from the grassroots.

[RufusTFirefly]

14. HRC has received $413,140 from lobbyists so far

That's according to the Center for Responsive Politics. That makes them No. 18 out of her 20 top industry contributors.

In addition, her top 20 individual contributors include Rupert Murdoch's News Corp., Time-Warner, and Ken Starr's law firm.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/indus.asp?id=N00000019&cycle=2008

[ashlarah]

15. He has my grassroots support, especially

for finance reform. I love that his top contributor is ActBlue. WE are who he will represent as president - not special interests.

[penguin7]

16. I don't think soft money is allowed in the primary.

Someone point a link to the law please.

[peacebird]

17. I like Edwards more and more - and HRC less and less....

lobbyists and big business are too close to her.

[peacebird]

18. I like Edwards more and more - and HRC less and less....

lobbyists and big business are too close to her. If I wanted to vote Republite I would pick a moderate Repub. I want a DEMOCRATIC nominee.

[NotGivingUp]

19. i'm impressed! could there be hope? and hillary....take a freaking leap!

she really thinks we're stupid out here..."she wouldn't be influenced by a lobbyist". she takes us for absolute, complete idiots. that woman will NEVER, EVER, get my vote. what a pig!

[penguin7]

20. Edwards is grandstanding as usual.

Take a look at this link:

http://opensecrets.org/pubs/myths/myths1.htm

Please do not consider voting for Edwards. Remember the attacks on Kerry for being a flip flopper? If by some disaster, Edwards is the nominee this election will be worse.

[ashlarah]

22. Edwards' largest PAC is ActBlue

That would be you and me . . .

[RufusTFirefly]

25. Post removed by me.

UPON EDIT: My bad for feeding a troll.

[penguin7]

27. My post had substance, this is a phony issue.

[knight_of_the_star]

33. No it isn't

It also points out that he has never taken money from a Washington lobbyist and this is his second run for the White House and he has run for the Senate before that. Hillary's run for Senate twice, won both times, and is running for Pres and the records show she has taken money from lobbyists while Edwards hasn't. Just looking at previous records I think that says enough.

By the way, how will electing Edwards be such a mistake, unlike Hillary he's admitted he fucked up in voting for the war.

[penguin7]

42. MYTH 1: PACS ARE THE PROBLEM.

http://opensecrets.org/pubs/myths/myths1.htm

* PACs accounted for only 40 percent of the campaign dollars collected by U.S. House winners in 1994, and less than 25 percent of the money collected by U.S. Senate winners. Contributions from individuals -- most of them delivered in amounts of $250, $500, and $1,000 -- formed the bulk of the funding for most winning candidates in the House and Senate. <1>


* Large individual contributions usually come from the same sources and represent the same interests as PAC contributions. So politicians who publicly refuse to take PAC contributions are often no less beholden to private interests than those who do take PAC contributions.




In 1991-1992, the chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee's Telecommunications and Finance Subcommittee, Rep. Edward Markey (D-Massachusetts), accepted no PAC money but received $75,000 from the communications and electronics industry; $64,000 from the finance, insurance, and real estate industries; and $81,000 from lawyers and lobbyists (most of whom make contributions to insure access on behalf of corporate clients). <2>

*If PAC contributions were banned, many of the same vested interests that supply PAC dollars would simply re-route their money as individual contributions, and the people whose only financial clout is through PAC giving (e.g., environmentalists, disarmament activists, and members of labor unions) would then have little or none.


*In presidential races, where tens of millions of dollars in private contributions are raised during the primaries, almost all of it comes from individuals, not PACs. In the 1988 presidential race, PAC money came to less than 4 percent of the total raised by all candidates, and in 1992, the PAC proportion was 1 percent. <3>

*PACs account for an even smaller percentage of the money in state elections than in federal elections. Although PAC money at the state level is on the rise, in all but a few states it accounts for less than one-third of the funding for legislative and statewide races. In the 1995 gubernatorial races in Maine, Massachusetts, and Connecticut, PAC contributions came to less than 6 percent in each state. <4>

"I don't understand what the distinction is supposed to be between PAC money and non-PAC money.... have a distorting effect on the process." <5>

-- CONGRESSMAN BARNEY FRANK (D-MASSACHUSETTS)

[Divine Discontent]

21. JE - 08 nuff said n/t

[Skip Intro]

23. I like Edwards, but part of Hillary's answer was edited out

I don't know what she said after, "yes" to the question of continuing to take lobbyist money. You can hear her start to say something, and then the vid jumps forward - Its like the "yes" was taken out of context. I'll have to reserve judgement until I see the whole thing.

Having said that, I kind of do have faith that Hillary is not influenced by lobbyist money. Until I can see a reason not to believe that, I'll believe that.

[cui bono]

26. I have absolutely zero faith and trust in Hillary but I would like to hear what she

was going to say when she got cut off after "and you know why...".

[cui bono]

29. You can see the unedited version here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x45376

She says "you know why? Because like it or not lobbyists represent real people... blah blah blah... they also employ people... blah blah blah..."

Blech.

[waiting for hope]

24. Wonderful ultraist!

K&R!! Edwards is the candidate for the people. He will have a transparent Administration as well, something we all need after the last seven years of misery.

Go, Johnny, GO!

[Tellurian]

28. One thing about Hillary...Nobody handles her!

Sorry to say, Edwards struck out with that lame attack!

Did you see Obama leaning out of his chair almost falling out of it to look at her face?

Obama is bedazzled by Hillary. Obama is putty in her hand!

GO! HILLARY!

[ashlarah]

30. I'm not an Obama supporter, but I'll give him credit

for NOT being putty in Hillary's hands. In comments not included in this clip, he piles on to Edwards' initial call for Dems to refuse money from lobbyists. He agrees that they do not represent the people. I think he greatly enjoyed seeing Hillary out of her controlled element.

Edwards hit this right on, something obvious to those of us not brainwashed by MCM.

[Tellurian]

31. I'm not an MCM fan..

that makes me immune to those comments.

I like Edwards, I don't have a problem with him. Is there anything with Obama speaking on Kos?

Eventually, I'd like to see Hillary one on one w/Obama. I'd like to see how he holds up to his idol.

[mahina]

45. Hello? Obama was laughing at her.

Whoever you support, that was not lame, it was dead on, and the room was with him.

[JackORoses]

49. Hillary has no Integrity

She will do and say whatever it takes to get what she wants.

She will take cash and make deals with whoever is necessary to assure her election.

She is bought and payed for.

Bidder Up!

[ariesgem]

51. He look like he was engaging with the audience to me.

Hilary's body language looked like she wanted to be any place but there.

[Bread and Circus]

32. Goddam John...that's awesome.

[Hobbs]

34. Is Edwards getting desparate?

Lobbyist contribution make up less than 1% of Hillary's funds and only about half of this is from Industry. The rest come from groups we like such as unions, teachers, environmental groups, etc.

[zazzle]

38. Edwards has never accepted donations from lobbyists or PACs

[Epiphany4z]

35. I liked Edwards last time

he ran and like him more this time...my republican aunt likes him...I nearly fell over when she told me. I am not sure how to proses that since he seems to me to be one of the more progress choices among the dems ...but hey who is complaining....

[Botany]

36. I like a trial attorney's mind ...

.. make the other person say the "damning" infromation so the jury
can see the truth.

Hillary said yes, she will keep taking lobbyists money.

[zazzle]

39. The People have been injured and need a plaintiffs' attorney in the White House

not a corporate attorney who spent her legal career in the Rose Law Firm which only DEFENDS corporations.

[ashlarah]

53. I agree, Botany. And a well-prepared and talented

trial attorney in action is awesome. He knew the jury (Kos attendees), he knew the facts and he trapped his opponent. That Hillary walked right into it was the surprising part.

[derby378]

37. I hate to ask - but why is the soundtrack so out of sync?

There's an apparent delay of half a second between the video and the audio.

[LSK]

43. K&R, John Edwards you rule!!!!

:headbang: :yourock: :bounce:

[KillCapitalism]

44. Go Edwards!

Wow, did you hear Hillary's response? It was almost as if Edwards was sitting next to George W. Bush.

[Kajsa]

46. The more I hear from Edwards,

the more I like him.

Kudos to John Edwards!

:thumbsup:

[Hobbs]

47. I am so sad Edwards is running on hate and smear

Business PAC contributions to Hillary $173,340 (3/10th of one percent).

http://tinyurl.com/yts89r

I reject lies and distortion.

[jsamuel]

48. All he did was call on everyone to not take any Federal Lobbyist money.

He didn't say she was evil. He didn't distort anything.

[Hobbs]

50. But if Hillary rejects PACS

She rejects good PACS, such as unions, civil right advocacy, environmental groups, etc., etc. Would it be fair that these groups can't support a candidate?

It is unfair for John to suggest this when he has raised millions from trial lawyers and hundreds of thousands from hedge funds.

[ashlarah]

54. He is asking Democrats to reject FEDERAL LOBBYIST money

not PAC donations. He has also challenged Hillary to return donations from Rupert Murdoch. It is an attempt to limit the most destructive influences on our elected representatives. BTW, Hillary has raised more from trial lawyers and from hedge funds than has Edwards.

[Evergreen Emerald]

55. but some lobbyists are good

and represent positive interests like teachers and unions. I think that Edwards knows the buzz words that get us going, assuming all lobbyists are bad. They are not.