• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama finds room for lobbyists

What I wonder more is, are those individual who he appointed the best for that position or are there better candidates? If they are the best would those whining about Obama willing to not have the best in a position just to hold true to a single statement?

Obama was definitely naive in making such a statement.

Does all this mean Obama will now fail as President and fall into corruption and incompetence? I doubt it.

Obama is a politician and as a politician he cannot be held to his literal word but should be held to the ideals of what he says. It's easy to say when you are not President, "I will do X" as an absolute, only to find out doing exactly that without any budging is not really feasible.
 
WillRockwell said:
I expect that if you are staffing a new government in Washington, it would be next to impossible to find people who have never been employed by lobbying firms. What's more, most of the time that connection is quite innocent.
Click to expand...

Then I guess it was poor judgment at best, and utter dishonesty at worst, for Obama to make not having people that were tied to lobbyists involved in his government
 
Chosen1 said:
Well the very first one that came to me was his support of the patriot act and all the civil liberty that it distinctively took away.
Click to expand...
and what has he done SINCE becoming president??? Did he revoke the act? Or restore some civil liberty or is this a non-sequitur regarding broken/kept Obama campaign promises?

:roll: Please stop, this isn't a therapy group. :mrgreen:

what a ridiculous worry: "Obama is selling out blacks". That is a non-issue.

that "crap" has always been there. Its just that the hype is finally wearing off so you finally smell it.
 

That's pretty much how I feel.

All politicians break promises, and I didn't expect Obama to keep all of his. It would be impossible. Now if these people turn out to be hacks, then yeah, he made piss-poor choices. Why cry now about it? Wait and see. They could turn out to be excellent choices.
 
 

You're right. Dick Cheney is VICE PRESIDENT. This guy is....ummmm deputy of a position what is a mostly irrelevant position as far as final decision making goes? And when did I go after Dick Cheney? Dude...get a clue....I didn't even bring him up. Somebody else did. I commented that THEIR comparison was faulty. It's like comparing a chihuahua(the deputy) to a Pitbull and saying they have the same amount of bite in the end. Which they don't.
 
Last edited:
RightinNYC said:
In practice, I would assume that a Deputy Secretary of Defense will have far more contact with and influence over matters involving Raytheon than a Vice-President would have with Halliburton
Click to expand...

Unless that Vice President is of course the former CEO of Halliburton and then Halliburton makes retarded money from a war that Vice President heavily lobbied for. But if this is what you want to compare the guy who is......the assistant bitch of some position most of us find irrelevant. Then sure?
 
Last edited:
 
winston53660 said:
What is the actual quote you are talking about?
Click to expand...
I was just saying that in general people are doing the apologist thing about Obama but many were the same calling Bush a liar because of the war buildup, now, we know the intelligence was innaccurate, but not that Bush lied, Obama said no lobbyists and we have lobbyists.
 
Are you seriously liking Bush's statments (Iraq, WMD, hunting Bin Laden, etc) to Obama saying "lobbyists will have no part in my White House"?

It is on those people to prove themselves worth of their positions and they hold a piece of Obama's credibility in their actions, or lack there-of.

Which promise are you talking about? The one where he said Lobbyists will not be in his White House or that Lobbyists won't dominate his administration?

Obama has changed his opinion from "no lobbyists" to a "maybe some lobbyists but they won't dominate", several times through his campaign. Which one is the promise?


His ideals in this instance is that Lobbyists will not be controlling the White House anymore. We will not have no-bid partnerships with corporations (Haliburton, BlackWater) above what is best for the country and the people.

What don't you agree with?
 

RIGHT ON THE MONEY! :rofl


It seems you're purposely missing the point, although I'm not terribly surprised. Can't say I blame you either, because I would also try avoiding the issue if the person I supported for President started lying their ass off from the get-go. Let me see if I can help you understand the significance of the Obama-lobbyist connection.

If I went through your post history would I find any instances of you bad-mouthing lobbyists in the Bush administration or McCain's campaign? Or even better, give me a rough estimation as to how many liberals in this forum having been singing a chorus about lobbyists in the Bush administration for the past eight years...think about it....alright, now think about this...

Why is that when Obama does something so blatantly hypocritical and dishonest all I'm able to hear from Obama's resident acolytes is...

*CRICKET* *CRICKET*

You guys act like you owe him something. You don't even know the man and you're afraid to simply call him out on a lie. He's the PRESIDENT. We are SUPPOSED to criticize him when he does something wrong. That's how a Democracy works! And the Obamaphiles wonder why people pejoratively referred to him as the Messiah, or why some people were concerned he might abuse his power while in office.

Man, he played you guys like a fiddle...embarrassing.
 
Zyphlin said:
Then I guess it was poor judgment at best, and utter dishonesty at worst, for Obama to make not having people that were tied to lobbyists involved in his government
Click to expand...

If an issue this trivial sets you off, how will you be able to participate in ideological debate when serious issues arise? By venting your outrage in Obama's first ten days you seem determined to marginilize yourself as an obstructionist partisan. Have you made the decision to work for the failure of the new administration?
 
danarhea said:
The Service Employees International Union is the one that organized the strike against the Hotels here in Houston a couple of years ago, where crowds of illegal aliens were stomping on American flags and flying Mexican flags.
Click to expand...

Do you have a link for that?
 
Ethereal said:
If I went through your post history would I find any instances of you bad-mouthing lobbyists in the Bush administration or McCain's campaign?
Click to expand...

And if I went through your post history, would I find you defending George Bush when he lied about WMD, about Iraq's nuclear capability, about torture, about issues that actually cost the lives of American servicemen? Probably. I find your outrage over a misplaced statement about the hiring of lobbyists curious, considering how much you overlooked from a Republican president.
 
Middleground said:
Meh.

What does that mean, anyway? Because they were lobbyists, they are not qualified for the job? Conflict of interest?
Click to expand...

Of course, the promise means nothing to you BECAUSE YOU LIKE HIM. I think we all see it now. THough I commend your courage to be the first OBama supporter to make a comment on this thread.
 

Obama didn't say "fewer." And any other claims are mere partisan speculation. There are some lobbyists in some pretty plum positions.
 
If they no longer work for lobbying firms, they are not lobbyists. And unlike Dick Cheney, who went directly from CEO of Halliburton to the guy who picked Halliburton to rebuild Iraq, former lobbyists no longer care about the concerns of their former employers.
 
Frankly, I am enjoying the squirming the leftists are going through in this thread. Is this an indication of how much fun the next couple of years are going to be until Mid-TErms?
 
ludahai said:
Frankly, I am enjoying the squirming the leftists are going through in this thread. Is this an indication of how much fun the next couple of years are going to be until Mid-TErms?
Click to expand...

I find it amazing that people would be willing to give up lucrative lobbying careers to go into public service with a 100k cap.
 
ludahai said:
Of course, the promise means nothing to you BECAUSE YOU LIKE HIM. I think we all see it now. THough I commend your courage to be the first OBama supporter to make a comment on this thread.
Click to expand...

I like Obama so far. But it's been only 10 freaking days! :doh
This is petty, and I'm not going to get riled up by it.

If I were you, I'd focus on results. Let's see how he does. But give him at least 100 days, m'kay?
 
Ethereal said:
If I went through your post history would I find any instances of you bad-mouthing lobbyists in the Bush administration or McCain's campaign?
Click to expand...

Search away. Don't let the sound of crickets lull you into sleep when you're working on this most important task.
 
Middleground said:
I like Obama so far. But it's been only 10 freaking days! :doh
This is petty, and I'm not going to get riled up by it.

If I were you, I'd focus on results. Let's see how he does. But give him at least 100 days, m'kay?
Click to expand...

Frankly, this wouldn't bother me at all except for all of the ALLEGATIONS for years about Bush "lying" and the ramifications of that. However, Obama is caught in a lie and that is ok. You don't see a problem with that?
 
ludahai said:
Frankly, this wouldn't bother me at all except for all of the ALLEGATIONS for years about Bush "lying" and the ramifications of that. However, Obama is caught in a lie and that is ok. You don't see a problem with that?
Click to expand...

It is a delicate dance. If lobbyists that agrred to the terms of the executive orders come come back to lobby then I will call it a lie.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…