748 Washington lobbyist have donated to Mitty Rom

Concerning, to be sure.

Question - more than half that amount is from "Friends and Family" - does the DNC somehow filter these folks from donating as well?

Also, if you're concerned about political ties to lobbyists, you might look up Hunter Biden.
 
[quote name='Soodmeg']Bottom line is....I dont really know if I want a president who is already indebted to a bunch of fat cat lobbyist groups. Doesnt that instantly cloud your judgement on certain issues?[/QUOTE]

Lobbyists cloud a politician's judgement regardless. They keep specially crafted research files that are designed to get politicians to vote a certain way, the "research" is often skewed polling data and other bogus scare tactics. Needless to say it's not altruistic, the files are designed to ward off anything that might be harmful to the lobbyist client's bottom line. They have a few other nasty tricks as well.

The donations are simply the most transparent weapon in a lobbyist's arsenal.
 
His name is Mittens, not Mitty Rom. Don't be silly.

[quote name='UncleBob']Concerning, to be sure.

Question - more than half that amount is from "Friends and Family" - does the DNC somehow filter these folks from donating as well?

Also, if you're concerned about political ties to lobbyists, you might look up Hunter Biden.[/QUOTE]

Lol.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Also, if you're concerned about political ties to lobbyists, you might look up Hunter Biden.[/QUOTE]

You mean the son of Joe Biden who quit lobbying before Obama even took office?
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Yup
Much like Romney quit Bain and Cheney quit Haliburton.[/QUOTE]

And this has what to do with the topic at hand? If you want to point out ties between Obama and lobbyists, I'm sure there are much better examples than a connection to a former lobbyist and son of his vice president. I'm not really sure what this strawman is meant to accomplish, however.
 
The catch is that you can do plenty of lobbying without being "federally registered". Like people that solicit and make bundler donations.

Though I would imagine that lobbyist donations trend similarly to the businesses that they lobby for - and I think we can all agree at least on which side overwhelmingly gets the support of the business community. So banning it might very nearly be sour grapes.
 
[quote name='Cantatus']And this has what to do with the topic at hand? If you want to point out ties between Obama and lobbyists, I'm sure there are much better examples than a connection to a former lobbyist and son of his vice president. I'm not really sure what this strawman is meant to accomplish, however.[/QUOTE]

Biden wasn't just a "former lobbyist". Biden was a founding partner of the firm now known as Oldaker Law Group, LLP (formerly known as Oldaker, Biden & Belair, LLP).

But, if you want something more, there's always niceties like this NPR piece from roughly a year ago...

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...nent-obama-fundraisers-have-ties-to-lobbyists

"Despite a pledge not to take money from lobbyists, President Obama has relied on prominent supporters who are active in the lobbying industry to raise millions of dollars for his re-election bid," The New York Times reports this morning.

The Times says "at least 15 of Mr. Obama's 'bundlers' — supporters who contribute their own money to his campaign and solicit it from others — are involved in lobbying for Washington consulting shops or private companies. They have raised more than $5 million so far for the campaign."
Click to expand...

If it makes you feel better to pretend that Obama isn't bought and paid for as much as the next man, then, by all means, continue fooling yourself.
 
I dont want to stray into false equivalence though. There IS a difference in the demographics of the donors and that difference is relevant, so they arent the same. Being bought by unions, green energy companies, gays and small donors - yes, please.

Bought? Yes - its required in our political system. Bought by the same entities/same degree? Absolutely not. The entities that can afford to will hedge their bets though.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']If it makes you feel better to pretend that Obama isn't bought and paid for as much as the next man, then, by all means, continue fooling yourself.[/QUOTE]

And where, pray tell, did I say this? All I am saying is you are making a really poor argument and could use much better examples than some former lobbyist. But if you want to attack me because you can't, go for it.
 
Yeah, you pulling that "strawman" crap wasn't an attack on me? Geesh.

Obama's ties are there - they're just better hidden. It's like the whole "I'm gonna clean up Washington because I don't look like those other presidents on the dollar bills." - then picking a man as his VP who is so entrenched in DC backroom shenanigans that his son is openly named on a huge lobbying firm?
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Yeah, you pulling that "strawman" crap wasn't an attack on me? Geesh.[/quote]

No. It wasn't. It was an "attack" on your irrelevant point. Big difference.

[quote name='UncleBob']Obama's ties are there - they're just better hidden. It's like the whole "I'm gonna clean up Washington because I don't look like those other presidents on the dollar bills." - then picking a man as his VP who is so entrenched in DC backroom shenanigans that his son is openly named on a huge lobbying firm?[/QUOTE]

I'm not naive enough to believe the ties aren't there, but I don't really see what Biden's son has to do with them. He stepped down from his job since he saw that it would be a conflict for his father, and even if he didn't, I wouldn't necessarily see that as evidence of backroom shenanigans since father and child can operate independently, though I can see where some would use that as ammunition against the Obama camp.
 
[quote name='Cantatus']And this has what to do with the topic at hand?[/QUOTE]

Nothing at all. It's a turfer tactic. Bring up a [n inflammatory] point about the opposition and hope someone takes the bait. You did so the thread is now about defending Obama instead of Mittens' bullshit.

Ta da.

Advice: Next time just ignore and/or keep to the topic at hand. There's really no winning with that kind of nonsense. Even if you roast the person who's clearly turfing, they'll just limp back into the boards with alts and keep spreading those right wing talking points. Kthxbye.
 
[quote name='cochesecochese']Nothing at all.[/QUOTE]

Wow. I've noticed you've had a lot of issues being able to follow the conversation... here, let me help.

In the OP ("opening post" or "original post"), this was written:

I dont really know if I want a president who is already indebted to a bunch of fat cat lobbyist groups.
Click to expand...

Therefore, does this not open up the entire conversation for discussing any potential presidential candidate and their ties to various fat cat lobbyist groups? Heaven forbid there be conversation about both sides of the fence.

[quote name='Cantatus']I wouldn't necessarily see that as evidence of backroom shenanigans since father and child can operate independently, though I can see where some would use that as ammunition against the Obama camp.[/QUOTE]

It doesn't help when Obama and Hunter are often out together golfing and such. :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What are you calling the "topic at hand"? Because if you're limiting it to Mitt Romney, then I guess we were beyond that topic in the very first post...
 
[quote name='cochesecochese']Nothing at all. It's a turfer tactic. Bring up a [n inflammatory] point about the opposition and hope someone takes the bait. You did so the thread is now about defending Obama instead of Mittens' bullshit.[/QUOTE]

I don't really think it's off-topic to discuss Obama in a thread about Romney, especially when the story that is initially being discussed draws a contrast between the two, but I don't disagree with your point entirely, specifically in the case of the post of mine you quoted.
 
Well when you really can't win the original argument, the only choice you have is to try and change the argument itself and hope everyone forgets what the original topic was. Oh, or you could just stay out of it, but we know that isn't going happen.
 
I'm surprised more lobbyists haven't donated. Romney is definitely the more pro-corporate, pro-elite of the two. I don't think they are confident in his ability to win it.
 
Face it, this time around they picked a really shit candidate, even by their standards. This is a guy who couldn't even convince conservatives he was conservative, and I still don't think many beleive he is. At this point it's more of an "anybody but Obama" strategy. In fact, if some of the other candidates hadn't been so extreme on their views, I don't Romney could ahve beaten them, it's just that he was the least batshit crazy of the bunch. Him and his handlers have tried really hard to convince their base that he's some pinnacle of conservatism, and I just don't buy it. I don't think their base even cares anymore, just so long as Obama doesn't win it doesn't matter who else does.
 
Even the republican party knows Mittens isn't the ideal candidate for them, his conservative cred is pretty weak at best, but they're running on a platform of "he isn't Obama". That's pretty much all they have to do, that's the test they have to pass. "Is he Obama? No? Good.". They could have run practically anybody with a platform like that. "This dog isn't Obama, vote for it!"
 
[quote name='Soodmeg']Thats what I am saying......I am scared to death of these people. Seriously, I have no more belief that America's future will be anything bot a death spiral. This election has proven to me that people would vote in another Hitler (not comparing Mitty Rom to Hitler) just as as long as the person they didnt like doesnt win.

The topics that Mitty Rom is on about, the way he goes about business, his constant pandering to whoever happens to be in front of him at the time screams that he is a horrid candidate. Even for the Repubs.

Its a joke as to how our government works....you will take any crazy person just as long as he isnt like the guy across the aisle. Its a scary thought for the future.

Hell I still cant even find a god damn plan of action from the guy. He states all the time how thing will be different when he is in the white house yet never gets around to telling you exactly how.[/QUOTE]
You're REALLY attached to the "Mitty Rom" thing aren't cha!:D

I think the rub is that the voters in the US are just dumb, but not crazy. Otherwise, we'd have Pawlenty, Santorum, or even Bachmann as the republican candidate. Not saying that your criticisms of Mittens isn't valid though.
 
That's what I was saying earlier in the year, that as time goes on and you get closer to the election, the crazier candidates usually get weeded out, and that goes for any party. Take Romney, easily the most moederate of the republican hopefuls this year. People don't really want anyone with bold opinions or stances, they want someone who isn't too different, and that's Romney.
 
Yep. Only center left/right candidates have a chance. For all the whining people do, most are seemingly pretty ok with the status quo and vote for people who won't mix things up much in the primaries.
 
[quote name='Soodmeg']Thats what I am saying......I am scared to death of these people. Seriously, I have no more belief that America's future will be anything bot a death spiral. This election has proven to me that people would vote in another Hitler (not comparing Mitty Rom to Hitler) just as as long as the person they didnt like doesnt win.

The topics that Mitty Rom is on about, the way he goes about business, his constant pandering to whoever happens to be in front of him at the time screams that he is a horrid candidate. Even for the Repubs.

Its a joke as to how our government works....you will take any crazy person just as long as he isnt like the guy across the aisle. Its a scary thought for the future.

Hell I still cant even find a god damn plan of action from the guy. He states all the time how thing will be different when he is in the white house yet never gets around to telling you exactly how.[/QUOTE]

I think you are just getting lost in the echo chamber. I know - I live in the DC metro area and sometimes I have to take a deep breath and remember the rest of the country doesn't obsess over politics like we do.
 
[quote name='Clak']Well when you really can't win the original argument, the only choice you have is to try and change the argument itself and hope everyone forgets what the original topic was. Oh, or you could just stay out of it, but we know that isn't going happen.[/QUOTE]

Now this is about the stupidest thing ever.

Okay, not really, but it's pretty ignorant, even for Clak.

I don't want to "win" an argument for Romney. He's a turd in a bowl and we all know it.

And when the argument concludes with "I can't trust a president with ties to lobbying groups" how in the **** is it "changing the argument" to discuss presidents and their ties to lobbying groups?

It's amazing - discussing Presidents and their ties to lobbying groups in a thread about presidents and their ties to lobbing groups is just horrible, but multiple posts about a made-up nickname... totally encouraged.
 
[quote name='Soodmeg']Because of my job I have met and talked to every candidate for a while now. The reason why I call him Mitty Rom and Ricky San is because that was the names on the production sheet when we did gigs for them. The Tech Director thought it took too much effort to say their name so "Mitty Rom" was the smallest possible thing he could say while still clearly referring to him. The same with Ricky San.


In Michigan I was backstage after one of his speeches and I said into the clear com system "Ready spot Mitty Rom is approaching stage left" his wife heard and said "why did you call my husband that?" I said, "Uhh because he seems like a cool guy...like a college buddy you give a cool name...you know Mitty Rom." She said oh...kinda shook her head and walked away.

The entire crew was cracking up in the coms......

So now he will forever be Mitty Rom to me and I am happy...[/QUOTE]
AAHAHAHAHA...Nice dude! That's pretty savvy!:rofl:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top