K Street Veering Left

[underbear1]

OK it's official Republican lobbiests are looking for work, that means the Democrat TSUNAMI is a comin'!
October 18, 2006
K Street Veering Left

Hotline On Call: K Street Veering Left

"In short, bets are being hedged. Groups that could be impacted by the Democrats' top priorities in January want to be sure they can get their calls returned. Whether it be the minimum wage (the Retail Federation), student loan interest rates (Sallie Mae) or lobbying reform (all of the above), Pelosi has made clear that her caucus would waste no time pushing through their agenda. And when that happens, these interests want to have the chance to make their case to somebody in leadership.

Asked about the influx of K St dollars to the would-be leaders of a Democratic-controlled House, Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly said it indicated "support for our agenda and the political reality that we have a chance to win." Pointing to their "6 for '06" plan released before the summer recess, Daly said such donors "understand our agenda" and that is the agenda they can expect should Democrats take the majority.

Carl Forti, the NRCC's top spokesman, declined to comment on the trend. "

Marketplace: K Street courting liberals (just in case)

K Street courting liberals (just in case)

"KAI RYSSDAL: If there are any voters out there still sitting on the fence, they've got just three weeks left to make up their minds. Election Day's exactly 21 days from today. The political winds seem to be blowing in a, shall we say, "lefterly" direction. Voters know it, some politicians know it, and in Washington, the lobbying industry definitely knows it. Marketplace's Scott Tong reports on how all the firms down on K Street are getting ready for the day Democrats may return to relevance.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SCOTT TONG: You might think Patricia Griffin leads a lonely existence. She works at an all-Democrat lobbying shop.

Last two months, though, Republican firms have been calling her, saying maybe we could team up on the access business if the Dems take the House. Griffin calls it "courting," in a junior-high sorta way.
PATRICIA GRIFFIN: All of a sudden you have the cool house and you have the cool car. And it's more than the note-writing phase I would say. I don't know that people are actually asking us out yet, I think they're creating ways to show that they're interested. Let's say they're sending flowers.
The point is, Griffin will be in demand should something seismic occur on [November] 7th. And her fees would reflect that. "

[PatrickHenry]

Doesn't this make you want to puke?

Washington is full of whores!

[bishop]

amen to that...


and, the actions by these scumbags doesn't mean anything about what the outcome of the elections will be.. they just want to get a head start on bribing whoever's in office to push policies they like.

[underbear1]

I'm just announcing the lobbiest rats are leaving the sinking ship, which is MUCH better indicator of the election, than any damn poll. These insiders have the scoop of where the election is headed, and they know how to end up on the winning side.
Washington is full of whores, but OURS are popular, Republican whores are stretched out and getting long in the tooth.............look at Libby Dole.....buh hahahaha!

[bishop]

i can't really find it in myself to get excited over the democrats in charge... it'll be better than seeing the republicans with continued control - but gridlock is not the same as progress...

the democrats are corporate whores, no different than republicans - which is exactly why these lobbyists are flocking to them like flies to sh....

[underbear1]

Democrats won't put another Christian Reich judge on the Supreme Court, should another appointment be Bush's choice. But the best thing about Democrats controlling Congress will be investigating all the sh*t we haven't learned about the last 5 years, not that what we have learned wasn't scarey enough, I blanche at the concept there could be worse stuff.

[bishop]

while i definitely welcome the chance that the public can officially learn the truth we've all known for years, the fact of the matter is that investigations won't affect our lives in any meaningful way.. blame games never amount to much of anything.

now, if democratic control can result in our withdrawal from iraq and balancing the budget, then i welcome them... but, i don't see that happening, no matter which one of these two corrupt as hell parties is in power.

and as far as the supreme court goes - bush has done damage that's going to stay with us for a very long time.

[Nono]

Quote by: underbear These insiders have the scoop of where the election is headed, and they know how to end up on the winning side.

Never underestimate the Republicans' ability to act at the eleventh hour to outspend or outfearmonger the Dems, or simply to tamper with the results.
They've had a lot of practice in the last two presidential elections.

I was reading the other day that if you take the total vote count from the past three elections to the Senate (and this is the tampered vote mind you), the Dems still come out two and a half million votes ahead. Ain't that something?

[bishop]

all because of the way they've managed to rig all the districts to minimize the "risk" of them being competitive..

of course, the democrats have done the same when given the chance.

[Nono]

Quote by: bishop all because of the way they've managed to rig all the districts to minimize the "risk" of them being competitive

Yes, and that's one aspect of US federalism -- putting that stuff under (political) state control rather than setting up a federal body run by civil servants, as is the case in Canada for example.

Another reason is federalism itself -- Wyoming and South Dakota each have just as many senators as California and New York. So if you live in one of the small, dog-wagging states, your vote has a lot more weight.

[bishop]

i'm a little weak on in-depth american history, but i think the 2 senators to each state rule was born the same time the electoral college was born - all vestiges of our slaveholding south. rural/unpopulated states bitched and moaned about how more populated states would have more influence over the outcome of elections.

what a concept... having the popular vote determine who holds power...

even google's getting in the game: MercuryNews.com | 10/21/2006 | Google flexing political muscle

Google, a global economic force but a latecomer to Washington politics, is trying to boost its influence in Congress with the first campaign contributions from its new political action committee. The initial round of $1,000 donations is modest by big-league PAC standards, but the recipients are noteworthy. Google NetPAC, launched last month, is contributing to three Republicans, including two of the most endangered GOP House members. In the past, Google executives have given overwhelmingly to Democrats and liberal groups. The Republican recipients include Reps. Heather Wilson of New Mexico and Deborah Pryce of Ohio, whose districts are now rated as a tossup in the Nov. 7 election, and Rep. James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin. He chairs the Judiciary Committee, which has jurisdiction over some Internet commerce laws. Alan Davidson, a Google lobbyist, said the PAC is ``a logical step toward building long-term relationships with policy-makers, and we'll support them across party lines.'' Google hosted a fundraiser for Wilson, along with eBay and Tech Net, a network of tech CEOs with a Washington office. Davidson said Wilson was ``one of the strongest Republican supporters of a free and open Internet.'' Google's Washington office is also reaching out to Republicans in other ways. Jamie Brown, a former legislative liaison in the Bush administration, joined Davidson as a lobbyist earlier this year. Google also recently signed up two lobbyists, Connie Mack and Dan Coats, who are former GOP senators with valuable contacts on Capitol Hill. The new Google PAC also gave $1,000 each to two Democrats: Rep. Anna Eshoo of Palo Alto, whose district includes Google's headquarters, and Sen. Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, who is running for re-election. The even-handed PAC contributions contrast with the Democratic tilt of Google employees. Out of 145 contributions from Google executives and employees in the past two years, all but four went to Democrats and liberal groups including moveon.org, according to data from Political Money Line, which tracks money in politics.

the best congress money can buy indeed..

[underbear1]

Outspending Democrats this year is like driving a very expensive yaght into a tsunami, and at some point it doesn't matter how expensive the yaght is.

[bishop]

so, are you looking forward to seeing the democrats in charge because you think they'll improve the course of the country - or solely because they'll be a pain in bush's ass?

the best we'll get imo, is gridlock - which isn't improvement.. plus, when they do manage to pass bills, those bills will be corporate giveaways - no different than the types of bills passed during clinton's last gridlocked years in office.

[underbear1]

First I'll see Republicans humiliated with a crushing defeat of both Houses of Congress, then there will be all the hand wringing and circular firing squads on their side of the aisle, like how they allowed TARDS like Concerned Women of America, Focus on the Family, Family Research Council to totally control the GOP. Later I'll deal with weeding out Democrats like Landrieu, until Progressives rule America, like God intended them to.
Republicans getting kicked in the teeth this year will eventually be better for their Party, because they have allowed a lunatic fringe of homophobes and racists get WAY too powerful IMO!

[bishop]

personally, i could care less about these random social issues. they're of much less importance than this mess in iraq and our ridiculous budget deficits. and as far as those important issues are concerned, we aren't likely to see any improvement even if the dems win back one of the houses.

[underbear1]

Random social issues...........yeah like all Americans treated equally, why would that be of any importance?

[bishop]

move to MA then.. i didn't say that those issues were not important, just that they're not nearly as important as gambling the country's future away by accumulating tons of debt and getting ourselves stuck in foreign military engagements (at a time when we should be focusing our attention on hunting down terrorists, rather than nation building).

and i don't think my perspective here is all that radical.. looking at the national concensus, people do tend to rank the economy and iraq much higher than things like abortion, gay marriage and flag burning. plus, the only thing those issues have managed to accomplish has been to mobilize the country's bigots to vote for republicans.

[underbear1]

Quote by: bishop move to MA then.. i didn't say that those issues were not important, just that they're not nearly as important as gambling the country's future away by accumulating tons of debt and getting ourselves stuck in foreign military engagements (at a time when we should be focusing our attention on hunting down terrorists, rather than nation building). and i don't think my perspective here is all that radical.. looking at the national concensus, people do tend to rank the economy and iraq much higher than things like abortion, gay marriage and flag burning. plus, the only thing those issues have managed to accomplish has been to mobilize the country's bigots to vote for republicans.

Republicans sought out those voters, Family Research Council BOUGHT David Duke's mailing list from the KKK. Republicans promised those voters the end of Voting Rights Act end of Affirmative Action, Repealing Roe vs. Wade, stopping the morning after pill, preventing not just marriage, domestic partnerships, and civil unions for LGBT people, they also want sodomy laws back on the books, and discrimination in housing, and employment, and refusing to allow gays/lesbians foster care and adoption oppurtunities. If these issues don't touch your individual life they may effect your neighbors, friends, and co-workers.
Republicans don't just seek out racists, they use their hatred of Blacks and Latinos as campaign ploys, look at the filthy racist calls Rove used against McCain in South Carolina in 2000, accusing him of having a Black baby, when in fact he adopted a Bangaladesh child.

[bishop]

again, they aren't as paramount as iraq and bankrupting the entire country.

(i also happen to oppose affirmative action, but that's besides the point.)

remembering this past presidential election, the issue of gay marriage popped in, and in my opinion - it was the biggest reason why so many social bigots went out to vote for bush. nothing mobilizes them as well as an issue like gay marriage. had that issue not been a part of the national campaign, perhaps kerry just may have won.

because i rank iraq and the deficit as the highest issues from my own perspective, i'd be mighty pissed if these corrupt sob's retain power solely because of these issues of these minority issues mobilized their troops, and trumped truly national issues (eg. iraq and the deficit).

[namguy69]

The Republican Party is history in the up coming elections.
namguy69