Obama Stands Against Lobbyists? Well, not to Fund His Big Party he Ain’t
Posted on July 16, 2008
-By Warner Todd Huston
The leftists of the nutroots went gaga when Barack Obama claimed that he’d stand against taking money from lobbyists with his campaign for president. It was because, of course, he was for a “new era” in politics. He is for “change.” Isn’t he special, the nutrooters sigh contentedly.
Well, apparently Obama’s standard of a “new age” in politics doesn’t carry too far into his campaign. Obviously Barack Obama has no real power over the Party from which he claims to head because the Democratic National Convention is being funded by… you guessed it… lobbyists.
As the New York Times reports, the man being tapped by the DNC to head the fundraising for their national convention is well connected lobbyist Steve Farber.
Mr. Farber’s vast contact list could prove crucial in raising the millions of dollars needed by the Denver host committee to showcase Senator Barack Obama and the Democratic Party in August in Denver. But Mr. Farber’s activities are a public display of how corporate connections fuel politics — exactly the type of special influence that Mr. Obama had pledged to expunge from politics when he said he would not accept donations from lobbyists.
Well, so much for getting the influence of lobbyists out of politics, eh Mr. Obama?
» Filed Under Elections, Liberal Media/Bias, News
Trackback URL
Comments
3 Responses to “Obama Stands Against Lobbyists? Well, not to Fund His Big Party he Ain’t”
Leave a Reply
Just one more thing that the moonbats and troofers are seeing that is letting them know that the Obamassiah is just another Chicago politician.
Against lobbyist? So, what is the NAACP, AIPAC, and Socialists Unions?
It takes the big bucks to fund the mandated, multi-colored plates of food in Denver.