TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Obama and the Lobbyists
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Obama and the Lobbyists

post #1 of 53
1/23/09 at 7:47pm
Thread Starter 
I thought Obama was so against lobbyists. LOL

Guess this means Cheney being involved with Halliburton at one time isn't a big deal anymore.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/firs...aytheon-stock/

Quote:
WASHINGTON -- A former Raytheon lobbyist nominated to be deputy defense secretary has agreed to sell his stock in the military contractor and similar holdings but won't be forced to step back from decisions related to his former employer, the Pentagon said Friday.
Good stuff.
Reply
post #2 of 53
1/24/09 at 7:27am
Well, it only applies when you're not under the "teflon Obama umbrella" as someone on Fox News said last night.
Reply
post #3 of 53
1/24/09 at 7:44am
My guess is that Obama is in the first stages of shock about the portents of his new job. He has always had a number of lobbyists around him, and while I applaud his ideals in the matter, in fact, if you want someone who is an expert at something like, oh, say, national defense, the odds are good that you'll end up with someone who has strong links in that industry.
Reply
post #4 of 53
1/24/09 at 7:56am
Ok, let me get this straight. First Obama issued new ethic requirements, and a few days later when he realized the requirements would keep Mr Lynn from holding this position, he sent out a waiver contradicting himself. (oh, this is for EVERYONE else...not MY chosen people). If I'm reading this wrong, please explain it to me.

Quote:
Shortly after taking office, President Barack Obama issued ethics requirements prohibiting individuals from working for government agencies they have lobbied in the past two years.

On Thursday, the administration delivered to the Senate Armed Services Committee a waiver to Obama's "ethics pledge" for federal employees, exempting Lynn from two specific sections: a two-year prohibition on employees from participating in decisions related to their former employers and a more specific section banning individuals from taking jobs in the agencies they recently lobbied.

"I understand that Mr. Lynn will otherwise comply with the remainder of the pledge and with all pre-existing government ethics rules," the waiver states.
Reply
post #5 of 53
1/24/09 at 8:02am
Thread Starter 
You are not reading it wrong calico2222.

Can you even imagine the outcry if it would have been a republican.

I have heard about Halliburton for eons it seems.

mrblanche, I'm sure you are correct. It is the utter hypocrisy that blows me away. But all is good when it is "The One" doing it.

And the dude he wants to head up the IRS, the dude that doesn't pay his taxes, oh my, it doesn't get much better than that.
Reply
post #6 of 53
1/24/09 at 8:06am
Well, the deal with the taxes was really egregious, to my way of thinking. Have you heard he also tried to deduct a sleep-over camp for his kid as "busines travel," and even when he was caught, he only paid up part of the taxes because the statute of limitations had run out on the first two years? This is the guy who's going to be responsible for seizing the savings accounts and houses of people like Fastnoc?
Reply
post #7 of 53
1/24/09 at 8:14am
Thread Starter 
Great move Barack, hire a tax evader and a cheat all rolled up into one to head the IRS, niiiice.
Reply
post #8 of 53
1/24/09 at 8:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
You are not reading it wrong calico2222.

Can you even imagine the outcry if it would have been a republican.

I have heard about Halliburton for eons it seems.

mrblanche, I'm sure you are correct. It is the utter hypocrisy that blows me away. But all is good when it is "The One" doing it.

And the dude he wants to head up the IRS, the dude that doesn't pay his taxes, oh my, it doesn't get much better than that.
So, basically, he doesn't have a clue what he's doing. Not that it suprises me. I know he's only been in office for a week, but doing one thing and "oops" sending out a waiver to get the person he wants is stupid.

Did all new presidents do things like this? I honestly don't know because the last 2 elections I had too much going on in my life to really follow what they were doing after they got sworn in.
Reply
post #9 of 53
1/24/09 at 8:34am
Being President is very different from running for President. You learn very quickly that no matter what you promised, you won't be able to keep many of your promises. There are just too many things to consider.

I'm sure the daily intelligence briefings are being very hard on Obama, because much of what he believes is being put to the test. I'm sure he's going to do his best, but just as an example, his order "closing Gitmo" does no such thing. It sets a goal of closing it within a year, pending the opinion of a commission.

I don't think he's dishonest or nefarious; he just has to deal with reality, now.
Reply
post #10 of 53
1/24/09 at 8:51am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post
Being President is very different from running for President. You learn very quickly that no matter what you promised, you won't be able to keep many of your promises. There are just too many things to consider.

I'm sure the daily intelligence briefings are being very hard on Obama, because much of what he believes is being put to the test. I'm sure he's going to do his best, but just as an example, his order "closing Gitmo" does no such thing. It sets a goal of closing it within a year, pending the opinion of a commission.

I don't think he's dishonest or nefarious; he just has to deal with reality, now.
How does that old saying go? "There I was, planning for the future, and the present kicked me right in the face!"
Reply
post #11 of 53
1/24/09 at 9:09am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post
Being President is very different from running for President. You learn very quickly that no matter what you promised, you won't be able to keep many of your promises. There are just too many things to consider.

I'm sure the daily intelligence briefings are being very hard on Obama, because much of what he believes is being put to the test. I'm sure he's going to do his best, but just as an example, his order "closing Gitmo" does no such thing. It sets a goal of closing it within a year, pending the opinion of a commission.

I don't think he's dishonest or nefarious; he just has to deal with reality, now.
I can agree with that. I do agree with that, to tell you the truth. But this tax cheat should not head the IRS and this lobbyist should end the endless blathering about Halliburton. If it DOES end the endless blathering about Halliburton I can live with it. The tax evader, I cannot live with, that is bull pucky.

P.S. *********Echoes and memories of Joe the Plumber are dancing in my head while Obama defends the tax evader/cheat

Joe the Plumber gets nailed to wall for it and he isn't even a politician but Barack's BFF can lead the IRS and be a tax cheat.
Reply
post #12 of 53
1/24/09 at 7:47pm
Firstly, let me say that I am NOT following this story as it was not in the online NYTimes or any of the blogs I frequent, but...........it did occur to me that: do you honestly think that people of Mr. Lynn's position do their own taxes? I mean, don't they have, like, personal accountants do that sort of thing for them? If, that were true in fact, would not the accountant be the one responsible for the nefarious conduct? It's like going to H&R Block. THEY stand by whatever they file for you and hence catch the blame & cost of any mistakes made.

Just something to ponder.
Reply
post #13 of 53
1/24/09 at 8:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by PookieBoy View Post
Firstly, let me say that I am NOT following this story as it was not in the online NYTimes or any of the blogs I frequent, but...........it did occur to me that: do you honestly think that people of Mr. Lynn's position do their own taxes? I mean, don't they have, like, personal accountants do that sort of thing for them? If, that were true in fact, would not the accountant be the one responsible for the nefarious conduct? It's like going to H&R Block. THEY stand by whatever they file for you and hence catch the blame & cost of any mistakes made.

Just something to ponder.
Dont he still have to sign it and swear its right?
Reply
post #14 of 53
1/24/09 at 8:07pm
I thought I heard on Fox yesterday that he claimed it was an error in his TurboTax software while doing his taxes himself. But, I may not have heard it correctly, it was playing on the monitor at work and I was a tad busy
Reply
post #15 of 53
1/24/09 at 8:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caleeko View Post
Dont he still have to sign it and swear its right?
I went to H&R Block once because I wasn't really secure of filing correctly that particular year & even tho I might have signed it I certainly didn't go over it with a fine tooth comb because that is THEIR job to see that it is done correctly and that is what you are paying them to do. I believe THEY are the ones who swear that it has been done correctly.
Reply
post #16 of 53
1/24/09 at 10:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post
Being President is very different from running for President. You learn very quickly that no matter what you promised, you won't be able to keep many of your promises. There are just too many things to consider.

I'm sure the daily intelligence briefings are being very hard on Obama, because much of what he believes is being put to the test. I'm sure he's going to do his best, but just as an example, his order "closing Gitmo" does no such thing. It sets a goal of closing it within a year, pending the opinion of a commission.

I don't think he's dishonest or nefarious; he just has to deal with reality, now.
Just so I understand...you understand the difference between running for President and being President and that there's no way a candidate can keep his promises because there's just too much to consider, but the people we elect don't figure that out until they're in office? Don't they check anything out that they promise ahead of time to even see if it's doable? It's kind of scary to think that people running for public office don't have the facts, or any concept of reality until they're in office. Or maybe I'm not understanding what you're saying.
Reply
post #17 of 53
1/25/09 at 1:49am
As to Lynn's nomination, the Fox article linked to above states that Gates wanted him.
Quote:
Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who requested Lynn as his deputy, did not want Lynn to have to recuse himself outright from all decisions involving Raytheon because it would severely limit his ability to do his job, Morrell said.
This NY Times blog entry seems to confirm that.
Quote:
During a Pentagon news conference on Thursday, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates praised the nomination of Mr. Lynn, and pledged to speed the information requested by the committee.

“People in the transition certainly recognized that it was an issue,” Mr. Gates said, but he noted that Mr. Lynn “came with the highest recommendations of a number of people that I respect a lot. And I asked that an exception be made because I felt that he could play the role of the deputy in a better manner than anybody else that I saw.”
Reply
post #18 of 53
1/25/09 at 7:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by PookieBoy View Post
do you honestly think that people of Mr. Lynn's position do their own taxes?
And it was pondered in the hearings. It turns out that yes, in fact he DID do his own taxes, using TurboTax.

Keep in mind that he was told by his employer that they were not withholding those taxes and that he was responsible for them himself. He got the memo, and decided to ignore it, for whatever reason.

And shouldn't the fact that Mr. Obama's choice to head the IRS is a blatant tax cheat doesn't make it into the NY Times blog tell you something about that blog?
Reply
post #19 of 53
1/25/09 at 9:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post
And it was pondered in the hearings. It turns out that yes, in fact he DID do his own taxes, using TurboTax.

Keep in mind that he was told by his employer that they were not withholding those taxes and that he was responsible for them himself. He got the memo, and decided to ignore it, for whatever reason.

And shouldn't the fact that Mr. Obama's choice to head the IRS is a blatant tax cheat doesn't make it into the NY Times blog tell you something about that blog?
Now you've got me confused. Aren't we talking about two different people in this thread? William Lynn, the subject of the blog entry, has been nominated as the Deputy Director of Defense and is a former lobbyist.

Timothy Geithner is the Treasury Secretary nominee who didn't pay some ($25,970 including interest) delinquent federal taxes until right before he was nominated.
Questions and answers in Geithner's tax problems
Reply
post #20 of 53
1/25/09 at 9:48am
I have to say, I am a little disappointed in Obama's decision to appoint Lynn. That being said, he may be the most qualified person for the job. Perhaps an exception was in order. We all make them at times.

As far as Timothy Geithner, I absolutely disagree with that choice.
Reply
post #21 of 53
1/25/09 at 10:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcat View Post
Now you've got me confused. Aren't we talking about two different people in this thread? William Lynn, the subject of the blog entry, has been nominated as the Deputy Director of Defense and is a former lobbyist.
Yes, we are, and it appears "PookieBoy" is confused about it, also. Mr. Lynn was a lobbyist for Raytheon, a major defense contractor. Mr. Geithner was a Fed banker who apparently seriously needs a personal secretary, as well as a long talk with an ethicist.
Reply
post #22 of 53
1/25/09 at 11:35am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post
Yes, we are, and it appears "PookieBoy" is confused about it, also. Mr. Lynn was a lobbyist for Raytheon, a major defense contractor. Mr. Geithner was a Fed banker who apparently seriously needs a personal secretary, as well as a long talk with an ethicist.
Crappy choices all around!
Reply
post #23 of 53
1/25/09 at 11:37am
Thread Starter 
I am more than willing to accept Lynn if it ends the endless blathering I have heard here and elsewhere for years about Cheney and Halliburton.
It is amusing that the people I have heard run it in the ground regarding Cheney/Halliburton have nothing whatsoever to say about Lynn. I guess that is just human nature to all of us, "Do as I say, NOT as I do"

But, sorry this tax cheat/evader is WAY over the line IMO. Oh yeah, let's appoint a tax cheat to heat up the Internal Revenue Service. And because it is Barack, it is barely reported.
Reply
post #24 of 53
1/25/09 at 11:52am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
But, sorry this tax cheat/evader is WAY over the line IMO. Oh yeah, let's appoint a tax cheat to heat up the Internal Revenue Service. And because it is Barack, it is barely reported.
I just Googled "Timothy Geithner nomination", and there are about 165,000 results. Is that what you consider "barely reported"?
Reply
post #25 of 53
1/25/09 at 12:42pm
Thread Starter 
I mean by the drive by's. I'm not talking about blogs.
Reply
post #26 of 53
1/25/09 at 3:33pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcat View Post
I just Googled "Timothy Geithner nomination", and there are about 165,000 results. Is that what you consider "barely reported"?
Actually I think Mr. Lynn is the one with a lobbyist problem.
Reply
post #27 of 53
1/25/09 at 6:30pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcat View Post
As to Lynn's nomination, the Fox article linked to above states that Gates wanted him.
This NY Times blog entry seems to confirm that.

Oh, well THAT changes everything then. NOT

****cough, cough, Halliburton, cough, cough****
Reply
post #28 of 53
1/25/09 at 6:35pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Oh, well THAT changes everything then. NOT

****cough, cough, Halliburton, cough, cough****
Once upon a time, we were using a sarcasm text color
Reply
post #29 of 53
1/27/09 at 5:29pm
Looks like the new Treasury Secretary didn't get the memo either. Wait - he issued his own set of rules against lobbyists serving in the administration.

http://gretawire.foxnews.com/2009/01...ma/#more-31492

Newly installed Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner issued new rules Tuesday restricting contacts with lobbyists – and then hired one to be his top aide.

Mark Patterson, a former advocate for Goldman Sachs, will serve as chief of staff to Geithner as the Treasury Department revamps the Wall Street bailout program that sent an infusion of cash to his former employer.

Patterson’s appointment marks the second time in President Barack Obama’s first week in office that the administration has had to explain how it’s complying with its own ethics rules as it hires a bevy of Washington insiders for administration jobs.

Last week, the White House announced the president had waived the ethics rules to clear the way for the nomination of William Lynn, a former Raytheon lobbyist, to be deputy defense secretary.

“This is exactly the kind of thing that makes the American public suspicious of politicians. You say one thing and do another,” said Melanie Sloan, founder of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

Reply
post #30 of 53
1/27/09 at 6:09pm
Thread Starter 
"Do as I say, not as I do", I have heard that saying somewhere.

The hypocrisy is astonishing. Is this the "Change" Barack promised?
With this kind of change the "hope" fades fast.

I really thought that when the it got to the wire and Barack thought about it, that he wouldn't let the tax cheat get the position, I am so naive.

One thing we can be sure of, we won't have to ever hear the words, "Halliburton-Cheney" in the same sentence again.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Obama and the Lobbyists