It was only for stimulus money so it doesn't count.

Thank you, subby, for making me indirectly support RedState. It's not that I'm averse to material critical of Obama - it's that I don't want to click that site. If it's just an oversight, that's cool. If you deliberately selected, "some guy," you suck.

Color me wo wo.
/that's not a color

The lobbyist ban was stupid. I hope he revokes the entire stance, so as to draw on qualified public-service people, who are apparently excluded even if their lobbying was on behalf of non-profits.

Wow, that sucks. Too bad it's still better than the alternative.

Thanks for the warning about redstate, they get no click.

Doesn't "red state" mean Communist?

Oh, and the author of this probably sucks more dick than Paris Hilton in a dick-sucking contest after she had three extra heads attached.

wow, I could get more reliable news from a high school gossip circle.

kmmontandon: The lobbyist ban was stupid.

That's strange, cause Obama sure seemed to think it was important before he got into power.

Mordant: Wow, that sucks. Too bad it's still better than the alternative.

Which is what, follow your word and actually stick to the principles that you were elected on?

If its true, even for limited access I'm disappointed. I really hope this administration keeps its promise to focus on delivering what the people want as opposed to what industry wants.

Products and services should sell themselves. Thats the way the rest of the country has to run.. the government should follow suit and set the example.

/and fwiw people need to quit biatching about where news comes from. Everyone should look at multiple opinions and decide where reality is instead of depending on other people to spoon feed them.

Ahh, Warner Todd Hudson, one of my favorite RedStaters. Author of such screeds as "How dare Obama watch Star Trek in a private theater, ZOMG what an elitist!"

However, this does seem to be a legitimate issue, even if the reversal is targeted. I, unlike the author, understand the benefit to modifying one's take on issues as necessary to reflect reality (something the Republican Party and our former President were unable to understand), but then he needs to come right out and say that. "Whoops, my bad. It was well intentioned, but it ain't working out right."

Thought to me, it's more disappointing that we've let Washington become so infested with lobbyists we have to resort to this kind of bullshiat.

ragekage: Thought to me, it's more disappointing that we've let Washington become so infested with lobbyists we have to resort to this kind of bullshiat.

it's not like we actually fire the bastards when we find out they're in deep with special interest groups. Although it's rather interesting to compare lobbyist donations with their voting record(s) on key legislative issues/items.

That does it! I'm voting Republican from now on, 'cuz they NEVER get in deep with lobbyists.

Lionel Mandrake: That does it! I'm voting Republican from now on, 'cuz they NEVER get in deep with lobbyists.

I think that's officially our first "but... but... the Republicans!" of the thread.

hey!!!! where's all the spin???? gettin tired of making lame excuses for a Chicago crook???

Stay Cool Babylon: Thank you, subby, for making me indirectly support RedState. It's not that I'm averse to material critical of Obama - it's that I don't want to click that site. If it's just an oversight, that's cool. If you deliberately selected, "some guy," you suck.

If you use FireFox with AdBlock and NoScript, you cost them bandwidth without actually getting a pageview for their ads. Schadenfreude makes the inadvertent clicks less painful.

Great pic in the article

real shaman: hey!!!! where's all the spin???? gettin tired of making lame excuses for a Chicago crook???

I don't want to alarm you, but all your punctuation keys seem to be sticking.

Ah, Friday afternoon. If the Watergate breaking had happened then, Nixon would still be President.

/Yea, I know he's dead.

So?

Joliet_Jake: real shaman: hey!!!! where's all the spin???? gettin tired of making lame excuses for a Chicago crook???

I don't want to alarm you, but all your punctuation keys seem to be sticking.

He just got back from foobies.com

CougarJeff: So?

True enough, apathy is a common enough response to yet more disappointment from popular leaders. But it's particularly hurtful to see Obama fail to fulfill his promises. He's supposed to be the last, best hope to replace the many many failures of the previous 2 generations of political 'leaders' more interested in lining their pockets than doing their jobs.

For my part, I expect Obama to be little different than his predecessors. The rhetoric will change, but in real terms he'll continue the policies of preceeding administrations. This country is sick in it's soul and flashing campaign ads or teleprompter lead speeches aren't going to fix it.

Realpolitik420: That's strange, cause Obama sure seemed to think it was important before he got into power.

And to an extent it was, however, as most people knew you don't become a Washington lobbyist unless you know your shiat. The ban as a pure blanket statement was ill thought out even if the reasons for it were good. If he wasn't having a hard time filling positions I doubt he'd have even taken a second look at the ban, but when damn near everyone in your resource pool has lobbying experience you knew he was going to have to rethink the hiring requirements.

/not that I'm happy with him changing the policy
//A little pain is supposed to be expected when your fighting against the grain

That was one of the stupidest blog postings I've ever read. Do people just wake up at thirty and decide they can write, without ever having previously done so? I mean this comment to be taken independently of how stupid the topic was.

Murkanen: And to an extent it was, however, as most people knew you don't become a Washington lobbyist unless you know your shiat.

Not always. You become a lobbyist because you know how to sell an idea to someone AND you've got some way to get them to listen to you. actually knowing what you're talking about is a plus, but since you can always hire outside consultants it's not as important as you might think.

Leave the President alone, he didn't lie. Obama is just planting seeds of hope into the truth. It's necessary to get the proletariat on board so we can begin re-edu.. I mean pull our troops out of Iraq.

Weaver95: CougarJeff: So?

True enough, apathy is a common enough response to yet more disappointment from popular leaders. But it's particularly hurtful to see Obama fail to fulfill his promises. He's supposed to be the last, best hope to replace the many many failures of the previous 2 generations of political 'leaders' more interested in lining their pockets than doing their jobs.

For my part, I expect Obama to be little different than his predecessors. The rhetoric will change, but in real terms he'll continue the policies of preceeding administrations. This country is sick in it's soul and flashing campaign ads or teleprompter lead speeches aren't going to fix it.

Gee you sound so concerned. Sometimes what was though of as a good idea actually hamstrungs an organization or this case Obama's administration from getting certain things done. The ban isn lt totally lifted but the lobbyist are put on notice that this isn't business as usual. And nice wingnut touch on mentioning telepromters there hack.

5_second_rule: Sometimes what was though of as a good idea actually hamstrungs an organization or this case Obama's administration from getting certain things done. The ban isn lt totally lifted but the lobbyist are put on notice that this isn't business as usual. And nice wingnut touch on mentioning telepromters there hack.

Idea? During the campaign, Obama said many times that lobbyists would not run his White House, and the campaign delighted in tweaking McCain for the former lobbyists who worked on his campaign. It was the cornerstone of Obama's campaign theme about limiting the influence of special interests, and he just flip-flopped.

inb4 apathetic response

Lionel Mandrake: That does it! I'm voting Republican from now on, 'cuz they NEVER get in deep with lobbyists.

Re-elect Obama: he's not quite as bad as Republicans

Realpolitik420

Mordant: "Wow, that sucks. Too bad it's still better than the alternative."

Which is what, follow your word and actually stick to the principles that you were elected on?

I have lived during the terms of eleven presidents. The first one that does as you suggest will be the first one that does as you suggest.

ragekage: However, this does seem to be a legitimate issue, even if the reversal is targeted. I, unlike the author, understand the benefit to modifying one's take on issues as necessary to reflect reality (something the Republican Party and our former President were unable to understand), but then he needs to come right out and say that. "Whoops, my bad. It was well intentioned, but it ain't working out right."

It's not like the lobbyist issue is a deep mystery that only reveals itself once the President becomes acclimated to the office and the ins-and-outs of DC life.

It's simply going back on an empty campaign promise used to dupe the easily manipulated.

Came here for the spin and left satisfied.

/Somehow, this is all Bush's fault

kleppe: 5_second_rule: Sometimes what was though of as a good idea actually hamstrungs an organization or this case Obama's administration from getting certain things done. The ban isn lt totally lifted but the lobbyist are put on notice that this isn't business as usual. And nice wingnut touch on mentioning telepromters there hack.

Idea? During the campaign, Obama said many times that lobbyists would not run his White House, and the campaign delighted in tweaking McCain for the former lobbyists who worked on his campaign. It was the cornerstone of Obama's campaign theme about limiting the influence of special interests, and he just flip-flopped.

inb4 apathetic response

Go RTA and you'll see that come Monday morning lobbyist aren't going to swarming all though DC. And you brought up a good point since your guy was well in bed with lobbyist, this shouldn't bother you at all. Maybe too hard of a stance isn't really as productive as one would think. But I will say that Obama's backpeddling on civil liberties is is very disappointing. Light his ass up on that issue.

could somebody explan the dif between the lobbyist program and bribery????

So, is this real?

If it's real, then Obama can suck it. But it's very hard to take that site seriously.

LouDobbsAwaaaay: So, is this real?

If it's real, then Obama can suck it. But it's very hard to take that site seriously.

c'mon - you didn't REALLY think there would be any sort of change in how D.C. operates, did you?

Weaver95: c'mon - you didn't REALLY think there would be any sort of change in how D.C. operates, did you?

What does that have to do with anything? I'm just asking for confirmation from a source that isn't batshiat retarded.

This is only a "lie" or a "flip-flop" if you're a hyper-partisan tool like the author of the article.

They said they'd review lobbyist policy and make adjustments and that's exactly what they did.

Jesus farking Christ.

I'm not sure if this goes along with his original lobbyist campaign promise.

I mean, was this part of his campaign promises from last year? To not let lobbyists talk to people about how to spend stimulus funds?

Seems as though this is one of those pie in the sky hopes that Obama tried and realized once the ban is in place...nobody with experience is there to help.

Stay Cool Babylon: If you deliberately selected, "some guy," you suck.

Of course it was deliberate. Republicans are ashamed of being honest about where they get their "news" from.

Weaver95: Murkanen: And to an extent it was, however, as most people knew you don't become a Washington lobbyist unless you know your shiat.

Not always. You become a lobbyist because you know how to sell an idea to someone AND you've got some way to get them to listen to you. actually knowing what you're talking about is a plus, but since you can always hire outside consultants it's not as important as you might think.

moothemagiccow: Lionel Mandrake: That does it! I'm voting Republican from now on, 'cuz they NEVER get in deep with lobbyists.

Re-elect Obama: he's not quite as bad as Republicans

And he would win on that alone, compared to Failin and Newtman

So I guess by now most Obama supporters are walking away with disgust and McCain voters are in full support of our new POTUS.

Except for the partisan hacks, of course.

Obama went against his campaign promise on lobbyists his very first day.

Day one.

He granted a "waiver" to go against his own ironclad rule.

So, why is anyone surprised by this?

Erebus1954: So I guess by now most Obama supporters are walking away with disgust and McCain voters are in full support of our new POTUS.

Except for the partisan hacks, of course.

Obama supporters (especially Farkwads) are spinning and BUT BUSH-ing, McCain supporters are laughing and crying.

Either way, this lobbyist BS really is insignificant, considering where we are headed. If a lobbyist (or former lobbyist) is the best person for a particular job, HIRE THEM. If they fark up, FIRE THEM.

I love the reaction from the democratic sheep. It's just like the response from the republican sheep when bush was in office.

You partisan followers all suck. Our country will continue to be on the failboat until you all realize that BOTH parties are out to get you.