Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yeah the Democratic party, the party of George Wallace, Al Gore Sr, Bull Connor, William Fullbright, and opposition to Civil Rights Act of 1964 , made it possible for Tim Scott to be elected as Republican.
You just don't like blacks who think for themselves and get off the Democrat plantation.
Scores of Southern Democrats left the Democratic Party and switched to the Republican Party after the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Lobbying is just groups of people trying to convince politicians to support their cause. You sound like a populist to me , just kind of reading off a list of talking points about non-issues but I think we have bigger fish to fry in this country than citiznes lobbying for something. Like the huge debt Obama has racked up. Or ObamaCare.
As I said, I don't have a problem with anyone communicating with their representative or sending them money. The problem with paid lobbiest is it makes for lazy politics. Instead of being actively involved in what a voter cares about, they want to throw a little money at a lobby firm, sign a petition, and expect a change. If people would just do their own research and communicate directly with their representative there really wouldn't be a need for lobbyist.
I'm not any one thing. That's part of our problem, we're to quick to try and label someone... put them in a box so it's easier to attack. I don't read off anyone's talking points list, only comment on my own frustrations.
My issues with lobbies are those established to push corporate interests over citizen interests. That's not to say I'm anti business, I just have a problem with say the telecom industry using a lobby to keep competition stifled and further our existing oligopoly. I actually had a conversation with a state representative over SC crippling the ability for cities and towns to be their own ISP when it felt they weren't being properly served by industry incumbents. Of course this same industry wrote the legislation he was co-sponsoring. When I asked him about how it made any sense to limit a town from offering service if one person in a zip code the town covered could get 768k down. That's slower than Edge cellular service (which is being retired as fast as possible). He had no, zero, zip understanding of the bill he was co-sponsoring. And while I would like to say that's just one politician.. it's not. It's a trait shared by all state and federal politicians regardless of party affiliation.
I don't remember ever implying or stating I represented all citizens. I do, however, remember explicitly stating I represent my own views for myself.
Companies are legal entities, and thus have semi protections for free speech as found by the US Supreme Court. IMO this creates a problem with our political system. Originally the protections were put in place not for political reasons, but to create an entity that could legally act as an entity for contracting, lawsuits, etc. reasons. The political issues are an unintended consequence.
As I said earlier (thanks for echoing it), politicians don't have to bow to a lobby. But because, in most cases, money wins elections... those willing to pay get the legislation they want because politicians are more concerned about themselves than being true statesmen. They (politicians and special interests) do a very effective job of distracting the American's 2 second attention span with divisive polarizing topics that are 'more important issues'. This while special interest stands up astoturf and fake think tanks to push talking points to steer public discussion.
Corporate are groups of people. Each with the full ability to communicate directly with their representative. You are correct, corporate interests don't always conflict with citizen interests. However, the corporation's interests are always to make as much money as possible. Which is a good thing.. to a point. But the days of corporations being good stewards died out in the 60s. We live in a global market where the US is nothing more than one of many markets. They care only for what's good for them. Sometimes that's good for us.. other times not so much. If what a corporation is doing is really in the best interest for the citizens, there shouldn't be a reason why the citizenship wouldn't get behind supporting it without the need for a lobby.
Take the current Net Neutrality issue that's raging. The FCC is catching all kinds of flack because they want to bow to corporate interests and create a two tier internet instead of a neutral network that treats all traffic the same. It's not about what's good for the citizens. It's about creating another income stream at the expense of competition and the citizenship. So now you have the telecom lobby pushing both senators and the FCC to go in a really bad direction.
I disagree with his politics, and will not vote for him, but admire him and respect him for doing this for sure. I just see the post above me, so I will say it - I am one of the Southern Democrats still around.
Done for the press and the story and the glory. Eat it up....Not because I'm for against his party...just because I don't buy the hoopla
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
