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.
You didn't direct this to me, but you have no freaking clue what you're talking about. There's nothing wrong with lobbyists themselves. I was a lobbyist at one point in time. Not much would get done in state houses and on the federal level without them, because their job is to advocate for groups they represent by bringing up issues that impact their clients, and educating elected officials on those issues. Churches have lobbyists. So do groups like the YMCA and Girl Scouts. There's absolutely nothing wrong with citizens banding together as a group and hiring a spokesperson to work the capital to address their needs. The problem comes in with CONTRIBUTIONS. When lobbyists can promise big campaign bucks or cushy board seats to loyal politicians when they retire, they start buying votes, even if it's done on a wink and a nudge basis where everyone pretends that's not what's happening.
This guy bankrolling Gifford's PAC is pretty slimy when it comes to PACs and politics.
So setting a goal to have $20 million by the 2014 elections so you can back anti-gun politicians up for elections in various states is making the world better ?
Sounds more like they are trying to stack the deck here and using $$$$ to do it.
There is no way to fight the NRA without funding, if it brings some reasonable control then yes it will make the world a better place. Congress doesn't vote their conscience and are easily influenced by money, like it or not. The NRA offers no solutions, even on simple issues like background checks.
Why do you have a problem with this particular lobbyist org., and possibly not any others? Tell us of some lobbyist groups you dislike, other than this.
Yeah, Dale is a real class act all right. She fits in well with the OP and a few others in this thread. If you want to talk about what's wrong with our culture, look no further than some of the despicable posters in this thread.
It's been my experience that people who do nothing but put other people down and who denigrate and make fun of people for reasons that are beyond that person's control (such as the disabled) really have low self esteem and a poor self image. Dale is the perfect example; I don't think I've ever seen a single post by him/her that didn't include an insult or nasty comment of some degree.
The only way they can feel good about themselves is to make comments similar to what we've seen in this thread.
I could almost feel sorry for them if the comments weren't so vile and hateful and cruel.
There is no way to fight the NRA without funding, if it brings some reasonable control then yes it will make the world a better place. Congress doesn't vote their conscience and are easily influenced by money, like it or not. The NRA offers no solutions, even on simple issues like background checks.
And no lobbyist should. It should be Congress making the rules, not influential people welding money and telling Congress they represent what the people want.
Why do you have a problem with this particular lobbyist org., and possibly not any others? Tell us of some lobbyist groups you dislike, other than this.
I'm against lobbyists period. That was one promise Obama failed to keep..to kick the lobbyists out of DC.
Lobbyists have loyalty to the person funding them.
Victims testifying to Congress is one thing but a lobbyist testifying is quite another.
Lobbyists serve one purpose and that is to push an agenda.
And no lobbyist should. It should be Congress making the rules, not influential people welding money and telling Congress they represent what the people want.
So let me get this straight: if Gabby gave the EXACT same testimony and wasn't in a PAC to end gun violence, you would whole-heartedly support her speaking to congress, huh? Yeah right.
On a federal level, a $1M PAC is laughable. It's nothing. The PAC means she can raise money and use that money to advocate for legislative changes. My bet is that it's used mainly for public and voter education efforts to rally voters on the efforts. If she was going to have the kind of money to start influencing votes by essentially BUYING them through campaign contributions to candidates that she wants to vote her way, you'd be talking closer to $1M per VOTE/politician. Again, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
And for the record, lots of organizations with lobbyists have a PAC and give ZERO money to candidates--especially the "do gooder" groups advocating for issues. Like Giffords, they don't have the money to give away--they spend it on voter education (TV time if they're not completely broke) instead. Do you have any idea what a national ad buy costs?
Why? Why are you so weak and pathetic that you have to refer to her like that?
Does it make you feel powerful? Does it make you feel important and more worthwhile to refer to a woman who has suffered like she has - or anyone, for that matter - in that manner?
When I see things like that, it makes me realize there are truly people in this world who are a total waste of oxygen.
Sociopath.
Sociopaths can imitate human emotions like compassion and empathy. However, low self-esteem cannot, it just attacks in order to feel more important.
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.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with citizens banding together as a group and hiring a spokesperson to work the capital to address their needs. The problem comes in with CONTRIBUTIONS. When lobbyists can promise big campaign bucks or cushy board seats to loyal politicians when they retire, they start buying votes, even if it's done on a wink and a nudge basis where everyone pretends that's not what's happening.
