Another example of the divide between Obama's talk and Obama's walk, in the case on benefits to gay partners
http://www.redstate.com/jrichardson/2009/03/13/crunch-time/ >>> If Obama had the political capital his administration claims, social >>> conservatives might have reason to fret (and LGBT Americans a reason to >>> rejoice). They don’t, of course, but even if that were the case, Obama has >>> proved himself to be nothing more than a craven political opportunist who >>> has exhibited no misgivings in betraying his “principles” and “allies.” On Mar 13, 1:55 pm, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > Either Obama had not thought out the consequences of over promising in > the campaign or Obama thought no one would object if he broke a > promise or an article, or Obama had no clue... Perhaps a mixture of > all three... In any case, now he has to pay up or declare bankrupcy > as a true wholesome reformer... \ > > the article > > http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/19961.html > > >>> In most Democratic administrations, it would be a no-brainer to hire an > >>> environmental specialist to work for the Environmental Protection Agency. > > But at least one green advocate in Washington has been shut out. > > This person’s problem, as well as those of many other Democrats in the > capital: They sport the Scarlet L, “Lobbyist.” > > Having campaigned on a promise that lobbyists won’t run his White > House, President Barack Obama is discovering that what may make for a > good sound bite on the campaign trail can complicate governing. > > As he strives to build an administration beyond his top Cabinet > officers, Obama is finding that he has limited his pool of potential > appointees because of a ban on individuals from agencies that they > have lobbied within the past two years. > > Some of the very people who would best serve in politically sensitive > posts – interest group veterans, former campaign operatives or ex-Hill > staffers – earn a living through lobbying. > > The policy has spurred frustration among some Democratic lobbyists, > especially those who got behind Obama early in his hard-fought > primary. They believe the president is depriving himself of an entire > group of capable aides – at a time when Obama already is having > trouble staffing up his Treasury Department and other key agencies. > > On Mar 13, 1:32 pm, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > is it is hard to hire good help (the best help were involved in > > Lobbying)... But this is the political price for the coin of trashing > > Lobbyists for political gold and gain during the campaign... So > > either Obama becomes the hypocrite for pragmatism sake or Obama hires > > inferior help... > > > Now the problem is is all those who demanded the hype of "clean > > government demands no lobbyists" that Obama used to pander to > > voters... Obama, being dishonest, has painted himself into a > > corner... --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
