Wait, I Thought Democrats Were Against Lobbyists?

Democrats are. Politicians aren't. Democratic politicians are far more politician than democrat (no less so than republican politicans), if they weren't we'd have a single payer healthcare bill on Obama's desk as we speak.

I would like to think that restrictions on lobbyists and corporate influence is something on which both democrats and republicans could agree. At least the voters themselves if not the politicians.

Well that explains it then, there must not be any "democrats" in the government then... all those people calling themselves democrats are just a bunch of liars who don't represent the true democrat values.

Thanks for clearing it up for me.

Just another example of hypocrasy 101.  Democrats did not invent the word, but they are bound and determined to make it their own.

I thought Obama said corporations and lobbyists wouldn't be a part of this process?  Another liar, imagine that.....

 

It's not as if republican politicans aren't even further in bed with "corporations and lobbyists". If you want to make a case for hypocrasy and lying go right ahead but at least the democrats make some effort to address this and not *all* democrats are on the take ... unlike the republicans.

It's tough to be too concerned about people throwing stones when they themselves live in glass houses.

nice try at mis-direction.  Did the republican President (oops!  There is not one) - Ok, did the republican Speaker (damn!  Not one either) - alright did the Republican Leader of the Senate (Oops again!  Not one!).  Ok, did the republican leaders on Health Insurance Deformation say they would exclude corporations and lobbyists?  No?  Liars.

Oh damn!  There are no republican leaders on Health Insurance!  It is all democrat, and all a bunch of lies, and broken promises.

So if you are a politician, the party title means nothing then? So in reality we don't have a Democratic controlled House, Senate and White House. We simply have a politician leading these Houses. So they basically lied when they claimed to be Democrats while running for office. Hmmm.

Politicians or voters? Now you have me confused with your Politician and non-politician excuse, I mean discription.

So 2 wrongs do make a right then. Funny how Republicans are bad for using lobbyist but Democrats (politicians that is) not only can use them but can even lie about not wanting to use them and still get excused. Amazing, it's worth being a Democrat these days. I can commit murder and get away with it so long as I'm a registered Democrat.

We need not to make cases, Democrats make themselves guilty within 3 seconds of opening their mouths.

So lying is making an effort? Gosh, not only do Democrats have lying down to a science (as oppose to a religion) but they are also masters at excuses and hypocrisy. And I mean both politicians and voters.

1. Who exactly?

2. 2 wrongs don't make a right.

Lets seperate your claims, they are:

1. Democrats are "making some effort" to address the problem of lobbyists.

2. Not *all* democrats on the take from lobbyists

3. ALL republicans are on the take from lobbyists.

To this I must say:

1. So making an effort against lobbyists means taking their money to give them the laws they want?

2&3. You are basically claiming that the vast majority of all politicians are on the take, with a few shining rare exceptions who stand against it... and that every last one of those is a democrat. That is simply bull.

Do you really believe not a single republican is unbought? does that mean that we just have to name one single republican who is not on the take to disprove everything you said?