Comments on Blah on the NYT. The Washington Post Gets the Real Story on McCain.

First, the bankruptcy bill was not very important to GS and JPM. I don't doubt that they supporteed it on general principals. But, as investment banks, their clients tend to be either old money families who rarely go bankrupt or big firms whoose bankruptcies are governent by corporate, not personal bankruptcy law. Mass market credit cards are not a significant fraction of their business.

Second, and more importantly, a vote that aligns with a lobbyist's interests is hardly evidence of having been swayed if the vote aligns with the senator's ideological predisposition. What you want to find is a vote add odds with what his ideology would lead you to expect. Like say a senator from a party whoose voters lean anti-nuclear working to water down a bill regulating nuclear power after having been lobbied hard by the nuclear power industry. I wonder if any senators have done that?

Errrr...wrong on that David...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=ar909uO1CqHw&refer=home

Washington Mutual, Bank of America Corp., JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Citigroup Inc. spent $25 million in 2004 and 2005 lobbying for a legislative agenda that included changes in bankruptcy laws to protect credit card profits, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a non-partisan Washington group that tracks political donations.

Josh: Okay, granted on JPM. I had forgot that JPM had merged with Chase, which gave them a big consumer credit card business.

John McCain, however likable and patriotic, is damaged goods, and anyone who remembers how he rolled over for George W. Bush, of all people in his party, during a previous tour of StraightTalk, will give pause before allowing to him that kind line of credit our well-meaning Democrats love to extend. His will be a sad post-convention campaign for the Presidency, wherein the last candles of Vietnam are hushed, and the male potency drug of his choice will be waiting, lovingly, for his deflated endorsement come December.

The only thing that’s missing from the piece is tying all the lobbyists (and all their clients) who work with McCain to McCain’s voting record.... It shouldn't be too hard to find examples of McCain's work in the Senate that benefited this corporate roster.

Nor would it be hard to do the same thing for the other 99 senators.

I hope McCain's campaign is like another Bob Dole in '96. Then he can go on and do a Pepsi Commercial with Miley Cyrus or somebody.

What? You expect the MSM to actually tell us about the dirt before we elect him as President and find he's dirty as all get out?

Have you been asleep the last 8 years?

My favorite aspect of this story is the fact that McCain's lobbyist campaign manager, Conrad Black, actually makes lobbying phone calls from ON BOARD the Straight Talk Express.

Before getting too delighted about McCain's ties to lobbyists, people should look into who's supporting Obama. Last I checked he got lots of money from banks and investment firms, like Goldman Sachs and JPM.

Here, top Obama contributors: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.asp?id=N00009638&cycle=2008

@9:
Nice job not reading the fine print:

"The organizations themselves did not donate, rather the money came from the organization's PAC, its individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families."

Given that this page:

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.asp?id=N00009638&cycle=2008

Confirms that he hasn't taken any PAC money, all that chart means is that the people who donate to him happen to work at those companies. Obviously damning evidence.

@1:
Passive-aggressive much? If you're gonna accuse Obama of something, just accuse him; there's no need to be coy about it.

On that particular issue, he didn't "water down the bill" - the rest of the Senate did. He got the bill to a point of compromise so it would get past the Senate. Also, he himself has stated that he is "nuclear agnostic".

@9

Also, the MAJORITY of Obama's dollas come from folks like you and me, not lobbiests. Can any candidate still viable say the same?

It's time, eh?

Whew* it's a darned good thing the New York Times and Washington Post have YOU around to keep them on their toes. Hey, why don't you see if you can get a job there? OH, that's right... now I remember.

Why in the hell would "left" wing press do an 8 year old story before he has the nomination? This is clearly a story he wanted out now. It stimulated his fundraising and if it isn't a death sentence it will make him stronger.

Josh you should be getting the dirt out on Obama now and not wait for the right wing to do it after the nomination.

@11: No, Clinton is the one who's "agnostic" on nuclear power. (Bullshit answer, by the way.) Obama likes nuclear power: "We should explore nuclear power as part of the energy mix." And he did water down that disclosure bill, but that was largely because of hostile R leadership, according to the Washington Post.

Energy Independence Now!

No more Oil Wars!

Stop funding the terrorists!

Drill in Anwar.

Build more nuclear power plants

Use More coal.

Use more natural gas

Turn trash into energy

Double the efficiency of windmills and solar cells.

If France can do nuclear power so can we.

If Brazil can do biomass/ethanol power so can we.

If Australia can do LNG power so can we.

Domestically produced energy will end recession and spur the economy.