There’s a great re-shuffling of mandarins going on in DC (it actually started two years ago), and I have to say it’s fun to watch. Why? Because when the access peddlers have to peddle faster, you know something is going on besides a bunch of speeches.

Matthew Mosk from WaPo:

Some large firms that focused exclusively on an ability to connect with top Republicans began to view the 2008 election as a serious business problem. This was true of Rogers’s firm, BGR Holding, which made its name with blue-chip connections in elite Republican circles. Shortly before Election Day, BGR signed a deal with Westin Rinehart to give his clients better access to a broader range of services, and to Democrats. “We wanted more familiarity with the inner workings of the Democrat machinery,” Rogers said.

But it’s not just the party identity that’s changing. That wouldn’t be enough:

This week, Obama transition chief John D. Podesta told reporters that the president-elect would impose “the strictest and most far-reaching ethics rules of any transition in history,” including a series of rules defining how the group that is planning the new administration will interact with the lobbying industry.

Political scientist Norman J. Ornstein said that while the rules “may exclude some good people with deep experience in their fields . . . it will also exclude those who see government service as a springboard to financial success, or who are more intent on pleasing future potential employers or clients than making tough choices in the public interest.”

But almost from the start of his campaign, Obama made clear that he would not be slamming the door on interactions with lobbyists. In a December 2007 speech in Iowa, he said he was “running to tell the lobbyists in Washington that their days of setting the agenda are over. They have not funded my campaign. They won’t work in my White House.” But the candidate quickly backed away from that second part. A few days later in Waterloo, Iowa, he changed the phrasing to say that lobbyists “are not going to dominate my White House.”

One bright line Obama will continue to draw is his prohibition on campaign contributions from lobbyists, now extended to cover the nonprofit accounts he has set up to pay transition costs and fund inauguration festivities. That is in keeping with the ban on donations Obama enforced during the campaign.

This part seems to have been overlooked by the denizens of WaPo’s comment section, where the wingnuts heard “Obama” and “lobbyists” and simply regurgitated what Rush had recently puked into their straining hatchling mouths:

vmrg1974 wrote:
I guess that is what Obama meant by “Change.” Changing Republican lobbyists with Democratic ones.

11/14/2008 10:18:25 AM
Recommend (1)

thegreatpotatospamof2003 wrote:
Actually, the predictions in regard to Obama’s behavior are based on his past actions, his current moves, his pattern of financial transaction, his “road” to the presidency, his political and financial “associations.”

Starting with Rezko, and Chicago.

You do understand, right?

11/14/2008 10:09:53 AM
Recommend (0)

Report Abuse Discussion Policy
enaughton27 wrote:
I could have sworn I heard the Dems crying about special interests this election period.
11/14/2008 10:07:30 AM
Recommend (1)

schratboy wrote:
Obama is really delivering “Change.” He and the democrats will be doing to the same power deals and influence peddling, only now they won’t have anybody looking over their shoulders or questioning them. Power corrupts.
11/14/2008 9:47:58 AM
Recommend (3)

Those are the cries from the wilderness. Stupid people deserve to suffer.