The media lobby scam

Jennifer Rubin:

THE New York Times, Washington Post and other "prestige" papers have been all atwitter over lobbyists working for (or leaving) the McCain campaign - as if they were uncovering some great hypocrisy. But their "exposés" never show any sign that the lobbyists actually sway John McCain. In fact, the record clearly shows that he's less prone to such influence than Barack Obama.

When papers cite specific lobbyists and specific votes, the McCain camp so far has dutifully pulled out evidence that the senator either rejected the lobbyist's entreaties or voted in keeping with his longstanding policy positions.

It's sometimes hard to fathom the point of these stories. If McCain, as recounted in a Washington Post report about an incident in the late '90s, threw then-lobbyist Charlie Black and his client out of his office, doesn't it show the lack of lobbyist influence on him?

And how is there a problem if campaign staffer Randy Scheunemann lobbied McCain to expand NATO on behalf of former Soviet states - when McCain has long favored such NATO expansion?

All this coverage is confused - at best. The problem isn't just the lack of similar stories about Obama's ties to lobbyists. (Yes, Obama has advisers and "volunteers" who lobby for oil, pharmaceutical, insurance and other businesses on Democrats' roster of villains.)

Rather, the error lies in these stories' assumption that McCain's proximity to lobbyists itself is improper. In fact, the real issue is whether the candidate ever sided with lobbyists against the public interest.

That is, how did McCain (and Obama) vote in the face of lobbyists trolling for taxpayer dollars or asking for dispensation at odds with the public good?

...

The stories are written on the false premise that McCain is a hypocrite. One way you can tell it is a false premise is to ask yourself would the story even be a story if McCain was not the GOP candidate. One way to find that is whether similar stories are written about Obama or Hillary Clinton.

The purpose of the stories is what Obama calls distractions when he is challenged. In McCain's case they really are.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t
Read more

Bin Laden's concern about Zarqawi's remains

James Robbins: ... Bin Laden suggests that President Bush should allow Zarqawi’s body to be returned to his family in Jordan, but this is a matter that is up to the Jordanian government, which so far has not shown much interest in facilitating a homecoming. Bin Laden mocks King Abdullah II, calling him a Coalition minion, and asking “w hat scares you about Abu Musab after he’s dead? You know that his funeral, if allowed to happen, would be a huge funeral showing the extent of sympathy with the mujahedin.” A large crowd would definitely turn out, though most people would be on hand to demonstrate their anger and disgust. Last November’s hotel bombings in Amman , masterminded by Zarqawi, are still fresh in people’s memory, and mentioning them to Jordanians has the same visceral impact as memory of the 9/11 attacks does here. Jordan has adopted a zero-tolerance policy towards those who choose to mourn the country’s least favorite son, and four opposition members of parliament who paid con
Read more