Those of you who think that there’s no difference in impact and power between corporate lobbyists wielding large donations and issue lobbyists who have little if any to give need to get a clue about how DC operates. Yes, there are lobbyists for all sorts of fine causes, but the problem lies with those who are primarily buying votes.

There’s a world of difference between lobbyists (of either political persuasion) playing a role in educating lawmakers and lobbyists whose primary role is to bring a check and a draft bill or loophole passage. It’s not like on most issues Joe Politician seriously considers between some postcards sent by constituents and a slick, well-connected lobbyist bringing a sizable bribe. Who gets the access? Those who have the money. Sure, you can go to DC on this or that issue and visit your Congressman’s office, take a tour, but the corporate reps are there all day, every day. Go on home now little voter, let the big boys take care of some bidness. That’s the way it works.

Look at the FEC filings to see who’s writing the checks. Look at the percentage of bills that are not on the front page of the paper but that affect millions of Americans, and look at how much corporate money flows in on just about every issue, usually at the cost of American consumers and taxpayers. Get a clue.

There’s nothing wrong with listening to what lobbyists have to say, and everything wrong with taking their money. I know the politicians need money like oxygen to survive the campaign process now, and that’s why we need a big change in campaign finance instead of this ridiculous money = legitimacy system.

Is Hillary being up front about who lobbyists represent? Take a look at where the money is coming from and decide for yourself.

While Hillary Clinton may not necessarily be the "ideal" candidate for president, she understands how the game is played. It is incredibly naive to think that special interests will suddenly stop being a part of the political landscape if Obama or Edwards is elected. Also, it is especially foolish to think that Obama and Edwards are not trying to appeal to the special interests through indirect means. Hillary, at least, is honest and forthcoming enough to declare her real position. I have noticed that many people in this blog are falling into that classical liberal trap of going for that "ideal" candidate or position rather than practicality. Hillary understands the realities on the ground and what she is up against should she be elected president and that idealism simply is not enough. To be successful in the longrun and to get the most accomplished, a candidate must be broad and must know how to navigate through the complex political landscape in Washington.

Sen. Clinton's less popular views and past practices should be seen as artifacts of her tenure in the White House as a politically engaged First Lady. Consistently, she acts and ideates based on an exaggerated deference to the office of the presidency. I think this explains her deference to Bush on Iraq. She was already protecting herself as future president at that time. The question is, was that wisdom or hubris? Understand, I think she's great!

Tom from Boston needs to check his facts. Here's a link http://fe7.news.sp1.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070802/ap_on_el_pr/edwards_news_corp

Edwards took less that 1000 from Fox employees which he has returned. Clinton took around 20,000

Kathy Callan you have it right. Edwards doesn't take special interest money. And, more importantly, he is offering more substance on every issue than any candidate other than Kucinich.

See the NYTimes column by Klugman today. He says that Edwards gets the credit if any healthcare plan succeeds in the next years and that Clinton lacks details and substance.

Clinton is a little Bush-lite
And Obama, while very appealing on every level, is actually Edwards lite.
Edwards has the progressive heart in this race.

Edwards was right about 1 thing; America does need a change, a BIG change, not a small one. Get rid of all these fake politicians. Get someone that knows how it feels to be poor in America AND succeed in business by doing it honestly. Yes, there are people out there like that. I know quite a few so it can be done.

They were wrong to boo Hillary Clinton, if anything they should boo Obama and support Hillary Clinton.
Check this out folks:

Obama speech sparks anti-US rally
Democratic US presidential hopeful Barack Obama was criticised by Pakistani officials as 'irresponsible' for saying in a policy speech last week that, if elected, he might order unilateral military strikes in the country against al-Qaeda. Following the Pakistani officials' comments, hundreds chanted anti-US slogans and burnt a US flag.
Bush administration officials had already angered Pakistanis last week by saying they would consider such strikes if intelligence warranted them. Full Story:

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2141839,00.html

"Politics as usual" will never change until the people actually know what's going on. Reading this article, or this article and a couple others, does not qualify you as a person who knows what's going on (just look at how many times people are corrected or argue over details of fact). Beyond who ends up in the White House, I wish more than anything that we can have an election based on knowledge and information, instead of (as a tribute to an ex-roommate) "stuff I don't know, I just make up in my head!"

While I agree that candidates often are too heavily influenced by special interests, I think Senator Clinton is right that you cannot simply say "all lobbyists are bad." Edwwards talks about helping "the working people", but unions, which exist solely (in theory) to benefit working people, all have their own lobbyists. Hell, Greenpeace has lobbyists, and they are as anti-establishment as anyone can be. Personally I would prefer to hear these candidates talk about how they can clean up Bush's mess than to have them look for minor differences among themselves.

What are "American jobs"? What happened to compassion for non-Americans? So what if some jobs are exported to India and Indians benefit. Is that such a horrible thing? Gosh, we have no compassion in America; we're a bunch of selfish, self-absorbed consumer pigs.

For those who whine about lobbyists: why not start your own lobby and have your voice heard? It seems rather silly to just begrudge other people with other interests their access to decision makers because you don't exercise it yourself.

I hate Hillary but she's right about special interest groups. Individuals donate money to a political action committee. The PAC then hires a lobbyist to represent the committee. The lobbyist goes to a candidate and says, "Hey, I represent the blah blah PAC and this is our agenda. We'd like to give you gobs of money if you will support our agenda."

So yes, those dollars actually represent the individuals who donate to their PAC. My $20 contribution isn't worth a second glance to a candidate but if I combine my $20 with a group of other like minded people our collective dollars make candidates stop and look. That's the nature of our political system. PAC's give people like myself a voice in government.

I work for a large corporation. I donate money to the corporate PAC. The PAC lobbies for legislation friendly to the company I work for, hopefully ensuring I will have a job in the future. My donation gives me a voice in government.

There are corporate PAC's like the AFL-CIO and there are special interest PAC's like the Christian Coalition. It is unfair and hypocritical to demonize one type of PAC and ignore the others. They all have their own agenda. If one is to be silenced they all have to be silenced.

/***
When she didn’t read all the available intelligence reports prior to voting for the war in Iraq, she basically demonstrated that on extremely crucial decisions, she won’t put in as much thought is as needed.
***/

You're joking, right? EVERYONE read those intelligence reports. Those intelligence report were lies, fomented by DICK Cheney. Everyone was fooled, not knowing that the CIA had gotten into bed with the V.P. and was MAKING UP INTELLIGENCE to push their war in Iraq.

You want to blame someone, blame the war criminals of the Bush administration.

Most of the people commenting here don't have a clue as to what is going on in this country. Get over it. Hillary Clinton will be the next President and will be one of the best we've ever had. Keep screwing around and you're gonna elect another "bush republican" just like you did the last two times.

The democrat party should be investigated for conspiring to interfere with US military operations as they admittedly hope for a defeat in Iraq as that would mean "problems" for the democrats according to a North Carolina representative.

This community spews hate like its alphabet soup… To them, America is the problem. Democrats are undermining their commitment to our security by pandering to this group for votes.

Hillary is a snake - what Democrats don't seem to understand - independents and republicans don't just dislike her…they hate her - they remember her 10,000 stock market investment in the commodity market - that yielded her 100,000 in one day (without insider trading….yeah…right) - anyway - she a socialist - don't believe me - read her college paper…and look at the universal healthcare she is proposing - ya know what - I bet the Canadians would be very interested in her plan - I mean - she is saying she can do this without raising taxes - and they pay a 60% rate…and come down here for treatment when something is serious. Also - another blogger referenced the influence of politicians on oil prices….DEMOCRATS - OIL IS A TRADED COMMODITY!!!!! (as is gas) - your leadership is LYING to you - every single day….playing you for fools…

Simple solution for Hilary et al - Accept money from non-profit lobbies, and don't accept from those representing corporations or foreign governments. The non-profits, generally speaking, work in the interest of the public at large, and the corporate ones, including industry groups, are looking out for the businesses and their profits. While corporations certainly have some rights, they do not necessarily represent the interests of US citizens, and their interests may conflict with the American public at large.

Frankly, I would find it extremely refreshing if our candidates refused special interest money completely. It might make me think they had some backbone.

Nice to see the Democrats pandering to this fine group of American citizens.

I would say they got what they deserved for involving themselves with these type of people. Would imagine this trip will be one of MANY things that come back to haunt them in the upcoming general election.

I am surprised that 1500 bloggers have taken to booing people off the stage during this debate. We are all guilty of some influence if we are in politics. If you invite people to speak then you should be listening and asking the right questions to get answers not for yourself, but for everyone else in public society. No preconceptions allowed. Coming to this event claiming to represent a blogging society and booing someone because you already dislike them is a dishonor to everyone. Keep an open mind and your opinions muted.

I think we ought to be fair to all of these candidates for just appearing and putting themselves on the line. Anyone debasing themselves and using this as an opportunity to show their dislike for a candidate shouldn't be allowed back. Period.

Telling it like I see it,
Wynter
(wynterdragon.blogspot.com)

It's so easy to say "I am against lobbyist funding" until they place a check for half a million in your hand. There needs to be laws passed for lobbying reform for there to be any real change. The candidates are still only human and subject to the same principles of greed and allure of power that all or most of us are. I wonder how long my resolve would last in that arena…

oh please! quit coming on here and talking about "Clinton-Obama" dream tickets. whatever. we do not need any more clinton-Bush rule. it's been 20 years of there neo-con globalist garbage already. enough!

Special interests include organizations like AARP, or even AAA. Given our political system, I am not sure how to separate the "good" lobbiests from the "bad" lobbiests, when ostensibly they all represent some portion of the electorate, or at least the population affected by policy even if they can't vote. Big Oil and Pharma have more money. That gets them a seat at the table, but the time to object is when they get to buy all the chairs and fill them, like with the Chaney Energy Policy. I believe a good politician is able to listen to everyone, even take their money, and make the best decision for the country as a whole. I appreciate Senator Clinton's approach; she has given some answers that were not popular, but practical and principled.

Let's not confuse the good of all and the good of individuals. We, as people, work, eat, sleep, play, love for the good of ourselves (and perhaps our families) but we also, do many things for the good of ALL (i.e. taxes, volunteering, religios affiliations). However, to ALWAYS do good for ALL makes us socialist in a socialist society, and removes the individual's needs entirely. Now I agree that the government should be for ALL b/c after all we voted for them and they're representing our needs, not just SOME needs. But when you start saying individualism is un-American, my hair stands up. That's what entreprenuership is about. In other words, just be careful what you wish for.

If we had a candidate who was "untainted" by lobbyist money, we wouldn't know who they are because it takes money (a lot of money) to run a campaign. If the people of this country don't agree with lobbying, then when you file your income taxes, give a dollar to the presidential campaign fund. I know, any form of sacrifice from the people of this country is frowned upon…

To this crowd, America is the problem in the world, not the terrorists. And watching the Democratic candidates cow to these kind of people makes me sick. This debate was a glaring example of why Democrats are not trusted with our national security.

The last thing we want is for the Democratic Candidate to unilaterally disarm. We need congress to eliminate special interest money for all, but until then we can't be so naive as to think you don't need money to win. No point winning the primary and loosing the election

Amen - Fred, Kissimmee, FL.

Lobbyist buy power with money, regardless of whom they represent. The politician is then the property of that lobby. THAT is undemocratic.

With all the information available, these debates should be only a small part of the voters decisions. We must look at their past voting records, their statements and their lives to varying degrees.

The 2006 election has shown us we cannot believe what they tell us, and there is very little difference between Democrat and Republican. One steals the other lies.

I have read many of Ron Pauls statements, I have reviewed his voting record and I personnally believe he is the best candidate from both parties. I will not allow myself to be limited to just my party.

Lew Rockwell's site has many papers that Dr Paul has written over the years, and his stand against the war from the beginning is proof of his dedication.

I am amazed that we are so completely horrified by the thought that lobbyists try to influence the outcome of legislation in Washington. It is absurd to think that each individual has the good of the whole in mind at all times. In a representative democracy each individual is primarily concerned with their own needs, and the elected officials seek to represent the needs of their constituents.

I think this is essentially what James Madison talks about in The Federalist Papers when he discusses the power of the "competing self-interests." Agrarian industry and mercantile industry compete for primacy in government, and the resultant balance of their interest is what the process is all about. It is entirely appropriate that unions, teachers, stock brokers, concerned parents, environmentalists, and even oil companies, lobby Congress in their own defense, and with their own interests in mind. The special-interest lobbies have brought important issues to the forefront of the national attention — environmental protection, health care, etc. — and they serve an important purpose in our Republic.

Perhaps the real problem is that, given an explosion in government power and an increasing lack of fiscal restraint, this is no longer an either/or decision for the legislature. If the government can deficit spend like a drunken sailor on leave, then they no longer have to balance one interest group's needs with the needs of another.

Another problem is a lack of organization among the voting constituency. Because grass roots voters tend not to be single-issue apologists, it is difficult to create the sort of organized political movement that can effectively counter the impact of more organized political opponents. But it seems disingenuous to claim that the anti-war movement isn't a "special interest" — how many at the YearlyKos convention would like to see them shut out of the electoral process?

Hillary tell's it like it is. John Edwards is just another hate filled hypocritical bible banging bigot that will say or do anything to get elected. Anyone who says that Hillary Clinton has no real experience and tries to compare her to Laura "do nothing" Bush must have been living on another planet during the Presidency of Bill Clinton. Hillary was very involved in policy making during the Clinton Presidency. She is smart, committed, and tough. Lobbyists rebresent many segments of this nation, including women, African Americans, Native Americans,and many other s who's voices must be heard. Just because one takes campaign money from lobbyists does not mean that there will be a quid pro quo. If both Obama and Edwards were being totaly honest, they would admit that thet too are taking donations from lobbyists. My faith goies to the person that is most transparent aboput their fundraising. How about you?

Hillary, I'm sorry to say this, but others are starting to look good. the lobbyist connection stinks. Perhaps my next check will be to John.

Lobbyists are the special demons of the Republicans. Cut them loose. NOW.

This is funny… despite the booing, the founder of Daily Kos still believes Clinton is the strongest candidate…

Was the hissing and the booing a test? A way of veting the Senator?

They all need to be reminded the war they support is a felony war - devoid of moral or legal justification - and that well placed polls are making hundreds of millions from it while soldiers and Iraqis die. Much more needs asked about why they are not calling for impeachments and prosecutions, and how each personally has profited.

Hillary is correct. Lobbyists do represent all aspects of society. And booing at her, very disrespectful, is not going to change that!

There are lobbyists for firefighters, unions, teachers, environomentalist, civil liberties (ACLU), women's rights, for children, nurses, poverty, pets, corporations, individual states, etc.

It would serve you better if you take the emotions out of all the complaining and study the facts and face reality.

I hear lots of hatred, but will you all vote when it is time to do so??
You can be your own lobbyist when you vote and allow your voices to be heard.

The insanity around Hillary is starting to become a piling on type of thing. It feels like you all just want to hate…I am not sure about that emotion being the only one most of the commenters seem to display. What's up with that?

Once again, Hillary is stating the truth and some of you can't take the truth.

Reality Check - Lobbyists are working for the people in the group they represent and being a lobbyist in and of itself is not a bad thing.

Finally! One of Hill's masks has been ripped off. A few hundred more and we will actually get to see the real Hillary Clinton.

Hey Hilary supporters,
if your CORPORATE support one of these Republic candidates and you disagree, do you think your job is secured? Don't forget that your corporate can fired you anytime at Corporate's will. Tell me that Hilary is going to protect you from being fired because you support Hilary?

Remember on an Election day, Corporate's vote is not counted! Ummm…. individual's vote is COUNTED! WHY???

Should you tell Hilary to protect your choice or corporate's choice that you like or not? *whisper* don't be hyprocrite!

universal healthcare system is not the answer…(well..unless you want want Canada has - a 60% tax rate and a waiting list for care) - wheres common sense??

Posted By Chris, Middletown, CT : August 5, 2007 12:03 pm

Wow a comment made by the truly uneducated. I really don't know what Canada you are talking about but the one I live in has a 40% tax rate as its highest so I don't know where you get your numbers from but I would say quite using your magic eightball for stats! Only 14% of America's workers are unionized so I fail to see how they carry that much influence within the Democratic party although the NRA carries a sickening amount of influence in both parties. Oh yeah that's right universal healthcare is not the solution, letting over 50 million working American's have no coverage at all is!!! I have made over $48,000 US already this year minus $14,000 in taxes and I will happily pay another $14,000 if we maintain universal health coverage for all. There is no waiting for vital surgeries unless you consider hips and knees vital!!! but I do know that NOBODY asks for outrageous sums of money for healthcare here and NOBODY declares bankruptcy due to health costs. In the case of healthcare I thank god everyday that I am NOT an American. In the case of organized labour it is not their demands for a higher standard of living that is killing American and Canadian jobs it is the outrageous levels greed that exist within this sickening global economy. Now if a steelworker in Pittsburgh loses their job it's moved to Mexico and if not enough profit is made there then they move on to China, thanks for the "golden era of profitability" which our corporate pigs enjoy while you sit back and tell us unions and universal coverage are not the solution!!!

posted by Jason, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
August 6th, 2007. 2:30am GMT

Public funding as an alternative?
That if anything is a hotbed for corruption far worse than this so called "lobbyism"…

The grass is always greener on the other side.

Someone, years ago, said that America has the best politicans that money can buy. Sad, but true. Do you really think that H.C. will do something about health care? Don't you think that if that was so, her spouse could and should have done something in the eight long years they were in the White House? One of the reasons that the great United States of America finds herself in this tragic condition is that the lobbyists and the politians are in control, and in the business for themselves. It doesn't help that the media are bedfellows either! Those elected officials who should care about us and our country could care less about what they are doing to an entire country. And, sad to say, we are so passive that we let them do it! Please, NOT H.C. in the White House. The Clinton's have disgraced the place and the office already! At least give someone else a chance!

If you don't plan to listen to them, then don't give them a voice.

Obama is not taking any money from lobbyists, PACs, and other special interests.

To the responder above who posted "Dream ticket: Clinton-Obama." Keep in mind that it is highly unlikely that the Democratic party will all them to team up on a single ticket. Too risky. Either of them will have a white male as a partner.

This group of people were the same ones that compared then-President Bill Clinton to Hitler for the bombing of Yugoslavia to end genocide in Kosovo.

The Democratic alliance with these "Leftist" bloggers will only last until a Democrat is elected into office.

They aren't anti-Republican. They are anti-authority.

-Kevin
http://www.ktracy.com

Ther is a huge difference between Laura Bush and Hillary Clinton.

Laura was a school teacher and her husband still can't speak Gramatically correct english. I won't even mention logic sentence structure.

Hillary is an experienced Lawyer and one who received great esteem and accolades from many Senior Legal Colleagues and firms.

Laura has spent six years in the White House doing what she is told and is rarely seen in public unless George and his Administration see fit.

Hillary spent 8 years in the White House as a prominent public figure, working for the American people, developing social programs, advocating women's rights, spear heading programs promoting Children's Health Care, Veterans' Health Care, Senior's Needs, and travelled Internationally as a respected Foreign Diplomat for America.

Laura is the wife of the Worst Amerian President in History who has single handedly brought devastation upon the whole world and turned the majority of world leaders against him.

Hillary is the wife of a President who was admired around the world, proved himself as a great leader and turned American economic devastation into an American economic paradise.

Laura has been dictated to by Momma, Papa and Georgie Bush.

Hillary was dictated to by no one and still stands on her own merits and strengths.

Laura has no political experience.

Hillary was elected as a Senator twice.

Why in the world do people keep insisting that Hillary is more electable? Nothing could be farther from the truth. Wake up! She may be the darling of the media and the Democratic party but Republicans and Independents hate her. Her unfavorable ratings are over 50%! Barack and Edwards are down nearer 20-30%. There is no one on the democratic ticket less likely to win the general election than Hillary Clinton.

As far as special interest groups go, Hillary's spin on the subject was creative but dishonest. I am elated that Edwards and Obama have elected to not accept money from federal lobbyists. That gives me great hope for the future of our government.

Once again, only three candidates are getting any coverage. Why does CNN persist in pretending that Clinton, Obama and Edwards are the only candidates in the running? Dennis Kucinich has the best clean money record of any candidate in the pack. Why isn't that being mentioned here?

Senator Barack Obama is the only person that has a PLAN period.
We're damn sick and tired of the Bush and Company which LIED to get all of us into "IRAQNAM"…
Senator Obama the "MAN WITH THE PLAN"

If politicians thought that voting would actually change things, they would make it illegal. The only hope we've got, Republican or Democrat is Ron Paul. Anybody else is just 'business as usual'. Not even close for second place.

Just a bunch of pandering liberals.

Not one of them that will be a better president than George W. Bush. However flawed his methods, President Bush is improving the world. He has done the hard things that President Clinton didn't have the stones to do. This crop of liberals will redefine inaction to be a virtue. They will plunder working people through taxes and redefine the word fairness.

And The Daily KOS kool-aid drinkers are loonies.

Lobbyists are bunch of crooks and unfortunately Hilary Clinton is part of that bunch. She talks about experience, what experience ?. Married to a President who occupied the white house for 8 years qualifies you to be President ?. Then close the books and elect Laura Bush. This stupid.

Perhaps my wording on my previous post was outside the realm of the acceptable for CNN. I continue in my belief that lobbying is an affront to the honest man. When many politicians retire from public life, they have six figure jobs awaiting them, very often as lobbyists. Has anyone out there ever heard of deferred payment?

I am a Democrat and I believe ALL lobbyists should be banned. They are nothing but legalized crooks buying votes. They do NOT represent the average American.

What ISN'T being reported ans what drew the largest boos was Ms. Clinton's stance on outsourcing and uest workers, especially H1-B workers. Why isn't the Post reporting this???? Even before the convention, most people were aware tat Hillary and Bill own stock in companies that assist U.S. companies with outsourcing. They are also aware o Ms. Clinton's despicable calls for even more H1-B visas. Now, tech workers know that between 20 and 30 percent of us are unemployed right nw, due to guest workers and outsourcing and were rather angry about this and want answers. Instead we got her dncing around the queston and a flat out ban on he subject by the media. But, what really p*ssed us off, was the tape where an Indian government offical introduces Hillary at a recent fund raiser as "The Senator From India". Why the Post ignores this story i beyond me, but a lot of people know about it, and bloggers that they are, you will find it hard to continue to cover up for your corporate bosses. Hillary is toast after this. If you want to join her, just keep it up!

I see some really odd things beings espoused here. So Ronald Reagan sent us on the right path? Do you mean the one where we were no longer manufacturing anything, but importing everything we used to make here? Do you mean by giving the wealthy HUGE tax cuts so that they could amass even more wealth and power to use against US? Do you mean when he went Union bustting as his first presidnetial act? Do you mean in how wages went down by about a decade's value? Do you mean how we got the reputation of being a cowboy nation that rode roughshod over everyone else? Do you mean in building up a 5 trillion dollar deficit, which we STILL haven't dealt with? Do you mean by increasing the size of government and it's ability to spy on the average citizen? Or could it be in turning all the mentally ill out on the street? Or maybe even his turning American against American by telling everyone that it's alright to hate whoever you want? Really, I'm struggling to see just HOW reagan is anything other than responsible for exactly where we are now. Please explain just HOW the "great communicator" did anything other than begin the destruction of this country that W is so admirably finishing. Now, as to MS Clinton, she admirably showed just WHY I won't vote for her, regardless of the situation. She is beholding to big money, and that is the root of EVERY problem we have in this country today. We don't need MORE big money influence, and we DON'T need another Bush/Clinton administration. We can't afford to allow these two families to do more damage to us as a country. This is EXACTLY what the founding fathers were so vehemently against. It's also WHY we had a top tax rate of 91% for so long. It was specifically to keep people like them from getting too much money, and therefore, power. Time to put an end to the dynasties that are screwing everything up for the other 98.5% of us.

As time goes on, Mrs. Bill continues to show us why she is not right for the job of President of the United States. She is more interested in catering to special interest groups and feeding her own ego, than representing us, the people. On the question of taking money form lobbyist, she showed us her cold and angry “don’t question me” side. She has never taken full responsibility for he lack of reading the intelligence data before voting to authorize war in Iraq. Instead she has stated that it is “Bushes war.” We need a president that will listen, is compassionate and will take responsibility for their actions whether the results are positive or negative. Mrs. Bill just cannot do/be that. Obama-Edwards (Edwards-Obama) 2008.

The Clintons should take the next bus to Arkansas

To Larry in West Covina: The "Republican Machine" will chew up Hillary Clinton and spit her out. She can't and won't get elected…too many people dislike her. All polls so far show, that the only Democratic nominee able to beat ANY and ALL Republicans running is Barack Obama. We've had the Clintons in the White House….Hillary Clinton does NOT represent change…and we desperately need it.

I am so disappointed and angry at Hillary Clinton. Everything that comes out of her mouth seems business as usual. She takes money from lobbies because that's what she thinks is the status quo. Both Obama and Edwards are absolutely right. It's not a time for compromise and small incremental changes. It's a time for a MAJOR CHANGE. The system is seriously, almost irrevocably broken. It's time to do something with that. I don't want a Clinton/Bush dynasty, I want leaders that talk sense and have the stones to make real changes that will keep the middle class I belong to from falling off the continent into the abyss.

To me, the greatest ticket in history is an Obama/Edwards ticket. They are both smart, speak simple and eternal truths about poverty, defense and world affairs and they both recognize a need for a dramatic overhaul of healthcare and the lobbying system that keeps corporations in power while keeping America way below the standard of living that it should have as the richest country in the world.

Frankly, politics as usual is ridiculous when we're dealing with global warming, Iraq and an America that is going the way of the do do as long as we get the same ol same ol.

Lance

The question is not who has more experience, but who will do something to reverse the disastruous policies of the Bush years. Obama stiked the nail exactly on the head when he called a future Clinton administration "Bush lite" . She seems to say what is needed to get elected, and then, business as usual! It seems inevitable, I guees.

She is smart just like he is. They eye the White House and the mighty power so that they can see their egos rise above America and ply their games. Do not be fooled my friend by here sweet talk, she does not mean it. Not another Clinton, oh God no!!

All elected officials take special interest money (including the rookie Barack Hussein Obama). Hillary Clinton is the only candidate that can take down the Republican machine. Don't waste your vote on someone who will hand over the White House to another ring-wing war-loving Repulican! can you say President Hillary Clinton???

Those “experienced” politicians love to call Obama naïve. If wanting to try something new is naïve then maybe naïve is a good thing. The US approach to foreign policy hasn’t worked in over a decade.

It’s time for fresh ideas from a candidate I am finding more trustworthy after every attack from the supporters of the status quo.

I found it hard to believe Hillary objected to Obama’s comment he would talk to governments we don’t agree with. If you don’t have dialog you’ll never make progress. Maybe Hillary should ride her broom back to Arkansas.

What would truly be refreshing would be truth. Don’t tell us what you think we want to hear, speak only truth. I’m not certain Hillary knows what the truth is. Look at how she has used the people of New York to further her political goals.

Obama has the appearance of being honest. I just wish he would stand his ground better when questioned by his opponents on his view points. The American public doesn’t expect perfection. We would like to hear truth for a change.

I disagree with Hilary Clinton about the who the lobbyists represent. They generally represent a very few Americans, the wealthiest & most powerful, who want to keep their wealth & power. Oil industry lobbyists aren't lobbying her for cheaper oil prices for "real Americans."

Take a look at the job the government has done running healthcare for our service men and women. Does anyone really want them running it for all of us? I sure don't. More oversite of the insurance companies is absolutely needed. But if they completely took over it'd be a tagedy.

Health Care Reform = Income Redistribution

John Edwards is the only candidate in the race who has never taken money from lobbyists or PACs. He also is the only candidate who truly "walks the talk" and is the most morally consistent candidate I know–he doesn't just talk about helping working class and poor families, but he was the first with a truly universal health care plan; he has a "College for Everyone" program he piloted in North Carolina; he has walked picket lines and helped get minimum wage increases passed in six states; he has a plan for creating jobs and eliminating outsourcing. He doesn't just talk about fighting global warming, he was the first to have an aggressive and comprehensive plan to do so, and his campaign is the only one that's carbon-neutral (his home uses solar power and is also carbon neutral); he also has a public education program on global warming. His plans for ending the war in Iraq and fighting terrorism by working on the causes of terrorism are the smartest I've ever seen.

We recently saw him at a fundraiser in San Francisco. He was warm, intelligent, and compassionate. It was evident that he truly cares about each and every one of us and wants to take the power away from the big corporations and put it back where it belongs–in the hands of the people. Put that together with recent polls that show he is the most electable Democrat in a general election, and you have our next president!

Everything in life is cyclical, history, fashion, the economy etc. But two things are always the same. Religion (interpretation) and the concept of survival of the fittest. In our society, fittest means richest, and religion means status. I mean depending on where you live in the U.S. your beliefs absolutely dictate who you are with or how you are viewed by others.
In other societies you can flip that theory. My point is that until those two concepts become a target for real "adult" conversation and make actual progress (past technological advances)we, as a world, will never grow or actually survive. I wish just once, the words, "how can we become better people" came from a candidate.

Amazing booing Senator Clinton. The Daily KOS is as intolerant of dissenting opinion as the Brown Shirts were, but they understand the power of a willing media. The real shame is every major Democratic Candidate speaking with them.

All politicians are crooks. They take money from special interest groups to screw us and they appropriate money for their friends to screw us (like for a highway to nowhere in Alaska while a bridge in Minnesota gets old and collapses). They have no interest in doing the right thing. We need real change and laws prohibiting pork, lobbying, lobbying by former elected officials for foreign governments and corporations and VERY harsh penalties for the breach of any of the above or violation of the people's trust by public officials without the possibility of pardon.

When will the people say "it's enough already?"

There you go again CNN (now known as the "Clinton News Network"). You can't even totally admit that your candidate is WRONG. You say in the article that Obama has taken money from "lobbying operations" and the "networks of lobbyists' friends and co-workers". (Whatever that means.) Prove it. Don't just toss out innuendos without anything to back it up. Write an article with names and dates. Prove it. I don't think you can.

Lobbying is nothing more than a means by which bribery can be conducted with expediency. Clinton is right when she says lobbyists represent real Americans. The most wealthy and powerful Americans! What is missing from any conversation is the number of foreign interests utilizing lobbying firms on K street. If Government wishes to be perceived as honest, they need to outlaw lobbying, among other things! One voice, one vote.

Response to Bob of del rio, texas:

This nation was never founded on the concept of equality. It was founded to protect the property of the elite and the fruit of those who work hard. Democracy, like capitalism, can only work if it is rooted in the concepts of self-fulfillment and individualism. We all have an obligation to self-preservation and self-advancement.

The argument against funding from the lobbyists is not that such funding makes the other americans less represented but that the actual measure of work (economic gains) of an individual person is not reflected in our political system.

we still have alot of people that are very naive. even the department of education has lobbyists. if they did not , where would our children be. without education. i believe people need to investigate before they pass judgement on hillary. do not take the word of anyone when you get ready to vote. get informed. how many times have lobbyists had to go in so that we can get the proper monies for education. this is just one subject. the people that are out there that think that you can simply call up and say you run the country need to travel into never never land. who are obama and edwards to criticize hillary. remember, everyone has a tail that can be stepped on. be informed, don't take anyone's words for anything and vote for the right person you feel will do the right thing. who are the bloggers anyway? I leave you with that question.

Hello, Excuse Me but The Political Fact is that Lobbyists and Special Interests give money to people that agree with their agenda and to people that disagree with their agenda. Merely because Lobbyists and Special Interests give money to just about everyone with input into the issues doesn’t mean that everyone will agree or support their agenda.

It wasn’t Special Interests that opposed Insurance Reform it was the Insurance Industry; other Special Interests supported Insurance Reform!

Power seeking spinstress, just like hubby always trys to bend the perceptions to suit her best interests.
Review of her history as 1st lady and as a senator support the notion she is only in this for herself.
I am not opposed to the idea of a woman president for this country, I am opposed to the idea of her being that president.

Fred's posting above reflects the way many of us feel. The things that once made this country great have been legislated out of society with no end in sight. We live in a hedonistic society that has no respect for the principles and traditions that once made us great.

There is no one running that has the guts to take us where we need to be. Reagan was the closest we have come in the last 40-50 years.

Hmmm, Hillary is an honest politician and she in trouble for it? Go figure….

This article makes it seem like there are only three candidates running for the nomination. What did Kucinich, Gravel, Dodd, et al have to say?

In response to Tom from Boston, John Edwards has not taken any political contributions from Rupert Murdoch, unlike Hillary. Edwards had a book deal with a subsidiary of News Corp., Harper Collins, and all of the proceeds went to charity.

I'm so sick of people yammering on about Hillary's so-called "experience." What experience does she have that is so compelling?

Bill Clinton had no experience in national office. That didn't stop him from being an effective president.

I have always voted for a Democrat for Pres. with the exception of John Anderson. I will NOT vote for Hillary Clinton under any possible scenario. It is for NO OTHER REASON than her support for the Iraq War. I mis-trust her motives, and want nothing more to do with her husband anywhere near the WH. I voted for him twice, sorry to say. I do tend to vote people, not party, and am a registered independent. I think the polls showing her with such a huge lead are very mis-leading. I'm leaning to Sen. Obama, and even Mr. Giuliani would be a more suitable alternative.

Yes, yes, Clinton will not "need to be trained." But that's just because she represents a continuation of current political leaders and their habits. Republican candidates are already distancing themselves from Bush/Cheney and will have the outsider angle down long before election time. Does anyone here think that the outsider label (among other things) did not help Bush in 2000? If Clinton gets the democratic nod, she will be depicted as what is wrong with DC from the get-go by her republican opponents. This will be as devestating to her as it was to Kerry in '04. We independants are keeping track. Hillary in not electable in any circle outside of a democratic caucus. Obama/Edwards should be the democratic "dream ticket." Would someone please tell the democrats this?

even breast cancer and leukemia "find the cure" have lobbyist. so yes, some lobbyist are OK.

As a teacher of mine said years ago–"not so many people that want to change the Government, as they want to BE the Government." Lots of rhetoric, not so much substance. What is the PLAN?? There are things we should all be able to get on board with. Let's start there. There is much that needs to get done. The Country is not in great shape.

Why would Hillary be any more ready on day one than Chris Dodd or Joe Biden? People see her as the most experienced candidate for the job because of her eight years as first lady and her time as Senator of New York, but 20+ years of Senate experience prepares Dodd and Biden much more.

Perhaps I'm too cynical or skeptical, but when I read stories like this, the only thing I see are Obama and Edwards presenting naive slices of demagoguery to appeal to the more idealistic portions of the Democratic base.

I'd love it if our next president did overhaul some of the more unseemly aspects of our government, but I find the chance of that happening extremely unlikely. John Edwards and Barack Obama are smart enough to know that, and so I find their comments disingenuous at best. Clinton takes a more nuanced approach to her platform and is willing to admit that the world is not entirely black and white.

I don't agree with all of her policy proposals or her past record, but I think there's no doubt that she's a class above her rivals for the Democratic nomination. She has a breadth of experience and a governing sophistication that they all seem to lack.

When will Hillary and Edwards release their earmarks (pork spending)? (Edwards can't talk about lobbyist money until we see his earmarks!)

This is when you see the payback that the special-interest lobbyists get for their money donated

Barack Obama is the only presidential candidate to publicly release his earmarks.

Why are the Democrats so hell bent on giving the illegals free stuff could it be about votes? Will someone please tell me. I am a Democrat but if things don't change I will no longer be a Democrat.

As much as they talk anti-lobbyist - the democrats are completely controlled by the unions (who are crippling this country) - and the republicans are towed by the religious right. We truly need someone who is not a democrat nor a republican - we need a socially liberal - fiscally conservative. I believe this person would get 80% of the vote - because Democrats/Independents/Republicans are 80% moderate and believe EXACTLY the same thing!! Where are you?? man or woman…you are out there somewhere - help! a universal healthcare system is not the answer…(well..unless you want want Canada has - a 60% tax rate and a waiting list for care) - wheres common sense??

Boo Hillary!

The U.S. will collapse in the same way the Roman Empire did, and for the same reasons. It is unfortunate that the lessons of History are neither being taught honestly in the government school curriculum, or acknowledged by the power greedy elite cowards that are leading us into that abyss. WE Americans are now experiencing all of the conditions precedent to the demise of the great roman empire and refuse to accept that our fall will indeed be the result. Wake up fools; we cannot cure the world of Greed, hunger and corruption. Anyone that promises he or she can, is a liar only looking to have his/her name ethced in the chronicles of History.

Lobbyist money is usually tainted money but special interest groups are not necessarily undemocratic. Sop long as they are only trying to persuade people to support their case, and not subverting democracy by buying votes, they can be useful.
The nature of cetain candidates relationships with various groups if for you guys to decide on, but here in Britain Rupert Murdoch is known for his manipulation of the political process.

this is the most newsworthy part of the story……..the hisses and boos are just temporary. This, however is the tidal wave that history will long say it first learned here, at the Yearly Kos convention.

"The Kos convention is a sign of the times.

Gone are the days when candidates and political parties could talk to passive voters through mass media, largely controlling what messages were distributed, how the messages went out and who heard them. The Internet has helped create millions of media outlets and
given anyone the power to express an opinion or disseminate information in a global forum, and connect with others who have similar interests."

In terms of this country's biggest problem, our monstrous failure of a foreign policy, I don't see how Clinton differs all that much from George Bush.

SOS, DD

Hillary's ability to make decisions is a little concerning to me. When she didn't read all the available intelligence reports prior to voting for the war in Iraq, she basically demonstrated that on extremely crucial decisions, she won't put in as much thought is as needed.

She might have an aura of inevitability but she doesn't have a glow of electability. Moderates and independents aren't going to vote for her. We (Democrats) need to nominate someone for whom moderates will vote.

unlike the other candidate Senator Clinton will be ready from day one . She will not need training unlike the other ones will ..

This is news? From whichever candidate? You people are naive. That said, I would take my chances on any one of the Democratic contenders over any one of the Republicans. Dream ticket: Clinton-Obama.

Hillary Clinton is Bush-Cheney Lite on every issue. She votes for the Bush administration's wars, takes money from both Big Insurance and Big Pharma, and supports the companies who outsource American jobs to India.

Why vote for her, Democrats? If she is your nominee, you will lose. People want change, not another Bush or Clinton in the White House.

Bush, Clinton business as usual!

Lobbyist money is an important factor to decide which candidate will lobby for the people. It seems like every other group has their mouthpieces _except_ the people.

Headline should have read" Clinton no friend to whacko fringe- go Kucinich!"

John Edwards took significantly more money from some of the same special-interest's, for which Hillary is being criticized. Particularly, Rupert Murdoch.

As for Ms. Clinton, am I seeing a wolf beneath a sheep's coat? I believe so. Look closer at her and what she truly is saying and you'll indeed smell a stinking fish in Denmark. I hope everyone has their senses on full alert everytime she opens her mouth.

Politicians are just salesman anyway. I can't trust anyone on either side. Voting is just choosing the lesser evil.

It is unfortunate that Senator Clinton supports lobbist. In a country founded on the concept of equality, ( real or imagined ), ANY "Special Interest Group" is out of step with American values, and is working ONLY for it's own gains, not for the good of all. If I recall correctly, Jack Abramoff was a lobbist, and his activities have undermined the very seat of government, the legislature, by corrupting the people elected to run this country.

I think Senator Clinton would be well advised to reconsider her position on lobbist. I think this is much like drugs. If you eleminate the demand, the supplier no longer has a market, and will disappear. So it may well be with lobbist, and the government will once again be OF the people, BY the people, FOR the people; NOT FOR the Special Interest Groups!

Hillary is finally being called to task. We want a politician who will actually represent the American people and not those with the deepest pockets. She is no different than the other Republican puppets running. Thank God there is a genuine candidate running and Obama will have my vote.