What's in a word?
A lot…if you’re LOBBYIST Jim Slattery. While he tries desperately to reconnect with Kansas after 14 years in Washington at top lobbying firm, Wiley Rein, the “L” word continues to dog him at home and nationally.
Yesterday, the Washington Post’s front page story on the presidential contest between Obama and McCain declares, “Candidates Vie to Be The Anti-Lobbyist.”
Jim’s own presidential pick, Senator Obama, said in a speech in Montana yesterday that “lobbyist aren’t just part of the system in Washington, they’re part of the problem.”
The Kansas Republican Party issued the following release regarding Slattery’s uphill battle with the “L” word.
Obama to
Slattery:
Keep Your Dirty Lobbyist
Money!
It must be
tough to be a lobbyist these days, especially one running for the Senate in the
Democrat Party with Barack Obama as the potential nominee.
With Obama
having all but clinched the Democratic nomination last night, it’s worth asking
what effect his campaign will have on Kansas.
Speculation
varies, but one thing is clear—it can’t be good for lobbyist Jim Slattery.
As Kansans
know, Slattery stopped working for Kansas fourteen years ago to cash in with
special interests. The Associated Press reported last week that he made
more than $4 million in 2006 alone.
But it sounds
like those millions came at a real price. Consider what Obama had to say
about the Kansas Democrat’s choice of profession just yesterday:
“Lobbyists aren’t
just part of the system in Washington, they’re part of the problem.”
-Sen. Barack Obama, Washington Post, 5/20/08
Given this
dim view, it’s understandable why Obama was Slattery’s third choice for
President. According to publicly available disclosure reports, in March
of 2007 Slattery gave $1,000 each to the Presidential campaigns of Hillary
Clinton and Bill Richardson—no doubt hedging his bets like any good Washington
lobbyist does.
In May 2007
Slattery gave another $250 to Richardson; and in September 2007 another $1,000
to Clinton.
But he hadn’t
hedged enough.
After Obama
began his winning streak that propelled him to his status today, Jim Slattery—ever
the opportunist—attempted to hop on the Obama bandwagon.
Perhaps
hoping no one would notice, Slattery sent Obama’s campaign $50 in February of
2008.
The problem
is Obama doesn’t like what Jim Slattery has been up to in Washington the last
14 years. So…
Obama sent it back!
It must be
tough to be a lobbyist these days. Especially one running for Senate in a
party where the Presidential nominee thinks you’re too tainted to give him
fifty bucks.
If it wasn’t
going to be hard enough to beat popular Senator Pat Roberts in November, an
outright rejection by your party’s nominee for President is just another black
eye on a campaign that is already treading water. Here’s to another
28-point loss in November for Democrat lobbyist Jim Slattery.
oh, you simple fools.
Reply to this
Hysterical. I love that he changed from a Clinton supporter to an Obama supporter since KS Ds caucused in favor of him.
Reply to this
Following is AN OPEN LETTER TO SENATOR OBAMA. You may distribute it for the good it may bring. This is an issue that is moving forward in a stealth mode and unless the American public becomes aware of the seriousness accompanying it, they will be blind sided in the years following the 2010 "lock in" target date.
= = = =
Senator Barack Obama
John C. Kluczynski Federal Office Building
230 South Dearborn St., Suite 3900 (39th floor)
Chicago, Illinois 60604
RE: A campaign issue that could win the presidency
Dear Senator Obama,
In your bid to be President, YOU HAVE SAID NOTHING about the North American Union (SPP.GOV) . Perhaps you are aware that this is a “deal” put into place by President Bush in concert with his close friend and confidant, former president of Mexico , Vicente Fox. It was agreed to with much less enthusiasm by former Canadian prime minister Paul Martin, Jr.
Finalization of this clandestinely undertaken business deal was orally solidified at the Bush ranch in 2005. It was never debated before the legislature or made known to the American citizens. Subsequently, we learned of plans to construct a Super Highway project, in which thousands of privately owned acres of tax payer property will be confiscated (under the cleverly initiated Kelo vs New London Supreme Court ruling - also in 2005) through eminent domain proceedings. Private property is central to the freedom we enjoy as Americans and the North American Union - Trans Texas Corridor “NAFTA Super Highway” deal negates this fundamental and traditional American right to own, retain, safeguard and preserve property that has been in families for, in many cases, generations.
The NAU springs from a process, (quietly - indeed surreptitiously) set in motion by President Bush in 2005, with NO debate or vetting considerations by the legislature thereby completely disenfranchising the American citizens from having any knowledge of or say in the matter. It is tantamount to a virtual coup in surrendering of U.S. sovereignty to a trilateral entity that, in the form of a North American Union, could emulate the European Union that now dictates to the citizens of 27 European states.
Senator Obama, you need to bring a bright light on this matter and alert the American people of your position on preserving U.S. Sovereignty. The N.A.U. is an issue that, if actively denounced in forthcoming campaign messages, could win you the presidency. Your opponents have never brought up this vital issue - - meanwhile the Bush administration is proceeding as thought this privately crafted scheme is a “done deal”.
The American people and I will be watching, listening and waiting to see how you stand on this critical matter.
Sincerely, C.E. Chester
P.S. Congressman Ron Paul is a co-sponsor of House Concurrent Resolution 40 expressing Congressional disapproval of the NAFTA Superhighway and any moves toward a North American Union. So far, Senator, you are NOT. Why?
Reply to this