var json_comments = new Array("
\"user-pic\"
subtlefrog
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate | Flag for review

Good god. I knew congress critters couldn't think for themselves, but must they make it so glaringly obvious that they take their talking points from everyone but the people who vote for them?

(Yes corporations are made up of people, many of whom vote, but many of whom are also likely to not be their constituents.)

Reply
13 replies
\"user-pic\"
YouDidWhatNow?
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@subtlefrog:


One more example of why lobbying should be illegal, period.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@YouDidWhatNow?: You want to see every lobbyist freak out all at once? Suggest public funding of elections.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
JennQPublic
November 18, 2009 4:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Trai_Dep: I can never figure out why average citizens can't grasp that public funding would be better for them.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dragonfire81
November 18, 2009 4:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Eyebrows Mcgee (now with more baby!): \"But it should never be businesses at the expense of the citizenry or the Republic. Their highest duty is to the nation and its citizens, not its corporations.\"

This is true no longer. The new version is: \"Their highest duty is to the people who will fund their re-election campaign\"

Reply
\"user-pic\"
subtlefrog
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@subtlefrog: D'oh preview is good. Swore I closed that italic. Swore I did. stupid early morning.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
pecan 3.14159265
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@subtlefrog: I think the issue is that most constituants (regardless of political party or where they're from) don't even have a working knowledge of the biotech industry. I certainly don't, and it would be ludicrous for my congressperson to take a cue from my opinion if it were not carefully researched. Most people wouldn't even try.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
subtlefrog
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@pecan 3.14159265: Does that mean they should be informed by the exact people who will benefit though? It seems fairly self-serving.

The part about job creation, the average person could comprehend. The part about lowering prices, you don't need someone in pharma to understand. So really, there's no reason for the pharmaceutical companies to be that involved.

Don't get me wrong - many of you here can guess that I'm going to be all for creating science jobs, even if it isn't one I'm going for. But why the congress people can't get their talking points from their advisors, I'm not sure. If the pharmaceutical concessions are that great, it shouldn't be that hard for someone on their staff to come up with something that isn't verbatim what the guy from another state is saying.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!)
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@pecan 3.14159265: Then the congressperson should have a staff member who researches these issues and finds out what's best for the congresscritter's constituents and for the nation as a whole -- not what's best for a single company or for an industry AT THE EXPENSE OF the American people.

I've got nothing against Congressmen supporting constituent businesses; that's part of supporting that constituency. But it should never be businesses at the expense of the citizenry or the Republic. Their highest duty is to the nation and its citizens, not its corporations.

Maybe the next time they hire interns to sleep with, they could find some hottie who studies biotech issues. :P

Reply
\"user-pic\"
TouchMyMonkey
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@subtlefrog: Most people don't watch C-Span. If they did, they'd be put to sleep most of the time. This so-called \"debate\" on the House floor was a charade, as it usually is. No one's mind was changed by anything anyone said, and the whole exercise was just a big waste of time. If I ran the Rules Committee, I'd dispense with the whole dog-and-pony show altogether, instruct members to submit their remarks in writing for inclusion into the Congressional Record, and go straight to the vote.

There is no need for wasting hours and hours on this silly nonsense. It's just grandstanding, and I suspect the goings-on in Congress had a whole different character before they turned on the television cameras. You certainly wouldn't have family members turning on the water works at Senate confirmation hearings, or congressmen bringing babies in to use as props, or any of the other circus acts that have us wondering whether we've just elected a bunch of retards to run our government.

If you want to know what any given congressman thinks about HCR or anything else, all you have to do is visit that congressman's website, or read his or her correspondence (you do get mailings from time to time, right?), or pick up a newspaper, or turn on the local TV news (not the \"news\" channel on cable, but the real local news broadcast). It is unfortunate, and certainly unintended, but one learns nothing at all from watching C-Span other than that members of Congress like to be on TV, and many of them are pretty horrible stand-up comedians.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
JennQPublic
November 18, 2009 4:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@HurtsSoGood: \"...or any of the other circus acts that have us wondering whether we've just elected a bunch of retards to run our government.\"

Umm... You're still wondering?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ExtraCelestial
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@HurtsSoGood: I say keep the charade if only for the Daily Show material it provides.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
TouchMyMonkey
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@HurtsSoGood: In fact, the only reason the President delivers the State of the Union address in person is because it is being televised. Before television, the SOTU was a written report that was delivered to the Congress on an annual basis. Google Herbert Hoover's SOTU reports; the man was seriously misguided about how to run the country, but his annual SOTU reports were laid out in great detail with a high level of organization. None of this soaring rhetoric, highly-styled PR bullcrap, special guests in the gallery, commentary about Hillary Clinton's latest fashion felony, or other silliness that goes on today. Just the state of the union as the President sees it, as prescribed in the Constitution.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
MostlyHarmless
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@HurtsSoGood: Rubbish. Watching C-Span is like THE.BEST.DRINKING.GAME.EVER. (Second only to concession speeches, and - if your only interest is in getting hammered - or to NOT drink at all - Sarah Palin ramblings.)

I can give you the rules if you are interested.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
pecan 3.14159265
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@MostlyHarmless: Three shots if someone behind the podium yawns!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
gStein_*|bringing starpipe back|*
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@subtlefrog: Roche might be Swedish, but they have US manufacturing plants (Go look up Roche Diagnostics - i think their plant is in indiana)

Reply
\"user-pic\"
frodoUnderhill
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@gStein_has joined the star bandwagon: Actually the plant in Indiana is closing. They still have plants in the US, but biotech seems to be fleeing the midwest.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
zigziggityzoo
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I don't think this is new here - and if anything, the Congressmen are to blame for being puppets of the industry.

We pay them to think like their constituents. The only reason I'm incensed is that they're not earning their keep.

Reply
6 replies
\"user-pic\"
H3ion
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@zigziggityzoo: You'll find that large portions of legislation, not just Congressional Record pap, are also drafted by lobbyists. Whole section of the Tax Code are drafted by lobbyists on behalf of one industry or another. Nothing to see here. Move along now.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ktetch
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@zigziggityzoo: Earning their keep? of course not!
Thats why the salary of a member of Congress has gone from $75,100 in 1985, to $174,000

I want a raise like that!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
sleze69
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@zigziggityzoo: That's not entirely true. We pay them because we believe they think like us and are putting our best interests first. We could easily change to a pure democracy system without representatives but then, pure democracy is only one step away from anarchy.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
P=mv
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@zigziggityzoo: They have not been earning their keep for decades. Most are simply the puppet of whatever corporation or lobbyist is currently paying them the most. We elect them based on a certain set of principles, but those principles are only created in order to get elected. These politicians don't actually intend to keep their word.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
amberlink
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@zigziggityzoo:

They're earning their keep fine, just it's Pharma whom they're earning it from.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
YardanCabaret
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@amberlink: Exactly, we give them $200,000(about) a year to work for us. Lobbyists give them untold millions a year to work for them. They are earning their keep just fine.

We should just stop paying them since they've obviously stopped working for us.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
QuantumRiff
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Wow.. the first two are especially funny when you consider Genetech is no longer a US company, they got bought out by a foreign firm....

Reply
5 replies
\"user-pic\"
QuantumRiff
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@QuantumRiff: Err. to reply to myself, They are owned by Roche, a large German Pharmaceutical company..

Reply
\"user-pic\"
pecan 3.14159265
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@QuantumRiff: @Ben Popken: While we're making clarifications...the company is Genentech, not Genetech.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
QuantumRiff
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@QuantumRiff: Sorry, No coffee yet this morning when I posted.. Obviously, I am a donut.. Ich bin ein Berliner.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
drkkgt
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@QuantumRiff: Nice, Izzard in the morning, what an eye opener

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Hobz
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

\"Is the health care debate really a fight between Democrats and Republicans, or a battle between lobbyists and the rest of us?\"

BINGO

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
hotdogsunrise
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Hobz: Every debate is controlled by lobbyists. PACs know how to run things and we pay them to do it. AAA. AARP. It's how government goes round.


If you want to make a pseudo-difference, I highly recommend writing letters or calling the DC office or the main office in your state for your representatives. The senator I worked for definitely paid attention to that stuff. Not all of them do, I'd imagine. But he did.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
parkj238
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Business people call the shots in the U.S., no politician wants to say no to money they need to keep their jobs. We have indirect bribery here in America because of the needs of campaign financing.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!)
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

It's always lobbyists and the rest of us. Dems/GOP is just a smokescreen to keep us distracted.

Man I'm cynical this morning.

Reply
5 replies
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!): That's why I always focus on ideologies, not parties. Any system that forces pols to beg, hat in hand, to megacorps, will inevitably disappoint.

PS: Joe Wilson? You LIED!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
pecan 3.14159265
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!): It may be cynical, but it's true. This is why corporate astroturfing is so astounding. While I do genuinely believe that a great deal of politicians do want the best for their constituents, I would never go as far as to say that it is because they believe only in the welfare of their constituents. Obviously, the overall happiness of their constituents ensures that there is a better chance of that politician staying in office. Understanding the side benefit is simply realistic.

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
PsiCop
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Of course it's the lobbyists vs the people! It's been that way through most of the post-war era and probably was, to an extent, even before that.

It's not news, to me at least, that so many Congresspersons would essentially prostitute themselves for businesses and lobbyists. They all do it, too, Left and Right, Dem. and Rep., they just do it for different cadres of lobbyists and outfits. Otherwise they're all playing the same game ... and we're the pawns.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
hi
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@PsiCop: when you say 'they all do it' you're referring to dems and reps (left/right). But not all congressman & woman sell-out. There are a few good men and woman in there. But the majority needs a good hanging for treason.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
PsiCop
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@hi: It pretty much doesn't matter that they're not all \"sell outs.\" Enough of them are, that the lobbyists and special interests run the show. The occasional decent Congressperson who hasn't sold him/herself to the highest bidder, pretty much can do nothing about it — aside, perhaps, from giving evidence against them or helping to expose the payoffs and backroom deals (assuming they have any inside knowledge of them, which they may not).

So long as Congress is — say — 80% bought and sold, the remaining 20% is voiceless and of no account in Washington.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Alys Brangwin
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Whoa! Let's not associate crazy ass Joe Wilson with North Carolina. He's not from my home state!

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
MostlyHarmless
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@pecan 3.14159265: Hahahaha good one. good one. And I was like \"wait, isnt he from SC?\".

I called SC \"home\" for almost two years. These guys all make me feel ashamed of doing so.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
kaceetheconsumer
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Having worked with my former-university-prof husband to try to curb plagiarism and found such a lack of concern about same amongst the students, this does not surprise me at all.

One student actually told me that plagiarism is okay because \"it's not fair that other students are smarter and better than me so they get higher grades.\"

Translate that attitude into the political workplace and yeah, they're going to be THRILLED that someone tells them exactly what to say. Plus, obviously they're not going to encounter much criticism from their voting public about it if the voters do the same thing themselves in their daily lives.

Reply
7 replies
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@kaceetheconsumer: For a group project in grad school, one of our members got caught (by me (taking small bow)) blatantly ripping off passages from the net and calling them her own.
We called her on it and she didn't have any problem with it. We tried the ethical argument, the utilitarian one (she'll get busted, opening us up to disciplinary charges) until finally we went practical (we'd add a note to the cover sheet noting we were uncomfortable with her sections due to concerns it didn't meet the ethical standards of our program and they didn't reflect the work product of the group).
Then she was angry with us because our blackmail made her go back and, y'know, work.

Sigh.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
PsiCop
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@kaceetheconsumer:

One student actually told me that plagiarism is okay because \"it's not fair that other students are smarter and better than me so they get higher grades.\"
All I can say is, WTF!? You've got to be kidding me!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!)
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@kaceetheconsumer: Wooooow.

I keep a list of incredibly moronic student comments. I hope your husband put that one on his list!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
kaceetheconsumer
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!): @pecan 3.14159265: It was actually said to me in my ceramics class after I refused to ghostwrite an essay for another student and gave a brief rant on ethics vs cheating. So my husband didn't hear it directly, but having sent more than one plagiarist to the dean (like the ones who forget to take the blue hyperlinks out of their stolen text, duh), he wasn't that surprised when I reported it back to him.

@PsiCop: I wish. The really sad thing was that the student who said this wasn't stupid and probably could have done well if he'd put in some effort.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
catastrophegirl chooses not to fly
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@kaceetheconsumer: gee, at least back in the pre home computing days you had to actually copy the homework in your own handwriting.
hehe

Reply
\"user-pic\"
subtlefrog
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@kaceetheconsumer: @Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!): I love the sense of entitlement that a lot of the students have. I've had students cheat, threaten me, cry (male and female), flirt (male and female), and come up with all sorts of great quotes.

I wonder how many will go on to public office.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
pecan 3.14159265
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@kaceetheconsumer: I'd like to see your hubby turn that ludicrous statement back to the student.


\"It's not fair that these other students do so much better than you, so you're going to get more homework and more reports to help you do better.\"

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
u1itn0w2day
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Helloooo...


A 1900 page mostly unread bill passed late on a Saturday night and this is surprising ?


Helloooo...

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
SacraBos
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@u1itn0w2day: Also, given the lack of time it took to come up with 1900+ pages of law, it's not written by the Congressmen themselves, but written for them by someone else. If they assert they can't be expected to read it, then obviously no one in Congress could have actually written such a large volume of legislation in such a short time frame.

Obama promised us transparency. We need to know who truly authored this bill, who really wrote each section.

If it's not our Congressmen - whose job this is - then this is another reason why this is a BAD BILL and needs to be defeated.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@u1itn0w2day: You're unfamiliar with how The Greatest Democracy In The World works. There've always been huge bills that aren't practical to be read cover-to-cover that are routinely passed. Since at least the last one hundred years. Across most modern democracies.
You either have to shrug and accept we live in a complicated world, or plant your flag saying you hate democracy.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
u1itn0w2day
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Trai_Dep There is no need to tuck stuff away in bill verbage . If the legislators want to barter for votes on A PARTICULAR bill then fine do it on a seperate bill. Just because back room deals and snuck in verbage is standard practice for a professional politician doesn't mean it's a good practice or even accepted.


Stuff like discrimination was legal for hundreds of years should we follow those practices.


And how is it even a democracy if the public thinks their legislature is voting on one bill when they are actually adding/sneeking in less than fully disclosed legislation. If professional politicians want to do business that way fine. But I do NOT want to pay them to do business that way as a citizen/tax payer/their EMPLOYER.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Coelacanth
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Perhaps that list should serve as a rubric of who should be voted out of office next election cycle... Obviously, they're not doing their jobs.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
MrEvil
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Coelacanth: I think it's pretty easy. I know we'll lost some good people in the process, but we'll gain far more. Just don't vote for anyone listed on the ballot as the incumbent. I don't give a rat's ass what party they are, hell they could be Libertarian for all I care. If they're the incumbent, vote for the other guy. Sure the other guy might be a complete scumbag...but you're showing these retards who wears the daddy pants.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
cmdrsass
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

The Congressional Record is always full of garbage like this. Members routinely ask to revise and extend their remarks, inserting volumes of material that they did not speak, did not write, and may not have even read.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
katstermonster
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Last night I was watching some of the 7th season of The West Wing (one of the greatest shows ever, IMHO). It was right after Matt Santos got elected, and he was talking about banning donations by lobbyists altogether. How amazing would that be?

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
the_wiggle
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@katstermonster: so amazing that the country would rise up & perform the 'snoopy dance' in sheer joy.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Loias calls you out if you can't RTFA
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

A) We've got budget crises all over the country, be it state or federal level.
B) Lobbyist get Congressmen/women in their pockets with various contributions and promises.
Solution? Stop paying Congress. If they're going to ignore the opinions of the people who are supposed to be paying them, then stop pating them. They clearly get perks elsewhere.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
TCama
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Is it sad that I didn't find this too surprising? Hell, lobbyists have literally written legislation for decades.

They occasionally write op-eds for newspapers too. There was a small controversy in Virginia a little while back when a few newspapers realized that their local state delegates were publishing identical op-eds. Turned out a lobbyist wrote one op-ed and gave it to the delegates to publish under their own names.

Reply
1 replies
","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
ChrisC1234
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

What would just make my day is to then have the company that wrote these statements sue the congressmen for plagiarism and copyright infringement.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
TCama
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ChrisC1234: Copyright wouldn't happen, because the companies gave the congressmen permission to do it.

Plagiarism, you might have a case, but not coming from the lobbyists (obviously). But I believe anyone can file an ethics claim against ... I don't remember who does that sort of stuff, but there's some office of ethics or something like that that oversees congress. Not sure if they have any power, but still.

Reply
","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
nstonep
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Yeah...I thought this was how law was created. Does it astonish anyone?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
RandomHookup
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Heck, even I have written remarks that ended up in The Congressional Record. The Senator was quite happy to let me correct his random statements and bad grammar.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
PsiCop
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@RandomHookup: I wish the most recent president Bush would have taken similar criticism. I once sent him a note explaining that it's \"new-klee-urr,\" not \"new-cue-lurr.\" A minor functionary wrote back that W's mispronunciation was \"accepted\" in his native Texas. Problem is, it's NOT actually \"accepted\" anywhere in the English-speaking world (it can be found in a couple dictionaries as an \"alternate\" pronunciation, but \"alternate\" does not mean \"accepted\") ... not to mention, W was NOT a native of Texas, but of Connecticut (he was born in New Haven).

Nice to see the White House staff lying through its teeth in order to justify W continually mispronouncing things. My own guess is that he did it on purpose in order to appeal to the ignorant masses in flyover country, the \"Joe Sixpacks\" who have no idea how to pronounce anything right and are comforted by the idea that their president is a near-illiterate buffoon.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
econobiker
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

\"Is the health care debate really a fight between Democrats and Republicans, or a battle between lobbyists and the rest of us?\"


\"Government of the corporations, by the corporations,for the corporations.\"


And here is the take from people from Florida:
[www.bradenton.com]


\"Let's get rid of the lobbyists. They should not be regulated, they should be outlawed. Wikipedia defines a lobbyists as \"a person who tries to influence legislation on behalf of a special interest.\" I thought that is what we elected our legislators to do on our behalf. In this government of the people, by the people and for the people, should we not be their special interest?\"

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
bhr
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@econobiker: So no more unions, no more NEA, AARP, AAA, Bay Foundation....

Reply
\"user-pic\"
econobiker
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@bhr: Interesting point: would these be considered \"affinity corporations\" created to represent a group of actual people (membership) sharing a commone issue versus a corporations (created to make a profit) bonding together under the banner of a certain industry?


There are various arguments flowing around about how a corporation now has a quasi-legal type \"personhood\" status that was never considered years ago. There is also the issue on just when does an industry or professional association change from being a technical resource to being a lobbying group?


Then too how does anti-trust fit into this- say would the banking and credit card industry's actions to get the bankruptcy laws changed been considered a monopoly action in the early 1900s?


In truth I see both sides of the coin as I am a member of several \"affinity\" groups along with being a member of several \"industry\" groups both of which have lobbying as a component of the activities.

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'm disappointed that for all their effort, the Swiss didn't at least give them those cool Swiss Guard hats, or those natty stripped pantaloons.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
B
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Trai_Dep: I hope they at least got some Swiss army knives.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
MedicallyNeedy
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

It's not very smart at all to screw with Terminally Ill People!
Why this hasn't crossed their minds, I don't know.
Good luck to the powers that be, to peacefully enjoying a bowl of soup without thinking, did somebody spit in this?.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
jayphat
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Can anyone remember when being elected to Congress was supposed to be a duty? Something that was an incovience to your life but you did it because the people around you needed representation and you were the example of what those people represented? Most of the members of Congress go to some fancy law school, intern somewhere, then right out to the campaign trail to get elected. To me, they don't represent anything but what's wrong with the system, but what can you do? These same people make the rules for voting, draw out the districts for whom will vote for them, and have more money than oil-tycoon jesus to back them for a campaign.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
hi
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Is this Obama's healthcare plan? If it is, are you still for it? Do you still beleive what they are pushing is for the good of the people or for special interests such as Genetech and Roche.


Roche makes the swine flu vaccine by the way. Now does it make sense to anyone yet? Connect the dots.


If you still don't see I will try to explain as well as I can: Roche pays lobbyists to get laws made, and to pay congressmen & congresswoman to scare people into the swine flu propaganda as well as the news outlets, TV, radio, newspapers, etc... They push (pay off people) for a healthcare bill in their favor to make the billions, trillions, whatever. It is an actual conspiracy and not a theory. People/corporations/businesses do things for a reason. There is always a reason, it's not hundreds of coincidences.


[www.google.com]

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
pecan 3.14159265
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@hi: I put gas in my car, I'm benefitting Exxon, Mobil, Chevron, and all of those big oil companies. Likewise, by putting gas in my car, I pay a state tax, and that benefits my state. If I get sick, I buy medicine, and that lines the pockets of pharmas. When I take public transportation, I grease the wheels of the private company that controls the system.


Everything we do benefits someone other than us. It's called business. Of course companies do things for benefit.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
hi
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@pecan 3.14159265: Buying stuff is not illegal. What they are doing is illegal. Lining the pockets of congressman to get laws passed to benfit special interests and corporations, and not the American people, is unconstitutional.


What you're describing is capitolism (business, and thats fine), what they are involved in is more of a political scandal.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
hi
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@hi: Roche isn't the only company doing this either. It's a systemic problem that affects all of us.

Reply
","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
ihatephonecompanies
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Asked about the Congressional statements, a lobbyist close to Genentech said: \"This happens all the time. There was nothing nefarious about it.

It seems to me that this is the problem right here.

Yes, it happens all the time, and yes, there IS something nefarious about it.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
pot_roast
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

And these are the people going for our \"health care reform.\" Remember that.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
savdavid
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

That's right.....the industry and lobbyist have ONLY the best interest of Americans at heart. They are in no way interested in their own profits. They say this \"happens all the time\". Yep, I will believe that since they own the Congress. As far as say there is \"nothing nefarious\" about it, that is debatable. I guess that is how you see whores doing what they are paid to do.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
HooFoot
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

And yet people still believe that there are differences between the Democrats and the Republicans.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
consumerd
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

yep, I think it's the lobbyists vs. us. If you don't like health care now... Speak up and speak often! it's the only way the little guy is going to win. Either that or another American revolution!

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
stlbud
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

It's so nice to see our Missouri representatives can think for themselves.


Bill B

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
iron_chef
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

it's like a bunch of below average college freshmen turning in the same term paper.

Geez!!!

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
the_wiggle
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@iron_chef: well those below average types had to get jobs somewhere doing something! /sarcasm

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
B
November 18, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Err, what do the rest of us have to do with it? Far as I can tell, it's the lobbyists vs the other lobbyists. Insurance firms vs hospitals vs drug companies.

Reply
1 replies
","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
silver-spork
November 18, 2009 4:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

\"This happens all the time.\"

I'm sure that's true.

\"There was nothing nefarious about it.\"

Bull. This is just further proof that the lobbyists are in control and that the meatbags in Congress are just mouthpieces.

Reply
","","","");