Cutting Out The Middleman: Why Take Money From Lobbyists When You Can Funnel It Directly Through Elites?
POLITICS
Cutting Out The Middleman: Why Take Money From Lobbyists When You Can Funnel It Directly Through Elites?
AT THIS POINT, WE SHOULD ALL KEEP OUR FINGERS CROSSED THAT "THE MESSIAH" BARACK OBAMA CAN WALK ON WATER. Because we are going to need a divine hand in righting the wrongs of the last eight years. His ascent to the presidency seems preordained, at least according to astrologers, historians and even crooks and liars. Yet I can't shake the feeling that Obama isn't the man we've been waiting for.
For a campaign built on "change," the charismatic Senator likes his operatives old-school. By which we mean Chicago-style, quid pro quo, back-washing politics.
His chief strategist is political consultant David Axelrod, Mayor Richard Daley's elections' bagman, who now serves Illinois' two most powerful pols. Shortly after he lay claim to the Democratic nomination for president, Obama rushed back to Chicago to pay back Daley with an appearance at a rally celebrating Chicago making the final cut for the 2016 Olypics. As an example of Chicago politics, there were news reports that Daley had "invited" (cough, cough) city employees to attend the rally. More recently, I'm sure the relationship also had something to do with Obama moving his entire campaign out of D.C. and back to Michigan Avenue. Fundamental lessons: Paybacks are important in politics, and so is consolidating power.
Which is why it is troublesome that Obama chose Jim Johnson to serve on his vice-president research team. Johnson, former chairman of Fannie Mae, resigned from the post after he was fingered as possibly being a "friend of Angelo,'' or Angelo Mozilo, the CEO of Countrywide, the biggest U.S. home lender, who reportedly gave Johnson and other influentials good deals on mortgages.
Countrywide shoulders a lot of blame for underwriting risky loans that contributed to the current housing crisis, and Obama has repeatedly denounced the company while campaigning. Obama has also promised to rid the country of such special treatment for the elite, but his lackluster record in the Illinois legislature does not denote a man who is willing to take the lead. You've got to have balls to stand up to influence-peddlers, and as of this date Obama seems only willing to share his bed with them. As far as I'm concerned, the Hillary 'nutcracker' was a compliment; as of now there is no evidence that Obama will be one.
And then there's Obama's bloviating about not taking money from lobbyists, but the disingenuousness of that policy is just evidence that he's a lawyer. Obama has in fact built a money machine unequalled in politics with "bundlers," mostly fat cats, who solicit their private or business networks for donations.
According to the Chicago Sun-Times' Lynn Sweet, "Those at the top of the Obama fund-raising pyramid -- people who pledge to raise at least $250,000 -- get a gold VIP lapel pin with the letters "NFC" fashioned in the campaign's logo." The NFC stands for "National Fundraising Committee. And in the same April article, Sweet revealed that "each of the 138 Obama bundlers promised to raise at least $50,000, and many are from Chicago, not surprising since Chicago billionaire Penny Pritzker is the national finance chairwoman." Pritzker is the campaign's "money maven," and has her own questionable ties to the subprime loan industry.
Having Pritzker, ranked 135th on the 2007 Forbes list of richest Americans, is a signal to elites that Obama is open for business. And they have gotten the message and are getting in line. Even Rupert Murdoch, the man responsible for Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity of Fox TV, is sending smoke signals to the presumptive next president. Everybody wants to be on the winning side.
Having a black president is a milestone for the nation and I am especially excited about what this dream delivers to African Americans. But the question still looms large: What, other than "hope," will Obama deliver to his corporate bundlers?
