(Chamber of Commerce) Lobbyist Fires Warning Shot Over Donation Disclosure Plan

[alp227]

Source: The New York Times

WASHINGTON — So much for détente.

After a brief truce of sorts between the White House and business leaders, the top lobbyist at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce took aim at President Obama on Tuesday over an as-yet unannounced plan to force government contractors to disclose their political giving.

The lobbyist, R. Bruce Josten, said in an interview that the powerful business bloc “is not going to tolerate” what it saw as a “backdoor attempt” by the White House to silence private-sector opponents by disclosing their political spending.

“We will fight it through all available means,” Mr. Josten said. In a reference to the White House’s battle to depose Libya’s leader, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, he said, “To quote what they say every day on Libya, all options are on the table.”

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/us/politics/27donate.html

[Zorra]

1. “This is meant to have a chilling effect,”

Yuh, that's the point.

[liberalmike27]

15. They should do an episode of criminal minds

Where some nut goes around and knocks off lobbyists. They could put some catty remarks in it like "Hey, do we really want to catch this guy?" Then have them all laugh heartily, while another says "Well I guess we have to."

Funny thing is, tragically funny, lobbyists and the corporations they work for, kill people legally every year, and bring many more to death prematurely. They are the real serial killers, and if there is one thing I like about Obama, if there is one single reason that I want to keep him in office for another term, is on the hope that one of the con-servative judges, those treacherous scumbags, kicks off, and he gets to appoint another anti-corporate judge. I'd hope for a declaration that corporations aren't citizens, but I'd settle for them just not being able to contribute to buying off our leaders, so they can do their dirty business, and do it perfectly legally.

[No Elephants]

18. Please name the "anti-corporate judges" Pres. Obama has appointed.

hint: Neither Sotomayor nor Kagan had anti-corporate records when he appointed them. And Obama had Evan Bayh name his very first judiial appointment, who, IMO, had a downright lousy record when appointed.

Is Obama (or ANY Democratic President) likely to name judges who are less conservative, to one degree or another, than those a Republican President is likely to name? Probably, although Republicans did appoint a couple of the most liberal Justices ever to sit on any federal bench.

if you had put it that way, I could have agreed with you.

[plumbob]

2. So they do have something to hide.

How about we let the unproven folks go at Gitmo and put R. Bruce Josten in as a start? He's a real terrorist and he has made a real and public threat.

R. Bruce? What kind of candyass name is that? Rupert? Rudolph? Ralphy? (apologies to all the actual folks with those names).

[slay]

3. Lobbyist, R. Bruce Josten can go fuck himself - it's WAY past time these billionaire manipulators

of our country are exposed. FUCK HIM - arrogant prick! :mad:

[starroute]

13. It occurred to me to check my files for Josten -- and I found this golden oldie

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,982729,00.html

Mar. 27, 1995

AT 11 A.M. LAST THURSDAY, CONGRESSMAN John Boehner took his seat at the head of a conference-room table a few steps from the Rotunda, beneath the Capitol dome. As the fourth-ranking Republican in the House and a field general in the war to pass the "Contract with America," Boehner (pronounced Bay-ner) looked at home. But his lieutenants, who were arrayed around the table strewn with coffee cups and cigarette butts, were not so natural a fit. They were not fellow lawmakers or even congressional staff members. They were lobbyists representing some of the richest special interests in the country. . . .

Welcome to the underside of the Republican revolution. To an extent unusual even for parasitic Washington, the House G.O.P. leadership has attached its fortunes to private lobbyists, and is relying on their far-flung influence to pass its agenda. Boehner's Thursday Group is the top of the pyramid of that sophisticated effort, serving as command central for a series of multimillion-dollar campaigns on behalf of the Contract with America. The stakes of the enterprise-and the potential rewards for the lobbyists-are huge. . . .

Not all Republicans think the alliance is a good idea. Some are worried that in its zeal to pass the contract, the leadership might be snuggling too close to the special interests that the all-important swing voters abhor. If the contract's tax cuts overtly favor corporations and the wealthy, says G.O.P. Representative Steve Schiff of New Mexico, "it will make us a sitting duck for those who argue that our party has capitulated to our allies." Democrats are already making the argument. "The Republicans are too close to business interests," charges Charles Schumer of New York. "That is their Achilles' heel." . . .

For the most part, though, the lobbyists are playing the good soldier and reveling in the experience of being at the right hand of power for a change. "The difference this year is that we're playing offense rather than defense," says Bruce Josten of the Chamber of Commerce. "It's very tiring but very exciting for all of us." It could also be very profitable.

[slay]

14. Nice find! This guy has been a scumbag for a LONG time it seems - and played a part in the COC

for crazy long too. Ugh. I hate how our country - our people - have become so - OWNED by these greedy power hungry assholes. :(

[999998th word]

33. K+R

[freshwest]

41. Good find, thanks. And the Koch types wonder why they're hated?

[pmorlan1]

16. Arrogant is right

These people don't even try to hide it anymore. When was the last time that a lobbyist allowed himself to be quote4d on the front page of the NYT essentially threatening the President? What does that say about who really has power in Washington?

[Vinnie From Indy]

4. This guy sounds a bit unhinged at the prospect of disclosure

"all available means"

“To quote what they say every day on Libya, all options are on the table.”

WTF is this dumbass talking about?
Is the COC actually putting violence on the table?

[999998th word]

7. FOIA called for.

Terrorist threat if ever there was one::wow: ::crazy: :wtf:

[99th_Monkey]

17. That's certainly how I heard it, and am available to testify to that effect anytime as needed. ~nt

[24601]

28. FOIA is for government information. Go serve one on Coke demanding

their formula and get laughed out of the room.

[999998th word]

34. OK sorry,misunderstood usage +a rant (warning)

Youre right-Question,How did they get by w/serving all of those Professors in Mi and in Wi?

What 'government' info were they hoping to gain from that. The Prof from Wi just got a little too

close for comfort on his blog w /info on A.L.E.C.,the Mi ones were writing up Heritage..

and other fake front lobbyist groups.Is it only for government info when it serves the lobbyists

best interests? Any fallout from the H.B.Gary debacle? investigations, prosecutions forthcoming?

Wont be holding my breath on that.

I know I'm new to the magic of internet communications,but I know lobbyist bullshit arrogant swill

when I hear it.I abhor their efforts to render us powerless while they steal our future and bleed us dry.

I'd put this on Craigslist R+R but theyre fulla fckn trolls:evilgrin: Ya never find 'em here :eyes:

[glinda]

9. That appears to be a direct threat against our President.

[wordpix]

30. +1

[freshwest]

10. You nailed it.

[No Elephants]

19. Wouldn't be surprised. Remember the 2010 election?

In Nevada, dumbass Angle was yapping about voters using their "Second Amendment remedies" and some Republican party woman in the South whose name i've forgotten urged using bullets if ballots didn't work.

if that is not inciting violence, what is?

[wordpix]

29. sounds like violence is an option for these assholes - hope Secret Service gives Josten a call

This kind of brown shirt intimidation needs to be nipped in the bud immediately.

[djg21]

45. This doesn't make sense . . .

How does an entity exercise its First Amendment rights, as allow by Citizens United, if its "speech" cannot be attributed?

[Lasher]

5. Obama will back down.

But he shouldn't.

[BadGimp]

6. so let me see if I have this right..

This ass clown says that merely exposing WHO is spending the money is attacking the CORPORATIONS' first amendment rights. First of all the Constitution does not grant Corporations ANY rights.

Thanks to the right wing lead SCOTUS Citizen V United case, Corporations, who are not people, have the right to spend limitless money in the political system, AND remain anonymous.

But PEOPLE can not have the SAME RIGHT. Is that fair?

Did I get that correct?

Can anyone else see how they are setting up a 2 class system of constitutional rights? And ain't that illegal? You can't have separate constitution rights for separate peoples can you? What about equal rights under the law?

I'll shut up now.

[SoapBox]

11. PLEASE...Don't shut up!

...keep it coming...you are spot on!

:-)

[No Elephants]

25. As best I can tell, you don't have the law right.

1/ Citizens United v. FEC (Federal Election Commission) did not hold that human beings have a lesser right than do corporations (nor does any case of which I am aware hold that).

Citizens United v. FEC held unconstitutional federal law that "prohibits corporations and unions from using their general treasury funds to make independent expenditures for speech that is an “electioneering communication” or for speech that expressly advocates the election or defeat of a candidate." http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-205.ZS.html

As far as the right to remain anonymous, human donors are identified, as are corporations that donate. Neither is able to remain anonymous. As far as donors to corporations, Citizens United affirmed disclosure requirements of existing law. (A much older case did say forcing an organization to name its members is unconstitutional. NAACP v. Button)

So, AFAIK, no two-class system or equal pro. issue exists.


2/ Unless and until our system changes, or the Supreme Court overrules Citizens United (and other cases), the Constitution does grant rights to corporations. I am not saying whether I agree or disagree, just saying, as of today, the Constitution DOES grant corporations rights.


The Constitution does, says and means whatever the Supreme Court says it does, says and means and the Supreme Court has for a long time applied Constitutional rights to corporations.

As to the First Amendment in particular, the Supreme Court has said that the First Amendment does protect corporations and unions, at least to the degree set forth in the Citizens United case. (See also, First Amendment cases discussed by the Court in the Citizens United opinion itself, such First Nat. Bank of Boston v. Bellotti, NAACP v. Button and Buckley v. Valeo. And, Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc., a 1976 Supreme Court granted limited First Amendment protection to advertising, presumably by corporations as well as by businesses run by individuals. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0425_0748_ZS.html


3/ FYI, at the request of BOTH Democrats and Republicans, the FEC expanded the holding of the Citizens United case via a rule that allows corporations to form "super pacs"--and very easily, too. http://www.campaignlegalcenter.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1312:apr-12-2011-national-journal-concern-lingers-as-fec-delays-new-rules&catid=64&Itemid=62

On his show, about two weeks ago, Colbert demonstrated just how easily.

[BuddhaGirl]

46. +1000

:thumbsup:

Love the picture, too!!!

[Gman]

8. Cry me a f*****g river

[bhikkhu]

12. You don't know what a dog's really like until you get close to its food

...that's what this guy makes me think of.

[Botany]

20. FWIW a picture of R. Bruce Josten

What truce? The President has tried to play nice and they Chamber showed their thanks by bringing in billions
from Red China to fund anti Obama republicans. The U.S. Chamber of Congress is a radical anti American
organization run to help the very rich @ the expense of the middle class.

[wordpix]

31. he looks like he's gonna blow! lol

[gtar100]

21. These lobbyists and the people they represent - these are our real enemies.

They are the modern day marauders and plunderers, willing to steal everything you and I have for their own personal gain. They will use you and make your life miserable with long hours of labor and little gain for all your hard work. And when you can't work anymore, they will send you to the street to die. R. Bruce Josten is one. He is a thief, a criminal and a parasite on this earth who contributes nothing good to this world.

Here's his bio: http://www.uschamber.com/about/management/r-bruce-josten

It's good to put a human face to those who cause so much misery in this world. Think I'm being too harsh on the guy or melodramatic? Remember who he works for - the US Chamber of Commerce. Read their own words and see the results of their efforts. They are the great supporters of sweat shop labor throughout the world, they stand with the defense industries that bring us the hell of war year after year - decade after decade. They are the great defenders of the rich who wage class warfare on us on a daily basis, these supporters of the great propaganda machine called the US media, these pushers of for-profit health care that kills us by the thousands every year. They are liars who spin the truth trying to convince us to be okay with food that kills us, air that is toxic, and environments that turn lifeless. They attempt to deceive us with silver tongues and bright shiny objects. They steal our culture and turn it on us to entice us to buy and in the process making a mockery of it and everything that is great in being human. They reduce us to laborers and consumers. And if not that, they throw us to the streets. They care not about the poverty in their wake. So pointing them out and identifying them by name is the least we should do. They love to hide behind corporate names. Let's tear those walls down and expose them for who they really are.

Remember what Josten said - 'all options are on the table'. And by their actions they have proven they will stop at nothing to get what they want. We will not let them win.

[w4rma]

23. YES. (nt)

[w4rma]

22. No more putting on a pretty public face and stabbing us all in the back while we aren't looking.(nt)

[Scuba]

24. We need to expose these criminals. Thanks for posting.

[Uncle Joe]

26. Kicked and recommended for disclosure.

Thanks for the thread, alp.

[gratuitous]

27. Aren't they proud of their work?

Doesn't the Chamber of Commerce want the public to know all about the businesses it's fronting for? As someone once said in a slightly different context, people trying to hide something are usually doing something wrong. In fact, that someone was a great and good friend of the Chamber of Commerce, who appointed Supreme Court Justices quite well-disposed to the Chamber and its clients.

Under the goose-and-gander principle, I deem Mr. Josten's whining out of bounds, if not downright un-American.

[wordpix]

32. “This is meant to have a chilling effect” ----Josten re: disclosing the legalized lobbyist bribery

What's chilling is this guy's threatening statements.

[Zorra]

35. LOL!

[newspeak]

36. I don't consider the COC to be american

To me, they're just a group of corporate whores (small businesses are small potatoes) who'd take money from any foreign global corporation to influence policies over the american people. They could care less about the people, the infrastructure or security--power and greed is their motive-they'd probably sell their first born to make a buck.

[CreekDog]

37. they fight everything through all available means anyway

the Chamber's threat to "fight" is ironic since they fight anyway.

[elias49]

38. Why is a Chamber lobbyist being asked about Libya??

Stupid reporter?
Why would anyone care what Josten thinks about Qaddafi?
Strange.

[alfredo]

39. Sounds like a death threat.

[unkachuck]

40. "...all options are on the table.”

....it looks like the 2012 election is shaping up to be all-out war....

....we've ignored these fascist bastards far too long; they are serious, deadly serious and they will stop at nothing to destroy whoever gets in their way....

[primavera]

42. Omg, that's too funny!

A lobbyist accusing anyone of "backdoor" efforts! Rotflmao! That guy must have cojones the size of watermelons to pull that off with a straight face!

[Rex]

43. Fuck them, I hope they all end up broke and eating out of the dumpster.

I don't know how much damage to America our political parties cause, but lobbyist are a decease in this country.

A rash leftover from Raygun's bee-hind.

[and-justice-for-all]

44. Obama should tell the CoC to go fuck themselves...

they are vile organization and we should not negotiate with terrorist.