Author Topic: Lobbyist  (Read 499 times)

Offline Sandman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17620
Lobbyist
« Reply #15 on: November 03, 2005, 01:08:33 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by john9001
MADD is a special interest group.


Maybe it's just me, but I think they fall under the "good" category of SPIGS.
sand

Offline Russian

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2992
Lobbyist
« Reply #16 on: November 03, 2005, 08:54:54 PM »
Ok, so there are ‘good’ and ‘bad’ lobbyists. (Good = people, Bad = corporations)
Since I was not aware of such, I placed everyone with such title under the second definition. In that case, let us focus on ‘bad’. I looked over wikipedia for definition, which gave me
Quote
Alleged corruption in lobbying
Lobbying is frequently performed on behalf of organizations which also make campaign contributions. This has led to allegations of corruption by opponents of some lobbying organizations.
Politicians are sometimes placed in apparently compromising positions because of their need to solicit financial contributions for their campaigns. Critics complain that they then appear to be acting in the interests of those who fund them, giving rise to talk of political corruption.
Supporters of the system respond that many politicians act in the interests of those who fund them due to common ideologies or shared local interests, and that lobbyists merely support those who agree with their positions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbyist


So let me rewrite my original question with ‘corruption’ definition of lobbing.

Why are lobbyist activates (AKA: motivation for corruption) authorized in US government? Isn’t it couther productive of the ideology ‘people by the people’ ?

Offline Russian

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2992
Lobbyist
« Reply #17 on: November 03, 2005, 08:57:49 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by midnight Target
True story..I know cause I stayed in this hotel last time I was in DC.

Lobbyists were the people who always tried to talk to President Grant while he was having his cigar and whiskey in the lobby of the Willard Hotel. Grant started calling them Lobbyists.


Quote
.What is the origin of the term "lobbyist" and its related forms? The article on Ulysses S. Grant suggests he might have coined it with his complaints about lobby-invading pleaders during his stays at the Willard Hotel. Wiktionary has no entry on any variant. Merriam-Webster Online, Dictionary.com, and various pages pointing to the American Heritage Dictionary failed to turn up an appropriate etymology. — Jeff Q 19:17, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Some etymology info... "The word 'lobby' dates back at least to the mid-seventeenth century when the large anteroom off the floor of the English House of Commons where members of Parliament could be approached by special pleaders became known as the lobby. According to H. L. Mencken, in 1829 petitioners for special privileges in Albany, New York, were called 'lobby-agents.' It was not a complimentary term." (p112, War Without Bloodshed by Eleanor Clift & Tom Brazaitis, ISBN: 0-684-80084-5)
This same source (War Without Bloodshed) also mentions the use of "lobbyers" and "lobby members" as precursors to the more-modern term "lobbyist." — Shawn 14:51, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
I've removed the "etymology" section until we can get a definitive sourced answer. Hope everyone agrees. Best, Meelar (talk) 15:23, August 8, 2005 (UTC)


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Lobbying

Offline Gunslinger

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10084
Lobbyist
« Reply #18 on: November 03, 2005, 09:09:58 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Sandman
Maybe it's just me, but I think they fall under the "good" category of SPIGS.


kind of like the NRA  :aok

Offline GtoRA2

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8339
Lobbyist
« Reply #19 on: November 03, 2005, 09:15:15 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Gunslinger
kind of like the NRA  :aok



Right we would not need them if people would stop trying to take out god given right to guns away!:D

Offline Russian

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2992
Lobbyist
« Reply #20 on: November 06, 2005, 06:25:20 PM »
So does that mean.....no one knows or cares?

Offline Sandman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17620
Lobbyist
« Reply #21 on: November 06, 2005, 08:19:51 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by GtoRA2
Right we would not need them if people would stop trying to take out god given right to guns away!:D


Hmmm... is there scripture to support this? :D
sand

Offline Chairboy

  • Probation
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8221
      • hallert.net
Lobbyist
« Reply #22 on: November 06, 2005, 08:43:23 PM »
With all that smiting, it's gotta be in there somewhere.

Or does that imply a god given right to artillery?
"When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." - Sinclair Lewis

Offline StarOfAfrica2

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5162
      • http://www.vf-17.org
Lobbyist
« Reply #23 on: November 06, 2005, 10:00:02 PM »
Ask Seagoon for specifics, he'd probably know.  But I belive its in the NT book of John where there is a section which speaks about arming yourself for self defense against thieves on the road.  That would be a sword and not a gun.  But, different times, different weapons, same problems.

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
Lobbyist
« Reply #24 on: November 06, 2005, 10:33:26 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by GtoRA2
I wonder when the first lobbyist showed up?


Prolly the start of the decline in US politics.


William Hull was hired by the Virginia veterans of the Continental army to lobby for additional compensation for their war services. In 1792, Hull wrote to other veterans' groups, recommending that they have their "agent or agents" cooperate with him during the next session to pass a compensation bill.
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline Seagoon

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2396
      • http://www.providencepca.com
Lobbyist
« Reply #25 on: November 08, 2005, 10:21:51 AM »
Hi SOA,

Only spotted this as I was catching up on old threads this AM.

Quote
Originally posted by StarOfAfrica2
Ask Seagoon for specifics, he'd probably know.  But I belive its in the NT book of John where there is a section which speaks about arming yourself for self defense against thieves on the road.  That would be a sword and not a gun.  But, different times, different weapons, same problems.


The verse I think you are probably referring to is in Luke 22, which is by an odd providence also the chapter I'm currently preaching through in Luke.

"And He said to them, "When I sent you without money bag, knapsack, and sandals, did you lack anything?" So they said, "Nothing." Then He said to them, "But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one." [/b] (Luke 22:35-36)

In context, however, this verse has less to do with self-defense than with a warning that hard times are about to come upon the church. The first time, Jesus sent the Apostles out to preach in His name, He sent them out without purse, or knapsack, or even a change of clothing. This first time, they were "in training" and as far as their spiritual development was concerned, they were not yet ready for the hardship they lay ahead of them (remember that 11 of the 12 apostles were eventually put to death for their faith in Jesus) so they went out under divine protection and had their needs fully met along the way - they "lacked for nothing."

Now Jesus is going up to Jerusalem to suffer, die, and rise again, and the time of their spiritual infancy and training is coming to an end. The time is coming when - like troops who are progressively trained and hardened for battle by facing increasing challenges with fewer and fewer resources - they will be sent out as sheep amongst the wolves to preach, and will have to be as "wise as serpents and harmless as doves."

He is saying once again, the kingdom is not coming in terms of the political reign of a restored Israel under a new David as you are hoping, rather the kingdom will come as you carry my message to the four corners of the earth, and my dominion will be extended as heart by heart, men are captivated by the gospel and reconciled to God. But... it ain't gonna be easy.

Commentator J.C. Ryle sums it up well: "It is safest to take these remarkable words in a proverbial sense. They apply to the whole period of time between our Lord's first and second advents. Until our Lord comes again, believers are to make a diligent use of all the faculties which God has implanted in them. They are not to expect miracles to be worked, in order to save them trouble. They are not to expect bread to fall into their mouths, if they will not work for it. They are not to expect difficulties to be surmounted, and enemies to be overcome, if they will not wrestle, and struggle and take pains. They are to remember that it is "the hand of the diligent which makes rich." (Prov. 10:4.)

We shall do well to lay to heart our Lord's words in this place, and to act habitually on the principle which they contain. Let us labor, and toil, and give, and speak, and act, and write for Christ, as if all depended on our exertions. And yet let us never forget that success depends entirely on God's blessing! To expect success by our own "purse" and "sword" is pride and self-righteousness. But to expect success without the "purse and sword" is presumption and fanaticism."


But as a secondary and minor application, may a Christian arm himself for the journey (if it is within the laws of the land) in order to defend himself from thieves and brigands? I would say that this and other verses indicate that this is certainly allowable. Even in the upper room on that final night, at least two of the disciples were armed, so Christ had not forbidden them to carry swords to defend themselves from robbers.

- SEAGOON
SEAGOON aka Pastor Andy Webb
"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion... Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - John Adams

Offline StarOfAfrica2

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5162
      • http://www.vf-17.org
Lobbyist
« Reply #26 on: November 08, 2005, 11:00:31 AM »
TY sir, that is exactly the verse I was trying to remember.  :)