Former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, who resigned in 2006 and is currently a senior vice president at HHB Inc., has picked up another gig as a member of APCO Worldwide’s International Advisory Council. At the huge lobbying firm, McClellan is joining a “a growing list of heavyweights” that includes former Bush OMB press secretary Scott Milburn and former Cheney press secretary Jennifer Dyck. McClellan says “it’s exciting to be a part of such a forward-looking team.”
Apologies to Mel Brooks….
Scotty: I want to be a Lobbyist. I want to coalesce the vapors of human existence into a viable and meaningful comprehension.
APCO guy: Oh, a bullsh*t artist!
Scotty: Hmmmmmm…
APCO guy: Did you bullsh*t last week?
Scotty: No.
APCO guy: Did you try to bullsh*t last week?
Scotty: Yes!
February 14th, 2008 at 9:57 amIt’s going to be fun watching all these guys go broke when Obama shuts down K-Street. One of his most recent stump speeches is about doing away with the lobbyist influence in Washington. K street must be getting really nervous about now.
February 14th, 2008 at 9:57 amMcClellan says “it’s exciting to be a part of such a forward-looking team.â€
…he continued, “especially since what we’re leaving in the past is such a huge clusterfu(k,”
February 14th, 2008 at 10:00 amThey just know Scottie is a team player **wink wink** and will literally say anything they tell him to say.
February 14th, 2008 at 10:01 amwater-torture (board) ALL lobbyists.
February 14th, 2008 at 10:01 amThis is why we need Obama:
To stop that lobbying party that is ultimately run with our money. When will someone actually stop that legalized insane crime of lobbying. It’s just immoral!
Where are the “conservatives” and the “evangelicals” when this issue is brought up? Do we hear the moralists opposing that corruption and crime that is happening so oppenly in DC?
February 14th, 2008 at 10:06 am#2 There is NO WAY Obama is going to get rid of the lobbyist. The K street lobby is to powerful and has Congress in their hip pockets. Barack Obama will try to do something about it but Congress knows where their bread gets buttered and will no way pass any serious lobbying reform.
February 14th, 2008 at 10:09 amThere is a basic flaw here…. by its nature, conservatism is not forward-looking. It is retrograde. The best days are always behind us; the future is uncertain and terrifying. Change is always a bad thing; progress is something to fight against.
These people really, really make me ill. The only thing “heavyweight” about them is their negative effects on our political system, our collective well-being and our standing in the world.
How can anyone – even Republicans – trust someone whose job was to go out and lie to the press every single day? What sort of credibility can he possibly have?
February 14th, 2008 at 10:10 amAlso, this is why I think OBAMA should have EXTRA-EXTRA-EXTRA protection. Those lobbists will try to assassinate him as soon as it becomes evident that he will be the nominee. Because they know that any democrat will win the general election this year.
He should have his own security very strong. Can’t count on the secret service! They may be corrupted and bought by the “special interests” and just create the ideal situation for an assassination.
That’s the way crime operates. Much more when it is an organized, legalized, bushized, cheneyzed crime.
February 14th, 2008 at 10:10 amPhilip Morris hired APCO to manage a massive national effort aimed at altering the American juducial system to be more hostile towards product liability suits. APCO is all about tort reform. An APCO specialty is supporting rogue scientists who are financed by industry and purport to challenge established scientific thinking.
February 14th, 2008 at 10:12 amK street must be getting really nervous about now.
Comment by bilbobaggins — February 14, 2008 @ 9:57 am
I liked K Street a lot better when The Hayloft and Rands were popular drinking spots for the 18-year-olds from Maryland and Virginia. The only nervous people then were kids under 18 with phony ID’s.
February 14th, 2008 at 10:17 amBarack Obama will try to do something about it but Congress knows where their bread gets buttered and will no way pass any serious lobbying reform.
Comment by KansasLiberal — February 14, 2008 @ 10:09 am
This reminds me a little of when Bill Clinton first came into office, one of the things he wanted to do was to eliminate sexual orientation being a factor in eligibility to serve in the military. He ran into such opposition from Congress and the general public that the result was the compromise “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. At the time, it seemed like a toothless, namby-pamby policy that would please nobody.
However, fifteen years later, we see that gays have served proudly in our military without causing the entire armed forces to crumble (well, they may be crumbling, but that’s not the gays’ fault). The idea of allowing gays to serve openly has gained much more public acceptance — to the point where we can soon drop “don’t ask, don’t tell” altogether.
If Obama tries to eliminate the lobbyists, he may wind up with a similarly toothless watered-down policy. But it could be a start in the right direction. Hey, I can dream, can’t I?
February 14th, 2008 at 10:23 amDid you ever feel like our tax dollars & our government was one big shark frenzy feeding pool?
February 14th, 2008 at 10:27 amEveryday #13! Everyday!
February 14th, 2008 at 10:42 amScott McClellan says, “It’s exciting to be a part of such a forward-looking revolving door system of corruption! I am so happy all of my years of blatantly lying for a criminal administration has finally paid off. Literally!”
February 14th, 2008 at 10:43 amHeavyweights in today’s political arena may become anchors in the next…
February 14th, 2008 at 11:26 amSee? Being a paid liar for a gang of criminals does pay!
February 14th, 2008 at 11:39 amAh. More Wingnut Welfare.
February 14th, 2008 at 12:24 pmHow much does a sweatty-palmed mushmouth get paid to mumble through a pack of lies?
February 14th, 2008 at 12:32 pmthe veterans go homeless or scrounge for minimum wage jobs while the inveterate liars bank major paychecks – that’s an example of what kind of “character” “integrity” or “honor”???????
shame on all you righties
the deepest shame of all
February 14th, 2008 at 12:34 pmHe needs to get his portfolio stuffed while he can, ergo, the next 11 months…
February 14th, 2008 at 12:45 pmScotty fits right in with this new crowd, because he lied through his teeth as spokesperson. That’s what lobbyists do. They creeps should be banned to bribing our congressman and then we’d get real representation. Tell you what, lets cut congressional pay and benefits and we’ll see how long these guy want to say in office. If lobbyists weren’t able to bribe them, they’d want to do what’s right.
February 14th, 2008 at 12:49 pmHeavyweights? Since there aren’t any mental heavyweights in the Bush administration, I assume you’re taking pot shots at Scotty’s waist line. That’s just childish. He can’t help being pudgy. You should take pot shots at things that matter, like his complete lack of a moral compass or his embarrassing inability to recognize facts when they bite him on the rump.
February 14th, 2008 at 1:16 pm#2 There is NO WAY Obama is going to get rid of the lobbyist. The K street lobby is to powerful and has Congress in their hip pockets. Barack Obama will try to do something about it but Congress knows where their bread gets buttered and will no way pass any serious lobbying reform.
Comment by KansasLiberal
If Obama makes it a focal point of his Presidency and gets the American public behind him, Congress will come around. You have to remember that Congressmen/women are elected every two years. If they start really feeling the heat from their constituents, they will have to pay attention or lose their jobs.
February 14th, 2008 at 1:38 pmAddendum to #24. I have to say, though, that I think Congress should be elected to 4 year terms rather than two year terms. The two year term is the biggest contributor to the influence of K-Street over our representatives. They are virtually always in fund raising mode and have little time to legislate. And because of that, they are constantly dependent on the lobbyists to fill their re-election coffers for their next run. If they had 4 years in office, they could at least legislate for 3 of the 4 years and will be less dependent on lobbyist money.
February 14th, 2008 at 1:42 pmBilbo, the other alternative is to have public/only funding of elections…
February 14th, 2008 at 1:44 pmBilbo, the other alternative is to have public/only funding of elections…
Comment by RUCerious
I agree that is the best alternative. But, I still think they should serve for four years rather than two.
February 14th, 2008 at 3:52 pm