Subsidizing Lousy Lobbyists

Matt Yglesias writes about this shilling piece by Harold Ford and John Sununu for the telecom "grassroots organization" Broadband for America. Matt points out that the "op-ed" piece makes no sense.

I'm more interested in what the telecoms think they get out of subsidizing Ford and Sununu. It's one thing to use them as conduits to pay make contributions to Congress folk. But to "shift public opinion?" Harold Ford? John Sununu? You gotta be kidding me.

An efficient market would have ended this gravy train for the likes of Ford and Sununu, who can't persuade anyone of anything. Here's my suggestion to the telecoms to help their bottom line - stop throwing your money away on the likes of Harold Ford and John Sununu.

Speaking for me only

< Supreme Court to Re-Examine Eyewitness Evidence | More Reasons Not To Care Who Is President >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Sununu? Ford? Sheesh... (5.00 / 0) (#2)
    by oldpro on Mon Aug 22, 2011 at 03:49:51 PM EST
    Maybe this is just a cover story and their real job is something else entirely...so, are the inside the tent peeing out or outside the tent peeing in?

    And who owns the tent?

    Probably the same reason companies (none / 0) (#1)
    by andgarden on Mon Aug 22, 2011 at 03:36:48 PM EST
    continue to spend money on ad campaigns they can't be sure are working. On top of which, they'd probably kinda, sorta like to believe that there is some possibility of underlying corruption. It's the inverse of the "no sit-down dinners" googoo rule.

    andgardeb, what is this (none / 0) (#3)
    by oculus on Mon Aug 22, 2011 at 03:53:24 PM EST
    "googoo" rule of which you speak?

    One of the various lobbying reforms (none / 0) (#4)
    by andgarden on Mon Aug 22, 2011 at 03:56:03 PM EST
    of the last decade or so. It stopped lobbyists from paying for a Congressman's sit-down meal over some dollar amount. (I don't object to the rule, BTW).

    Site Violation - spam (none / 0) (#8)
    by MO Blue on Tue Aug 23, 2011 at 08:04:21 AM EST

    SITE VIOLATOR - SEOSEOCU (none / 0) (#9)
    by Anne on Tue Aug 23, 2011 at 08:10:13 AM EST
    And congrats to andgarden, whose comment in this very thread was partially appropriated for the delivery of the spam link!