That didn't take long

Barack Obama last year:

One year from now, we have the chance to tell all those corporate lobbyists that the days of them setting the agenda in Washington are over. I have done more to take on lobbyists than any other candidate in this race - and I've won. I don't take a dime of their money, and when I am President, they won't find a job in my White House. Because real change isn't another four years of defending lobbyists who don't represent real Americans - it's standing with working Americans who have seen their jobs disappear and their wages decline and their hope for the future slip further and further away. That's the change we can offer in 2008.

Barack Obama today:

President-elect Barack Obama, who vowed during his campaign that lobbyists "won't find a job in my White House," said through a spokesman yesterday that he would allow lobbyists on his transition team as long as they work on issues unrelated to their earlier jobs.

And I imagine our definition of "unrelated" might differ from theirs in numerous subtle ways.  Obama could fill out his transition team and his other government appointments without using lobbyists, of course, but it would mean reaching out beyond the Washington establishment—you know, altering how things are usually done.  And if there's one thing we shouldn't expect from Obama, it's variation.

I was dismayed to see Amy Goodman passing along the Obama team's spin about these being "the most far-reaching ethics rules of any transition team in history" without mentioning how he's just reversed himself on one of the major themes of his campaign:

Transition Team Limits Lobbyist Role

Meanwhile, the Obama transition team says it’s issued a set of regulations that will limit the role of lobbyists in the incoming administration. Under the new rules, lobbyists joining the transition won’t be allowed to work in the field in which they previously lobbied. And transition officials who go on to become lobbyists will not be allowed to lobby the Obama White House for at least one year.

In the hope that this was just an oversight, I sent her his quote from 2007 and suggested that she correct this report on tomorrow's show.  We'll see what happens.

UPDATE: Nothing on today's show, and she hasn't responded to my email yet either.

UPDATE 2 (11/18/2008): Still no correction or response, so it seems clear at this point that none will be forthcoming.  This isn't quite as bad as her interview with Wesley Clark, but it's still disappointing to see her uncritically passing along official spin—something she never did with Bush.  Hopefully not a harbinger of things to come, but Democracy Now! certainly isn't immune to Obamamania (even if their case isn't as severe as most).

Comments

[cemmcs]

I think it was an oversight. I'll email too. I bought of couple of her books which gives me plenty of clout.

[KDelphi]

I think that they removed the entirity of the article. I jsut see a little blurb...maybe "correcting facts"?

I really like Goodman....

[John Caruso]

No, actually the article is still there and still says just what it said when I copied it here—they haven't changed it. And Amy didn't correct it on today's show.

[KDelphi]

I see it. Sorry. I am not the best on the pc, and mine is old and slow...

I will look to see the correction. I hope I am not wastng my energy...or whatever.

[cemmcs]

John Caruso

Right now, at the link you provided, it does not have the quotation, "the most far-reaching ethics rules of any transition team in history". It has the Meanwhile... part but not the "far-reaching ethics" part. Was that something she quoted on the show but which was not in the Headlines? Or did DN remove it from the Headlines? (I didn't actually check before)

In fairness to Obama, working on the transistion is not the same thing as having "a job in The White House". It may end up that he actually does renege on that promise but he hasn't yet. Keep in mind, the guy's a lawyer.

[cemmcs]

Oops!

I hadn't looked at the other link either but I just did and it says,

a lobbyist could join the administration as long as he or she didn't work on "regulations or contracts directly and substantially related to their prior employer for two years."

Pardon my laziness.

[John Caruso]

Actually I said she was passing along their spin, which I was quoting (the quote in question comes from John Podesta and is in the Boston Globe story I linked to). I didn't mean that she herself relayed that exact sentence; sorry for the confusion. The portion I quoted afterward is what she actually said on the show.

You're right that Obama is still technically safe (in a sneaky lawyerly sort of way) on the "a job in the White House" quote, but in that same speech he also said "we have the chance to tell all those corporate lobbyists that the days of them setting the agenda in Washington are over"—and I'd say people on the transition team are certainly in a key position to set the agenda. And he also said "real change isn't another four years of defending lobbyists," among many other quotes during his campaign claiming that he'd keep lobbyists away from his administration, all of which he's chucking in the trash now.

So even if he's technically safe on the "job in the White House" quote, he's safe in about the same sense that George Bush can safely claim that he never said Iraq was involved in 9/11—even though the vast majority of the population believes he did.

(Obama's official campaign positions regarding lobbyist rules are here, BTW. The actual rules they've announced are similar but weaker, and the rules he proposed on the web site weren't nearly as strong as the rhetoric he used in his speeches—as usual for him.)

[KDelphi]

Yes, you have to dig around for it a little, that was what confused me...thanks

Good point about what Dubya said about 9/11--I wish I knew how to explain that. I mean, I say, "well he never really said that". But I usually get some "I have faith or hope " answer...