Coffee house loophole

[Mac-A-Matic]

Wow. There's a lot of denial and "that's not possible" going on here.

Had this been the administration of GW Bush, most of you would be going ballistic.

But I guess this kind of narrow-minded thinking is to be expected here.

[$tevie]

Last year.

SO you believe that the Administration is being less than transparent, but this right wing lobbyist is incapable of being less than transparent. Huh.

[Lemon Drop]

Mac-A-Matic wrote:
Wow. There's a lot of denial and "that's not possible" going on here.

Had this been the administration of GW Bush, most of you would be going ballistic.

But I guess this kind of narrow-minded thinking is to be expected here.

Enlighten us on "coffeegate." I don't know much about it other than what's in the links above. How did lobbying go in the Bush White House? All transparent and on the record?
Jack Abramoff anyone? John Schmitz and the Medicare drug bill? (he worked for the defense industry too)
When I think lobbyists and Bush, that's what comes to mind.
Lobbying should be on the up and up, if the meetings are outside the rules, then expose it. Those rules were not in effect durign the Bush adminstration, they arose because of abuses during his terms I believe.
If they are not being followed then I'm all for blowing the whistle on that. This came out two years ago, is there more since? If so, what?

[$tevie]

Holy crap, I never noticed it was a two year old link. So the Republicans had plenty of time to investigate this by now. Gee, I wonder why a bunch of politicians didn't go after after this Free Coffee Off The Record scandal the minute they heard about it?

[August West]

Wow. There's a lot of denial and "that's not possible" going on here.

Had this been the administration of GW Bush, most of you would be going ballistic.

But I guess this kind of narrow-minded thinking is to be expected here.

There's some marvelous insight. Have you ever considered that all your repeated nuggets about how "most of you would be," coincidentally, confirm your prejudices ?

[$tevie]

I am always baffled at people who read this forum every day and then gripe about how "everyone" is so this, that, or the other thing. There's only like a quadrillion internet forums -- go find one you can enjoy if this one is so distasteful to you.

[Dennis S]

"Had this been the administration of GW Bush, most of you would be going ballistic."

Back during the administration of GW Bush most of us had plenty more important things to occupy our outrage.

[Mac-A-Matic]

$tevie wrote:
I am always baffled at people who read this forum every day and then gripe about how "everyone" is so this, that, or the other thing. There's only like a quadrillion internet forums -- go find one you can enjoy if this one is so distasteful to you.

Many guns in America that won't go away, go find a nation with extremely restrictive gun laws that you can enjoy since this nation is so distasteful to you.

[Mac-A-Matic]

Dennis S wrote:
"Had this been the administration of GW Bush, most of you would be going ballistic."

Back during the administration of GW Bush most of us had plenty more important things to occupy our outrage.

During the Bush administration most of you were outraged.

[Mac-A-Matic]

August West wrote:
There's some marvelous insight. Have you ever considered that all your repeated nuggets about how "most of you would be," coincidentally, confirm your prejudices ?

You're such a Tea Party type, August.