Visitor logs show Bush meetings with super-lobbyist, religious right

Visitor logs show Bush meetings with super-lobbyist, religious right

rawstory.com

The visitor logs also reveal almost 200 visits to the Bush White House by leaders of the religious right, 35 of which were visits with President Bush himself. The visitors included such familiar names as James Dobson, Gary Bauer, the late Jerry Falwell, and leaders of the Traditional Values Coalition, Concerned Women for America, the Family Research Council, and the American Family Association.

(visit the link for the full news article)

I think we all knew that the Religious Right wing had the ear of the president Bush. I wonder how much of an influence they played in the Invasion of the ME. In fact a modern day extenuation of the Crusades. I have always thought that Christendom was just waiting for another opportunity to start the Crusades up again via the PNAC.

rawstory.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

They're no different than any other lobbyists in my opinion. Freedom of speech and religion being what they are, if we're going to allow lobbyists to meet with government officials in this manner, Christian leaders have as much right to a direct hearing with the president as any other group does.

That said, the whole practice of lobbying needs to be banned.

Meanwhile in the present...the here and now....

www.msnbc.msn.com...

The Obama administration says it will release names of most visitors to the White House, starting at the end of this year. Information on visitors in the first eight months of his administration will remain secret — though officials say they will consider narrow and specific requests.

Obama likes keeping secrets....doesn't he?

Originally posted by vor78
That said, the whole practice of lobbying needs to be banned.

I agree but both of us know that's not gonna happen. That being said,
all this talk about Obama going socialist is just false rhetoric.

It's the corporations that have the final say on policy. A corpratracy if you will. So when I hear this Socialist rant, it's just seems stupid and empty as how can a country owned and operated by big business and special intrest be socialist?

[edit on 5-9-2009 by whaaa]

reply to post by whaaa


I don't think the two (socialism and corporations) are mutually exclusive by any means. There are plenty of CEOs and other business executives out there who are far-left lefties, for instance. Their philosophy seems to generally be 'socialism for thee, but not for me.' If they've got the ear of government officials, they can get the loopholes necessary to forward a socialist agenda to 'help' the poor working class sods while also ensuring they retain their own personal fortunes.





[edit on 5-9-2009 by vor78]

Originally posted by RRconservative
Meanwhile in the present...the here and now....

www.msnbc.msn.com...

The Obama administration says it will release names of most visitors to the White House, starting at the end of this year. Information on visitors in the first eight months of his administration will remain secret — though officials say they will consider narrow and specific requests.

Obama likes keeping secrets....doesn't he?

We don't usually agree on much but this one we do.

Nothing but total transparency in government from all sides will allow a Republic/Democracy to flourish. Other wise it's just empty lies and BS.

Whitehouse website

Visitor log

I saw one with Obama and clicked it. I saw very few names for his 8 months.

Is this the whole list? I don't even see George Clooney's name on it and I know he visited Obama about Sudan. It can't be a secret because it was in the papers.

EDIT- As to the question above, this list only corresponds with what CREW asked for. Guess rest of list coming later.

Furthermore, does he get to make the decision who was National interest for Bush?



[edit on 5-9-2009 by jam321]

The Republican strategy of moving to the religious right for a boost was ironically one of the worst they could have ever undertaken.

BY the nature of their conservative bent they implicitly undercut the 'original' values of the Republican 'premise' - less federal power over states and people.

The religious right want MORE.

The Democratic wing of the same party seized the opportunity to rattle the fractured foundation.

The secret meetings are meant to stay that way. Why? To keep the public in a constant state of apprehension. It's an important factor in the globalist strategy to weaken the American resolve to be ONE people - which has been, and still is, the single threat to the globalists.

Americans have no single cultural standard, so we can't be manipulated as easily as those nation states with a single form, like the more ideologically indoctrinated of our neighbors.

We need to accept that for the moment, and until the judiciary and or legislators (our so-called 'checks and balances') address it, we will not be allowed to know, and thus judge, the company our leaders keep until after it makes no difference that we know.

Anybody else noticing the increasing usage of Bush administration 'news' lately by the Obama pundits to try to divert attention away from their idol?

What is on the horizon that they are being told to divert attention away from?

Originally posted by whaaa

Originally posted by RRconservative
Meanwhile in the present...the here and now....

www.msnbc.msn.com...

The Obama administration says it will release names of most visitors to the White House, starting at the end of this year. Information on visitors in the first eight months of his administration will remain secret — though officials say they will consider narrow and specific requests.

Obama likes keeping secrets....doesn't he?

We don't usually agree on much but this one we do.

Nothing but total transparency in government from all sides will allow a Republic/Democracy to flourish. Other wise it's just empty lies and BS.

But then how far do you take this?

I agree that transparency absolutely has to be brought back into leadership, but there are certain security issues to consider too.

Unfortunately, governments now treat their own people as an enemy to keep secrets from. America especially is able to put absolutely anything under the banner of "national security" in one way or another.
Just look at Obama deciding not to release CIA info after all, he used the excuse that it could damage national security.
How exactly? It's already known about.

reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II


Do you really think he released the visitor log because of his transparency promise?

If it was due to transparency he would have never fought the release in the first place.

Originally posted by Ferris.Bueller.II
Anybody else noticing the increasing usage of Bush administration 'news' lately by the Obama pundits to try to divert attention away from their idol?

What is on the horizon that they are being told to divert attention away from?

Divert attention? Just now the absolute corruption and control of the populace is coming out about the neo cons and their fascist agenda. Should we just ignore it?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Don't let your ideology get in the way of common sense.

[edit on 5-9-2009 by whaaa]

reply to post by whaaa


Then where's Obama's WH visitor logs?

His spinners are only releasing the info they want to release to hopefully provide a pundit sponsored diversion to events planned on the horizon.

The problem with these articles is they select a section and point it out. You don't know how many people of other sects had come to visit him.

Actually I have no problem with the President meeting with any group he deems fit; my problem is with the secret meetings of congressmen and Reps having lunch and playing golf or Bohemium Grove BS. with the cooperate interest, lobbiest when secret promises are made and money changes hands. No transparency as the plebes are excluded.

That's called corruption and if this Union is to stand; it needs to stop.

I saw one with Obama and clicked it. I saw very few names for his 8 months.

Probably why I constantly hear people yelping in the news about how they haven't been invited to the white house.

I really don't understand the hoopla about the logs. I do believe they have names to protect, and I don't blame them. You don't know what the visits are about, you don't know what transpired. Who cares?