Listening to the fulsome praise for anybody that pretends to be Reaganesque, I think the diehard republican voter will overlook a wart or two and decide to support Fred. Those repub voters are so programmed to fall under the spell of any macho patriarchal-sounding leader, that flipflops and recent conversions, even guys with a lot of baggage like Giuliani, are okay. And Fred is an actor, so he can be convincing if he just maintains the Reagan-mask long enough.

Although if Thompson claims to have rendered services in 1991 and received compensation for those services--and he now is asserting that he did NOT render those services, but was still paid he could have some liability. 

I don't know what the statute of limitations are for lobbying fees that run through DC law firms, but this could get ugly if someone really wanted to press the matter. 

If said clearly, frequently, and loudly enough....it just might stick!

Harris Miller comes to mind as a case in point as a lobbyist without a soul. 

Even though I may disagree with people on political views (regarding a variety of issues) I have personal respect for them as individuals and accept that we often agree to disagree.

In the case of lobbyists, their only moral guide is money.  They genuinely discust me.  They will advocate for their clients no matter their personal beliefs.

Lawyers do the same thing, however I understand and support what they do because it is part of our legal system - a necessity. 

But that argument doesn't hold water for lobbyists.  It is shameful that our political system is so influenced by people who care only about making money, not about the future of our nation. 

For instance, lobbyists for workers' rights, human rights, womens' rights, the environment, GLBT equality, stem cell resarch, etc?  I don't agree that they "have no souls;" quite the contrary, I am very glad that they're doing what they're doing. 

First of all, the good lobbyists will never win in a race against billion dollar corporations.  There are four healthcare industry lobbyists for every member of Congress. 

Traditional political action such as participation in public hearings, public forums, activism, and so forth should be adequate.

It isn't adequate - but the reason is because the system is broken.  Fix the system and lobbyists should not be needed.

But right now, it's not fixed.  I want someone who will fight the corporations and stand up for workers and the environment.

"But right now, it's not fixed.  I want someone who will fight the corporations and stand up for workers and the environment."

We need more Webbs, Testers, and the like.  Maybe strong and honest leaders will change things.

Unless they genuinely believe in what they are advocating, I find their behavior reprehensible.

Money corrupts the process.  I can't think of a good reason that we need to hire someone to represent our interests in Washington.  Our representatives should be actively seeking input from constituents - not on junkets funded by corporations.

If you really want to be "progressive" seek true representation of the people.  Seek campaign finance reforms.  Seek ethics reforms.  Enough of this corporate controlled government.

But for now, given the way the system is, I'm very happy that we've got people up on the Hill fighting for the environment, education, labor, etc. 

someone is lobbying for the corporations, I'd like to know someone is lobbying for labor, the environment, etc.  If you haven't already the latest Washingtonian, there's an article about lobbying Hired Guns: The city's 50 top lobbyist, that will make you ill and angry.