Do They Never Learn?

As reported by TPM Muckraker, the Democratic leadership is leaning on lobbyists to ante up more money in the Democrats' attempt to retake the House, the Senate, or both:

"With control of the House within reach for the first time in more than a decade, Democratic lobbyists say they’re feeling unusually intense pressure from House Democratic leaders to open their wallets and help their party close the deal.

"But Democratic lobbyists are rising to the challenge, a dozen Democratic consultants said, upping their personal contributions and making the case to their corporate clients that they need to pony up as well.

"Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.) 'has been pretty blunt with people,' one Democratic lobbyist said. “Now, people downtown are finally paying attention and believing.”

"“There’s been a significant increase in House Democratic fundraising activity. Folks are really working it hard,” said another well-placed Democratic lobbyist." (Roll Call, sub. req.)

Now, maybe I'm just too pre-television, but, fer chrissakes, repeating the mistakes of the Repugs is a sure sign that a) the voters will have their opinions confirmed that there's no difference in the two major parties, and b) there will be enough squirmy deals made in the course of this power play that the Repugs will c) use them against Democrats in 2008, and d) will require Democrats to kiss the asses of the Dem lobbyists' corporate clients via helpful legislation, so much so that the voters' opinions as in a) deserve confirmation.

The Dems can't say they're a different breed of political dog if they're always following the Repugs around looking to scarf up the odd lobbyist vomit.

What this does is confirm the view that politics today has nothing to do with the little guy and his vote, and everything to do with big money. You'd think, after the last couple of years of watching (sometimes, admittedly, with great schadenfreude) the Repugs' little shell game come apart at the seams, the Dems would be much less inclined to give even the appearance of improper influence and be all for more openness in government.

But, you'd be wrong.