< .comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Massachusetts Liberal

Observations on politics, the media and life in Massachusetts and beyond from the left side of the road.

Monday, November 16, 2009

Two faces of Pags

Mike Capuano has an anger management problem. Steve Pagliuca has a consistency problem. One can be fixed. The other? I'm not so sure.
“Steve appreciates the role lobbyists play in educating policy makers on the impact of legislation under consideration,’’ his press aide Will Keyser said. “At the same time, he believes it is wrong for lobbyists and special interest PACs to be a critical source of campaign funding for members of Congress.’’
I'm having a hard time seeing the same difference Money Pags sees between cash provided by lobbyist through election PACs to help a candidate and cash used to influence legislation. Both are stomach-churning examples of protected commercial speech -- and both have contributed mightily to the elimination of the buying of influence in America.

So tell me why it's OK for lobbyists to spend billions of dollars to get what they want in health care, climate change and financial regulation reform -- but it's wrong for them to contribute to candidates who can do their bidding in Congress and in legislatures?

Is it because Pags can purchase his own campaign exposure -- but the lobbyists who have worked for Bain Capital Partners have achieved the type of legislative gifts that has allowed Pagliuca to amass the private fortune he is spending on his campaign?

While Capuano needs to keep a tighter rein on his emotions (and stay away from baseball bats) he is consistent on the issues where Pagliuca is twisting himself into rhetorical knots.

Who's being more honest?

Labels: , , ,


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home