Charley Gibbons zinged Obama on the anti-lobbyist bill he wrote - meaning

[kelligesq]

it said and did nothing. And Edwards joined in with yeah the lobbyists cant take them out to lunch anymore - unless they eat standing up -
Obama looked very deflated after that

[kurth]

1. But that was a huge CHANGE - making people stand up

to eat.

[Thrill]

2. uh no he didn't

went ahead and explained the Bill.

[papau]

7. OK - as you heard an explanation of the bill - could you say how it reduced lobbyist

influence, decreased the appearance of or chance for bribes, or brought more exposure to the activities of lobbyists - beyond entertainment reporting of monies spent on you if you sat down during activity someone else is paying for you to enjoy.

[trumad]

3. And then Hill got Edwards about the Paitents Bill of Rights

that Bush didn't sign.

[HeraldSquare212]

4. I'll take incremental change

over more of the same. He got what he could get, and it has had an impact. Not 100%, but it's had an impact.

[TheDonkey]

5. it was a phoney "gotcha" call

lobbyist being able to give food only if you are standing is 100 times different than sitting down. It is the difference of fining someone for passing out candy versus a meal worth more than 100 dollars.

[msongs]

9. yeah the phoney was gotcha'd alright nt

[BeyondGeography]

6. Gibbons came off as very cynical, not just there

but later in the debate when he mocked the eternal quest for change in Washington. That's exactly the kind of attitude that Obama is using to generate support for his agenda and it's working. Watch Obama use this on the stump as an example of what needs to change.

[DURHAM D]

8. I thought Obama was caught by surprise.

In other words, he didn't even know the provisions of his own bill that he was touting. Total deer in the headlights moment.