Newt’s flaw not so fatal

Oops, I was wrong in my previous post. 

Since yesterday (Feb 8) and my post “Newt’s Fatal Flaw”) I looked for a way out of his apparent vulnerability to a trumped-up accusation of illegal lobbying.  I found one in an unlikely place – The New York Times!  It appears he’s probably not within the definition of illegal lobbyist.  Here’s the article:

Legal tests on lobbying

Here’s the definition of a lobbyist who must be registered, taken directly from the Office of the Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives website: 

Lobbyist:  Any individual (1) who is either employed or retained by a client for financial or other compensation (2) whose services include more than one lobbying contact; and (3) whose lobbying activities constitute 20 percent or more of his or her services’ time on behalf of that client during any three-month period.

The key here: no single client who takes up more than 20% of his time — so, 10 clients, at 10% each, wouldn’t require one to register.   A strange exemption, indeed.

I was puzzled – I knew Newt is smart, the smartest politician on our planet, and I was certain he would be aware of the possibility of an ambush.  I couldn’t understand why he was still in the race, knowing such a possibility was out there.  I thought: he’s holding false hope that he can argue his way through this problem if it comes up. 

I hate to be wrong, but in this case I’m glad Newt isn’t really in dangerI admit, when I heard D’Amato explain what could happen, I was hooked by the opinion of someone I believed to be an authority on lobbying – a former senator.  Gullibility is a symptom of a weak mind, and I often fall victim to it. One needs to be cynical in politics. I freely admit my error, but I’m glad there’s still hope for Newt.  However, with the rise of Santorum, Newt faces a steep uphill battle. 

This entry was posted in Presidential Elections and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Newt’s flaw not so fatal

  1. The Shrink says:

    Tempest in a teacup.

    Doubted the voters would become too upset about the Fanny issue anyway.
    The average voter is becoming so disgusted with the present administration,
    another Clinton could get collective voter representation.

    Romney has a tiger by the tail with religion. Voters are ticked about the Obama Healthcare
    requiring the Catholic Hospitals to offer contraceptive information and counseling but on the other hand, voters that have verbalized to me, seem very cautious of a definitive Mormon entering the presidential office because of fears around his adherence to the Mormon tenents. This issue could either hurt or help Gingrich at the polls but wouldn’t matter one iota to the Republican Party Leaders who will have the last word on offering the candidacy, I suspect.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s