Chris Dodd Breaking Promise Not To Become A Lobbyist Just Weeks After Leaving Senate; Joining MPAA As Top Lobbyist

from the ah,-the-lies-of-politicians-and-hollywood dept

One of the worst kept secrets in DC and Hollywood over the last month or so is the news that former Connecticut Senator and failed Presidential candidate Chris Dodd is set to become the MPAA's new boss (salary: $1.2 million per year). This came after a failed attempt to get former Senator (and failed presidential candidate) Bob Kerrey to take the role last year.

Assuming Dodd takes the role, he's already proving himself to be perfect for a Hollywood job, because it makes him a blatant liar. Last summer, Dodd insisted that he would not become a lobbyist. He made this abundantly clear. When asked what he would do, he was explicit: "No lobbying, no lobbying." Yeah, apparently a million dollar plus salary makes you a liar barely a month after leaving the job. Of course, technically, Dodd is also barred from becoming a lobbyist for two years after leaving the Senate, but there's a kind of *wink, wink, nudge, nudge* trick that Dodd and others use to technically claim they're not lobbyists while merely running one of the bigger and most high profile lobbying organizations around.

Of course, it'll also be interesting to see if Dodd sells his soul and changes some of his professed principles. For example, he was a big supporter of "net neutrality." But the MPAA has come out against net neutrality, claiming it would hamper its efforts to "fight piracy." He was also against ISP data retention, which the MPAA has supported (again as a way to fight piracy). On copyright he was somewhat non-committal, but did talk about how fair use rights are important. I imagine that will disappear once he takes the role formerly filled by Jack Valenti -- the man who once declared that fair use doesn't exist.

Anyway, I guess it shouldn't surprise us that a politician lied and went back on his basic principles in favor of a huge check from industry. It happens all the time. The real question is why anyone would take Chris Dodd seriously in this role going forward after proving that he's in it for nothing more than the check.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 7:42am

    "Of course, it'll also be interesting to see if Dodd sells his soul and changes some of his professed principles...."

    Principles aren't something they believe in, merely something that affects how much money they can make. If going against princples makes you more money, then bye-bye principles.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    ltlw0lf (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 7:48am

    Assuming Dodd takes the role, he's already proving himself to be perfect for a Hollywood job, because it makes him a blatant liar.

    He is a politician. Frankly, I would have been more surprised if he had actually kept his promise. As the old adage says, "How can you tell a politician is lying? Their mouth is moving."

    I have yet to meet a politician (I've met quite a few) who wasn't a two-faced liar. Sure, they will offer you the world to get elected, but then they start breaking every promise they made (though, I think in some cases they honestly made a promise through naivety they eventually couldn't keep, I think this is the exception, not the rule.) I always love hearing "we'll look into that" from a politician...that essentially means "we don't care, but we have to say something to make you feel like we do."

    Knowing this, I never vote for a politician based on what they say...I always use their record of action to decide whether to vote for them or not. Not that that makes a difference though, as the last election no one I voted for was elected because a majority of those in my state listen to what the politician says and not what they do, and then they get upset when the politician gets into office and fails to do what they said.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Yogi, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 7:54am

      Re:

      I don't understand why more people don't vote according to record.

      That would also do away with all the ridiculous campaigning: no more campaigns, just show us your record - what you voted for and against, laws you proposed or opposed, tax money you saved or wasted.

      The election process could be so simple and rational. If only people were...

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Dark Helmet (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 8:07am

        Re: Re:

        "That would also do away with all the ridiculous campaigning: no more campaigns, just show us your record - what you voted for and against, laws you proposed or opposed, tax money you saved or wasted."

        Why do you think so many Governors get elected President compared to Senators? The whole reason Obama was in such a rush to run when he did was because he was relatively without a voting record. He could claim whatever he wanted and there was an insufficient sample size to confirm or rebuke him.

        W had the same deal, and Clinton, and Reagan. It's a strategy, if you want to be President, to NOT have a federal voting record....

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 8:40am

          Re: Re: Re:

          "That would also do away with all the ridiculous campaigning: no more campaigns, just show us your record - what you voted for and against, laws you proposed or opposed, tax money you saved or wasted."


          The politicians passed a law that said you can't do that before an election.

          McCain/Finegold we got rid of the second now we need to get rid of the first.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Greevar (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 8:35am

      More power to you.

      Do you use sites like this?

      http://www.votesmart.org/

      I agree. Actions speak much louder than words and that's how you figure out who will represent you faithfully.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      gorehound (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 6:05pm

      Re:

      another lying politician.they are all lyers it seems.to work in washington means you must give in to the dark force.

      MPAA Go To The Hell You Deserve !!!!

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    fogbugzd (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 7:54am

    Maybe...

    Maybe Dodd will reform the MPAA. He will remain true to the ideas he expressed in the Senate and convince the MPAA that they need to abandon their obsession with piracy and concern themselves with other issues that desperately need attention if they are to survive.

    Dang. I'm having those fantasies again. Now I have to call the doctor and have him increase my medications.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Nina Paley (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 8:03am

    not just the check

    I guess it shouldn't surprise us that a politician lied and went back on his basic principles in favor of a huge check from industry.

    I'm sure he did it for more than the check. There's also the status. Repping the MPAA means lots of schmoozing and photo ops with movie stars. I'm told politicians love that, even when they're not being paid directly.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Spaceman Spiff (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 8:05am

    Liars and politicians

    All politicians are liars. So, we should be surprised by this turn of events? I have always said that lawyers become politicians so they can write laws that only they know the loopholes for, so when they "retire" from politics, they have an automatic expertise to gain income from helping companies exploit the loopholes they themselves wrote into the laws...
    Quod erat faciendum

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Ron (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 8:05am

    Pre-requisite ...

    ... for a politician, or a lobbyist: the ability, nay, the predisposition, to lie.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 8:08am

    Of course by Masnick's logic no politician should get a job for at least two years after he leaves office, because then he'd be a "lobbyist".

    You're so paranoid about your precious piracy being addressed by Congress and law enforcement that you throw these public tantrums that make you look like a 4 year old girl. You're pathetic.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Michael, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 8:14am

      Re:

      No.

      By the logic we have here, a politician should not, when asked what he will do after leaving office, say "No lobbying, no lobbying." and then take a position running a major lobbying entity.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Scote, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 8:15am

      Re:

      "Of course by Masnick's logic no politician should get a job for at least two years after he leaves office, because then he'd be a "lobbyist"."


      And why would you say that? The MPAA is the lobbying group for the major players in the motion picture industry. Not really representative of all jobs in the US. I guess your argument isn't a genuine one.

      (Sorry, sometimes I can't help feeding the trolls.)

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 8:21am

        Re: Re:

        Interesting. So a pure lobbying group decides how movies are rated in this country? Gotcha.

        You're still not explaining why Masnick is being such a baby about it. What is he afraid of?

        We all know.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 8:24am

          Re: Re: Re:

          The War on Piracy has begun!

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Not an electronic Rodent, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 9:19am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            The War on Piracy has begun!
            Excellent! Another sink-hole war like the "war on drugs" that the US can pour billions and billions of dollars of tax payers money into and get nowhere for decades..... a couple more of those and if the UK is smart enough to keep out of them we'll be able to afford to buy back the US..... oh, wait that doesn't work out too well either way really..

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Mike Masnick (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 10:02am

          Re: Re: Re:

          Interesting. So a pure lobbying group decides how movies are rated in this country? Gotcha.

          Yes, actually. The only reason they rate movies is because the government was putting pressure on Hollywood to make movies more family friendly and were getting upset about sex and violence on screen. The MPAA's creation of the rating system was solely a lobbying move, to avoid having new laws passed against Hollywood.

          Surely, it helps to understand history before spewing nonsense.

          The MPAA is a lobbying organization, top to bottom.

          You're still not explaining why Masnick is being such a baby about it. What is he afraid of?


          I'm sorry, but can you explain how pointing out a politicians lies is "being a baby"?

          It seems to me that sitting around while your band fails, while you advise it to do nothing to adapt other than to cry to the government for help, seems a hell of a lot more babyish.

          In the meantime, when you grow up and want to actually learn how to succeed, give us a call. I'm still waiting. It's kind of sad to watch you want to fail like this.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Anonymous, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 10:49am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            What band is that, Masnick? LOL

            And stories of your success with bands are all over the web, right?

            Oh wait, no they're not.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              icon
              Marcus Carab (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 11:00am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              What band is that, Masnick? LOL

              And stories of your success with bands are all over the web, right?


              So wait, which is it? You don't work with bands at all, or you are better at it than Mike? Choose your rebuttal, man! Don't just throw 'em all and see what sticks! (that's why the floor is so messy around here...)

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              icon
              Mike Masnick (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 11:12am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              I asked you a question. Why won't you answer it? How is pointing out a politician lobbying "babyish"?

              And, bonus question, isn't complaining to the gov't about how you can't figure out how to adapt to a changing marketplace a lot more babyish?

              What band is that, Masnick? LOL


              You told us your band was failing.

              And stories of your success with bands are all over the web, right?


              There are plenty of success stories, yes. Rather than rushing to insult me, perhaps you should look around you.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                identicon
                Anonymous, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 11:47am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                You made some backward comparison of how movie ratings came into being to try and say the MPAA is a pure lobbying group. Every industry group looks out for their members, and in a myriad of ways; they certainly are not exclusively lobbying groups. That's just more of your silly pirate propaganda.

                And the current ratings system came about in 1966 because Jack Valenti realized the previous self-imposed code the movie industry used since 1930 was out of date. It had NOTHING to do with "lobbying". You're so full of bs that it is mind boggling.

                There are plenty of success stories, yes. Rather than rushing to insult me, perhaps you should look around you.

                I've looked everywhere on the web. No one says you're a success other than you and your merry band of pirate half-wits here.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                •  
                  identicon
                  Anonymous Coward, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 11:52am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  Wait, if he's so unsuccessful then why are you here?

                   

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                •  
                  icon
                  Marcus Carab (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 12:11pm

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  So now, having been called out on the band thing, you are just going to ignore it as if it were never said?

                  Your desperation is getting transparent...

                   

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  •  
                    identicon
                    Anonymous, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 12:29pm

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                    Called out on the band thing???

                    I never said "my band was failing". ??? That's just another lie that Masnick threw out there. You see, he does that all the time.

                    Or at least most people see that. It's difficult for you Marcus, because your face is constantly planted somewhere else...

                     

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                    •  
                      icon
                      Marcus Carab (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 1:24pm

                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                      Actually I just mean at first it seemed like you were denying anything to do with a band, now you are ignoring it. I am kind of curious what exactly your role in the music industry is.

                       

                      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                    •  
                      identicon
                      Anonymous Coward, Feb 23rd, 2011 @ 6:59am

                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                      No, Mike did not just throw the "band" thing out there.

                      You were screaming and ranting about it not so long ago, all the while failing to realise you were damning your own argument. Too funny. You really couldn't see it.

                      When Mike pointed out how you were contradicting your whole argument in his favour, you suddenly shut up and ran, and haven't mentioned it since.

                      Now you're pretending it never happened.

                      You have made yourself into a total joke on this site.

                       

                      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 10:42am

          Re: Re: Re:

          There are thousands other professions Dodd could go into, you explain why he broke his promise and took a job as a lobbyist.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Not an electronic Rodent, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 8:15am

      Re:

      Surely you've run out of puppies by now? Mike Masnick can't be that heavy-footed aroudn them can he?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Kaden (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 8:17am

      Re:

      Words you don't appear to know the meaning of:

      Logic
      Lobbyist
      Paranoid
      Piracy
      Tantrum
      Pathetic

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 8:22am

      Re:

      Nice try, Chris Dodd.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 8:37am

      Re:

      I'm starting a new sport.

      I will make it my mission to make your ridiculous posts become the funniest of the week (funny +1 submitted). My immediate goal will be to make a little "lol" appear in your post (thus, highlighting how dumb it was), but the real prize would be to make it appear in the top 4 of the week.

      The goal is to highlight the fact that you generally have nothing useful to say other than "Masn1k is t3h king of t3h P1rat3s!!11111oneone" and insulting pretty much everyone that opposes you (freetard is a popular insult) without resorting to insults or feeding you.

      Let's see how it plays out. Perhaps you will win at something in life for once (oops, that one slipped by...).

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Bruce Ediger (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 2:30pm

        Re: Re:

        I formally join you in this Sacred Quest.

        I usually just mark any of the Anonymous Coward with good grammar's posts as "report", but I will henceforth mark them as "funny".

        I'm still going to "report" any posts using the word "freetard" as an insult, however.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Berenerd (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 11:38am

      Re:

      And of course by your logic, big business should just put the government on their payroll and answer to noone.

      The earth would implode (or explode depending on who wins the power struggle) within 5 years.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Bruce Ediger (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 2:28pm

      Re:

      Of course by Masnick's logic no politician should get a job for at least two years after he leaves office, because then he'd be a "lobbyist".

      Wait, what's your opinion about "no-compete" contracts?

      And more to the point, why do you have a problem with the Law of the Land, what our Representatives Enacted into Law as the Will of the People? Are you some kind of Anarchist?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Miff (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 8:10am

    I'm surprised none of those politicians caught lying in their campaigns have been prosecuted for it yet. Isn't false advertising a crime?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Matthew (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 8:18am

    Maybe...

    Maybe this is a sign that the MPAA is turning over a new leaf. That they have seen the error of their ways and they want to try to find a way of doing business that actually works, instead of just throwing away money and alienating their customers.

    lol...yeah, right.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Dark Helmet (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 8:20am

    Correction?

    "Of course, technically, Dodd is also barred from becoming a lobbyist for two years after leaving the Senate"

    I'm pretty sure the ban is only a single year....

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Josef Anvil (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 8:22am

    Ummmm Dodd did what you told him to do Mike

    Mike,

    I think Dodd reads TechDIrt. He found some loyal fans in the MPAA. So he connected with his fans and gave them a reason to buy. $1.2 million per year is just showing you that your formula works.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    theskyrider, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 8:23am

    show me a

    politician that keeps a promise and I'll show you a news(blog)worthy item.

    Sigh.

    Anyways, not an attempted slam on the author, just a little wiped out by all the f'in lying politician stories.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 8:31am

    Umm, when did the MPAA become a lobby only group?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Marcus Carab (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 8:56am

      Re:

      you can argue that it is not "lobby only" all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that it is a massive lobby group. For someone who said "no lobbying" twice upon being asked about his plans, it is pretty damn hypocritical.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 9:09am

        Re: Re:

        No, it's an industry group that may have lobbyists on the payroll. Dodd isn't hired as a lobbyist, is he? Nope. He is hired to run an association, that may have lobbyists working for it.

        If he went to work as a lobbyist for the group, that might be different. This isn't the same thing. Please Marcus, think past the end of Mike's nose.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 9:13am

          Re: Re: Re:

          No, it's an industry group that may have lobbyists on the payroll. Dodd isn't hired as a lobbyist, is he? Nope. He is hired to run an association, that may have lobbyists working for it.

          Part of his job is to direct lobbying efforts. That makes him a lobbyist in my book.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Mike Masnick (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 9:59am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Part of his job is to direct lobbying efforts. That makes him a lobbyist in my book.


            Not only that, but the *key* priorities of the MPAA -- as stated in the very article linked above -- are entirely based on lobbying. Calling it just an organization that also does some lobbying is false. It's a lobbying organization, top to bottom.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          freak (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 9:27am

          Re: Re: Re:

          I am thinking past mike's nose. I'm also thinking past the bullshit of corporations.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Marcus Carab (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 9:59am

          Re: Re: Re:

          You are playing semantics.

          Are you denying that the MPAA includes an incredibly powerful lobbying force?

          Are you denying that the person in charge of an organization with an incredibly powerful lobbying force has anything to do with that force?

          Or are you just denying that being in charge of a tonne of lobbyists counts as being a lobbyist?

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Anonymous Coward, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 1:28pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Ummm, the tobacco, the booze, the car, the music, the airline, the import export, and even the orange juice producers all have trade and industry groups, and part of the work of those groups is to lobby.

            Each of those groups has lobbyists. They also have receptionists and people working in the mail room. None of us assume for a second that the president of the group is a receptionist or works the mail room.

            It is one part of what the MPAA does. Even by Mike's own admission, they have panels in the area of anti-piracy (Mike is on a real anti-MPAA run today, they must have peed in his cornflakes this morning). There are more things than that going on.

            Mike is just being nasty, attacking where none is merited. I have a feeling he is worried that this move will make the MPAA group overall stronger, than thus upset his pro-piracy business models.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              identicon
              Anonymous Coward, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 2:55pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              Upsetting a pro-piracy business model is impossible. Can. Not. Be. Done.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              icon
              Marcus Carab (profile), Feb 23rd, 2011 @ 6:32am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              Haha, okay, so you are saying that the MPAA is no more a lobbying organization than it is a mailroom? That's quite the naive fantasy world you are living in. I'm a little surprised that even you could be that oblivious.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 8:39am

    Reminds me of a joke I once heard:
    Guy walks into a club and sees an incredibly beautiful woman sitting at the bar. He sits down next to her and says "You are incredibly beautiful and I am an extremely rich man, Will you make love to for one million dollars?" The Woman's Eyes light up and she says "Sure!" The man says "Well…Will you make love to me for one hundred dollars" The woman got angry and said "What kind of girl do you think I am?" The man replied "We already know what kind of girl you are, now we are negotiating".

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    TDR, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 9:19am

    And you, AC29, stop splitting hairs that don't exist. The MPAA is corrupt beyond redemption, and the only useful thing it can do now is collapse.

    DISCLAIMER
    Anonymous: "I am a lying industry shill with no sense of morality or even the pretext of a point. I fear change like nothing else and cannot comprehend living without extorting as much as I can from my clients and blaming the 'losses' on a nonexistent problem. I do not know how to address an argument or even present one. I just flame because I know I'm wrong and unable to prove a single thing I've said, and I'm terrified to admit it."

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 9:21pm

      Re:

      If you are going to try to talk down to someone, the least you can do is figure out how to click the "reply to" button.

      And no, I am not an industry shill. I don't work for the MPAA or RIAA, nor do I make movies, nor do I make music.

      The rest of your post is meaningless horse manure.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        techflaws.org (profile), Feb 23rd, 2011 @ 1:53am

        Re: Re:

        As was your failed destinction trying to explain away whay a lobyying group is no lobbying group. Try again.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Feb 23rd, 2011 @ 8:28am

        Re: Re:

        They why do you constantly repeat every single piece of blatant bullshit from them?

        Why do you never, ever, not once, think or admit they have done anything wrong, ever?

        It's intriguing. Maybe you're a politician, simply trying to defend the outrageous racketeering the government has ALWAYS been involved in? Or are you a part of government "Public Relations"?

        Rhetorical questions since, either way, you're completely full of shit pal.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    theangryintern (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 9:39am

    Just proves that the RIAA and MPAA realla are a mafia....they made him an offer he couldn't refuse. Money talks, bullshit walks.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 10:39am

    People in power are money/politics whores. Its as simple as that. Every word out of their mouths have brown stained meaning.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Thomas (profile), Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 12:14pm

    we get it..

    politicians are corrupt. Politicians sell their souls just to get into office, assuming that they even have souls in the first place. They take enormous amounts of money while in office and vote the way they are bribed, and now they take up cushy jobs from the companies that paid them while in office. Nothing new here. If a senator votes in the MPAA's favor while in office and then leaves office and becomes a puppet for the MPAA, is that simply payment for votes already made?

    We castigate other countries where politicians take money openly, but here it's almost as bad.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    MM, Feb 22nd, 2011 @ 9:23pm

    Dodd needs to be google boomed into the phase for flip flopping like Santorum was to you know....

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Rocky, Feb 24th, 2011 @ 12:31pm

    GooD StuFF

    EveryBody Needs JESUS toGoto Heaven,,,HeLL is Too HOT to HandLe ,,,So ...ConFess to GOD our FATHER that you are a sinner, ask JESUS to wash away your sins with HIS Precious BLood that HE Shed on Calvary's Cross for you,then ask JESUS to Come into your Heart and Life as your SAVIOR and LORD,and to HeLp you Live for HIM the Rest of your Life, and to take you to Heaven with Jesus When you die ! ! ! AMEN Thank YOU LORD ! ! ! Guide and Direct me Forever AMEN ! ! !

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Frank DeMartini, Mar 10th, 2011 @ 4:23pm

    Chris Dodd Not the Right Choice

    I have written a very in depth article about this from a Conservative perspective on my web site "A Hollywood Republican." You can find it at: http://www.hollywoodrepublican.net/?p=3744

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This