Tony Rezko Shares Corruption Secrets
By MIKE ROBINSON, AP
(Oct. 11) - Jailed political fundraiser Antoin "Tony" Rezko, the Chicago real estate developer who helped launch Barack Obama on his political career, is whispering secrets to federal prosecutors about corruption in Illinois and the political fallout could be explosive.
Democratic Gov. Rod Blagojevich, whose administration faces multiple federal investigations over how it handed out jobs and money with advice from Rezko, is considered the most vulnerable.
Rezko also was friendly with Obama — offering him a job when he finished law school, funding his earliest political campaigns and purchasing a lot next to his house. But based on the known facts, charges so far and testimony at Rezko's trial, there's no indication there'll be an October surprise that could hurt the Democratic presidential nominee — even though Rezko says prosecutors are pressing him for dirt about Obama.
"I think this strikes fear into the Blagojevich administration and the Statehouse Democrats but not into the Obama campaign," says state Sen. Kirk Dillard, R-Westmont, a John McCain delegate to the GOP convention but an old friend of Obama.
Rezko, 53, a real estate developer, was convicted in June of scheming to use his clout with the Blagojevich administration to squeeze $7 million in kickbacks out of a contractor and seven money management firms seeking to do business with the state.
Within two months, Rezko was seen in U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald's office, along with his attorneys.
There has been no official confirmation that Rezko is talking but his sentencing has been postponed indefinitely and both sides say they are going to "engage in discussions that could affect their sentencing postures.
"
"They never would have delayed the sentencing if he weren't talking — it's proof positive," said Jay Stewart, executive director of the Better Government Association of Chicago.
In addition, attorneys say federal investigators have been questioning Blagojevich contributions around the state using information that only Rezko could have supplied. Finally, courthouse personnel requesting anonymity because grand jury probes are secret said Rezko has been repeatedly brought from his cell to the U.S. attorney's office to talk to prosecutors.
Rezko could have a lot to tell. He has raised millions of dollars in campaign money for many Illinois politicians and according to federal prosecutors used his clout to control appointments to state boards.
Obama has sent to charity $159,000 that Rezko raised for his campaigns for the state legislature, the House and the Senate. Rezko raised nothing for Obama's White House run.
Obama's name came up in testimony at the trial four times, twice in connection with an obscure legislative memo, as a guest at a Rezko party and when defense attorney Joseph Duffy told jurors his client was a friend of the senator.
None of the witnesses accused the Democratic nominee for president of doing anything improper.
But questions concerning Obama's relationship with Rezko linger, particularly over Rezko's role in the purchase of the Obamas' home.
The two have known each other for years, starting when Rezko offered Obama a job after he graduated from Harvard Law School in 1991. Obama didn't take it, but a friendship developed.
The men talked politics frequently and occasionally dined together with their wives.
In 2005, the Obamas paid $1.65 million for their home near the University of Chicago. The sellers wanted a parcel they owned next door to sell on the same day, and Rezko's wife, Rita, was the buyer. At the request of the Obamas, Mrs. Rezko later sold them a 10-foot strip of land to enlarge their lot. They paid $104,500.
The deal took place while Rezko was under investigation and when details of the cozy relationship surfaced, Obama said it was a "bonehead" error to have asked for the additional land because it looked like he was getting a favor.
"I regret it," Obama said at the time. "I'm going to make sure that from this point on I don't even come close to the line.
"
McCain and vice running mate Sarah Palin have mentioned Rezko little if at all. But Republicans have aired a television ad focusing on Rezko. And McCain aides have repeatedly tweaked their opponent over the real estate deal in e-mails to reporters.
"We're delighted to have a debate on judgment with Barack Obama, who bought his million-dollar mansion in a shady deal with a convicted felon," McCain spokesman Brian Rogers said in August.
Blagojevich, meanwhile, got a black eye from the trial.
One witness testified that Blagojevich talked about hiring him for a major state job while his $25,000 donation to the governor's campaign fund was lying on the table.
Two attorneys testified that Blagojevich hinted that they could get lucrative state contracts if they raised money — possibly for a future White House campaign.
Obama's name has not surfaced in accounts of the investigation since the trial. But Rezko himself raised it in a letter to the judge months ago.
"Your Honor, the prosecutors have been overzealous in pursuing a crime that never happened," he wrote. "They are pressuring me to tell them the wrong things that I supposedly know about Gov. Blagojevich and Sen. Barack Obama.
"
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Friday, October 10, 2008
The Obama-Ayers Connection: Why We Should Care
EXCELLENT ARTICLE FROM FREEDOMVALUESRIGHTS.COM
I want to be very careful about what I am going to write. www.FreedomValuesRights.com was born with an intent to change the tone of political discussion in America. My intent is not to engage in red-meat, smear politics. We have enough of that in America. So be assured, that is not the intent of www.FreedomValuesRights.com in writing this entry.
Some people are asking, “Why should I be concerned about the Ayers, Obama connection?”
I think we should be concerned because there is a valid justification to be “reasonably concerned” about the Ayers, Obama connection. I’m not going to go into every detail of the situation here, because many have already covered this. My intent is to show why there is room for someone to be “reasonably concerned” about this situation.
We know Ayers is an unrepentant, domestic terrorist. He bombed government offices and doesn’t apologize for it. We know Obama started off his political career in his living room. Most know that Obama served with this guy on various causes and issues. It’s a proven fact that Obama even read and spoke positively about a book this guy wrote.
There are clear and undeniable political and social connections between these two men. So what does this mean? Does it mean Obama will listen to everything Ayers says? Does it mean Obama is for blowing up government offices? Does it mean Obama is a terrorist?
I don’t think it automatically means Obama loves terrorists and hates America. We can’t assume Obama believes everything this guy says, just because they served on some boards together. To reach those conclusions would do an injustice to reason and also to Obama. So you may be asking, “Then why should we be reasonably concerned about their connection?”
The office of President of The United States is one of the most important offices in the land. We must be careful about the person we elect to that place in government. Obama could hold this office.
It is fact that Ayers had the ear of Obama in the past. It is fact they served together. How can we be assured that this domestic terrorist won’t have Obama’s ear if Obama is elected to one of the most important offices in this land?
This is why we have cause to be “reasonably concerned” about the Obama, Ayers relationship. We don’t know for sure if Obama will listen to this guy. We don’t know for sure if Obama plans to keep a distance from him. There is just too much uncertainty.
The fact that a man like Ayers could have access to the highest office in the land, is justification to be “reasonably concerned” about Obama being elected. In the courts, reasonable doubt can keep a man from being convicted. Reasonable concern should at least make a voter think twice before voting for Obama.
Again the intent of www.FreedomValuesRights.com is not to smear Obama. I’m not saying Obama should be disqualified for all political offices and shunned out of existing in the public square. I’m just saying that reasonable concern exists that should make us all think twice about electing this guy to the highest office in the land.
A reasonable person can look at their connections and have valid justification to be reasonably concerned about Obama holding the highest office in The United States of America.
I want to be very careful about what I am going to write. www.FreedomValuesRights.com was born with an intent to change the tone of political discussion in America. My intent is not to engage in red-meat, smear politics. We have enough of that in America. So be assured, that is not the intent of www.FreedomValuesRights.com in writing this entry.
Some people are asking, “Why should I be concerned about the Ayers, Obama connection?”
I think we should be concerned because there is a valid justification to be “reasonably concerned” about the Ayers, Obama connection. I’m not going to go into every detail of the situation here, because many have already covered this. My intent is to show why there is room for someone to be “reasonably concerned” about this situation.
We know Ayers is an unrepentant, domestic terrorist. He bombed government offices and doesn’t apologize for it. We know Obama started off his political career in his living room. Most know that Obama served with this guy on various causes and issues. It’s a proven fact that Obama even read and spoke positively about a book this guy wrote.
There are clear and undeniable political and social connections between these two men. So what does this mean? Does it mean Obama will listen to everything Ayers says? Does it mean Obama is for blowing up government offices? Does it mean Obama is a terrorist?
I don’t think it automatically means Obama loves terrorists and hates America. We can’t assume Obama believes everything this guy says, just because they served on some boards together. To reach those conclusions would do an injustice to reason and also to Obama. So you may be asking, “Then why should we be reasonably concerned about their connection?”
The office of President of The United States is one of the most important offices in the land. We must be careful about the person we elect to that place in government. Obama could hold this office.
It is fact that Ayers had the ear of Obama in the past. It is fact they served together. How can we be assured that this domestic terrorist won’t have Obama’s ear if Obama is elected to one of the most important offices in this land?
This is why we have cause to be “reasonably concerned” about the Obama, Ayers relationship. We don’t know for sure if Obama will listen to this guy. We don’t know for sure if Obama plans to keep a distance from him. There is just too much uncertainty.
The fact that a man like Ayers could have access to the highest office in the land, is justification to be “reasonably concerned” about Obama being elected. In the courts, reasonable doubt can keep a man from being convicted. Reasonable concern should at least make a voter think twice before voting for Obama.
Again the intent of www.FreedomValuesRights.com is not to smear Obama. I’m not saying Obama should be disqualified for all political offices and shunned out of existing in the public square. I’m just saying that reasonable concern exists that should make us all think twice about electing this guy to the highest office in the land.
A reasonable person can look at their connections and have valid justification to be reasonably concerned about Obama holding the highest office in The United States of America.
THE GREAT OBAMA!!!
Obama's Magic
By Kimberley Strassel
WALL STREET JOURNAL
And now, America, we introduce the Great Obama! The world's most gifted political magician! A thing of wonder. A thing of awe. Just watch him defy politics, economics, even gravity! (And hold your applause until the end, please.
)
To kick off our show tonight, Mr. Obama will give 95% of American working families a tax cut, even though 40% of Americans today don't pay income taxes! How can our star enact such mathemagic? How can he "cut" zero? Abracadabra! It's called a "refundable tax credit." It involves the federal government taking money from those who do pay taxes, and writing checks to those who don't. Yes, yes, in the real world this is known as "welfare," but please try not to ruin the show.
For his next trick, the Great Obama will jumpstart the economy, and he'll do it by raising taxes on the very businesses that are today adrift in a financial tsunami! That will include all those among the top 1% of taxpayers who are in fact small-business owners, and the nation's biggest employers who currently pay some of the highest corporate tax rates in the developed world. Mr. Obama will, with a flick of his fingers, show them how to create more jobs with less money. It's simple, really. He has a wand.
Next up, Mr. Obama will re-regulate the economy, with no ill effects whatsoever! You may have heard that for the past 40 years most politicians believed deregulation was good for the U.S. economy. You might have even heard that much of today's financial mess tracks to loose money policy, or Fannie and Freddie excesses. Our magician will show the fault was instead with our failure to clamp down on innovation and risk-taking, and will fix this with new, all-encompassing rules.
Presto!
Did someone in the audience just shout "Sarbanes Oxley?" Usher, can you remove that man? Thank you. Mr. Obama will now demonstrate how he gives Americans the "choice" of a "voluntary" government health plan, designed in such a way as to crowd out the private market and eliminate all other choice! Don't worry people: You won't have to join, until you do. Mr. Obama will follow this with a demonstration of how his plan will differ from our failing Medicare program. Oops, sorry, folks. The Great Obama just reminded me it is time for an intermission. Maybe we'll get to that marvel later.
We're back now. And just watch the Great Obama perform a feat never yet managed in all history. He will create that enormous new government health program, spend billions to transform our energy economy, provide financial assistance to former Soviet satellites, invest in infrastructure, increase education spending, provide job training assistance, and give 95% of Americans a tax (ahem) cut -- all without raising the deficit a single penny! And he'll do it in the middle of a financial crisis.
And with falling tax revenues! Voila!
Moving along to a little ventriloquism. Study his mouth carefully, folks: It looks like he's saying "I'll stop the special interests," when in fact the words coming out are "Welcome to Washington, friends!" Wind and solar companies, ethanol makers, tort lawyers, unions, community organizers -- all are welcome to feed at the public trough and to request special favors. From now on "special interests" will only refer to universally despised, if utterly crucial, economic players. Say, oil companies.
Hocus Pocus!
And for tonight's finale, the Great Obama will uphold America's "moral" obligation to "stop genocide" by abandoning Iraq! While teleported to the region, he will simultaneously convince Iranian leaders to peacefully abandon their nuclear pursuits (even as he does not sit down with them), fix Afghanistan with a strategy that does not resemble the Iraqi surge, and (drumroll!) pull Osama bin Laden out of his hat!
Tada!
You can clap now. (Applause. Cheers.) We'd like to thank a few people in the audience. Namely, Republican presidential nominee John McCain, who has so admirably restrained himself from running up on stage to debunk any of these illusions and spoil everyone's fun.
We know he's in a bit of a box, having initially blamed today's financial crisis on corporate "greed," and thus made it that much harder to call for a corporate tax cut, or warn against excessive regulation. Still, there were some pretty big openings up here this evening, and he let them alone! We'd also like to thank Mr. McCain for keeping all the focus on himself these past weeks. It has helped the Great Obama to just get on with the show.
As for that show, we'd love to invite you all back for next week's performance, when the Great Obama will thrill with new, amazing exploits. He will respect your Second Amendment rights even as he regulates firearms! He will renegotiate Nafta, even as he supports free trade! He will.
By Kimberley Strassel
WALL STREET JOURNAL
And now, America, we introduce the Great Obama! The world's most gifted political magician! A thing of wonder. A thing of awe. Just watch him defy politics, economics, even gravity! (And hold your applause until the end, please.
)
To kick off our show tonight, Mr. Obama will give 95% of American working families a tax cut, even though 40% of Americans today don't pay income taxes! How can our star enact such mathemagic? How can he "cut" zero? Abracadabra! It's called a "refundable tax credit." It involves the federal government taking money from those who do pay taxes, and writing checks to those who don't. Yes, yes, in the real world this is known as "welfare," but please try not to ruin the show.
For his next trick, the Great Obama will jumpstart the economy, and he'll do it by raising taxes on the very businesses that are today adrift in a financial tsunami! That will include all those among the top 1% of taxpayers who are in fact small-business owners, and the nation's biggest employers who currently pay some of the highest corporate tax rates in the developed world. Mr. Obama will, with a flick of his fingers, show them how to create more jobs with less money. It's simple, really. He has a wand.
Next up, Mr. Obama will re-regulate the economy, with no ill effects whatsoever! You may have heard that for the past 40 years most politicians believed deregulation was good for the U.S. economy. You might have even heard that much of today's financial mess tracks to loose money policy, or Fannie and Freddie excesses. Our magician will show the fault was instead with our failure to clamp down on innovation and risk-taking, and will fix this with new, all-encompassing rules.
Presto!
Did someone in the audience just shout "Sarbanes Oxley?" Usher, can you remove that man? Thank you. Mr. Obama will now demonstrate how he gives Americans the "choice" of a "voluntary" government health plan, designed in such a way as to crowd out the private market and eliminate all other choice! Don't worry people: You won't have to join, until you do. Mr. Obama will follow this with a demonstration of how his plan will differ from our failing Medicare program. Oops, sorry, folks. The Great Obama just reminded me it is time for an intermission. Maybe we'll get to that marvel later.
We're back now. And just watch the Great Obama perform a feat never yet managed in all history. He will create that enormous new government health program, spend billions to transform our energy economy, provide financial assistance to former Soviet satellites, invest in infrastructure, increase education spending, provide job training assistance, and give 95% of Americans a tax (ahem) cut -- all without raising the deficit a single penny! And he'll do it in the middle of a financial crisis.
And with falling tax revenues! Voila!
Moving along to a little ventriloquism. Study his mouth carefully, folks: It looks like he's saying "I'll stop the special interests," when in fact the words coming out are "Welcome to Washington, friends!" Wind and solar companies, ethanol makers, tort lawyers, unions, community organizers -- all are welcome to feed at the public trough and to request special favors. From now on "special interests" will only refer to universally despised, if utterly crucial, economic players. Say, oil companies.
Hocus Pocus!
And for tonight's finale, the Great Obama will uphold America's "moral" obligation to "stop genocide" by abandoning Iraq! While teleported to the region, he will simultaneously convince Iranian leaders to peacefully abandon their nuclear pursuits (even as he does not sit down with them), fix Afghanistan with a strategy that does not resemble the Iraqi surge, and (drumroll!) pull Osama bin Laden out of his hat!
Tada!
You can clap now. (Applause. Cheers.) We'd like to thank a few people in the audience. Namely, Republican presidential nominee John McCain, who has so admirably restrained himself from running up on stage to debunk any of these illusions and spoil everyone's fun.
We know he's in a bit of a box, having initially blamed today's financial crisis on corporate "greed," and thus made it that much harder to call for a corporate tax cut, or warn against excessive regulation. Still, there were some pretty big openings up here this evening, and he let them alone! We'd also like to thank Mr. McCain for keeping all the focus on himself these past weeks. It has helped the Great Obama to just get on with the show.
As for that show, we'd love to invite you all back for next week's performance, when the Great Obama will thrill with new, amazing exploits. He will respect your Second Amendment rights even as he regulates firearms! He will renegotiate Nafta, even as he supports free trade! He will.
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Federal Judge Orders Obama To Produce Birth Certificate!!!
One of Pennsylvania's most prominent Democrats, attorney Phillip Berg, has sought an injunction in federal court to remove Barack Obama's name from the presidential ballot on the grounds that he is not a natural born United States citizen, and therefore ineligible to become president.
In a recent ruling, the judge not only denied a motion by Obama's attorneys to dismiss the case, but also ordered that Obama immediately produce the following to Mr. Berg so that he may proceed with his pursuit of the injunction:
1.) A certified copy of his ORIGINAL long version birth certificate
2.) A certified copy of his "Certification of Citizenship"
3.) A certified copy of his "Oath of Allegiance"
Ironically, I guess you could say that "what goes around comes around." Obama actually won his first election to the Illinois State Senate by having his two opponents removed from the ballot (including the black female incumbent) on "legal technicalities" regarding the validity of signatures they submitted to get their names on the ballot. However, if it turns out that Berg's allegations are true, we have a blatant constitutional violation, and Obama has attempted to commit a FRAUD upon the American people. You can read the judge's order here:
http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/pennsylvania/paedce/2:2008cv04083/281573/13/0.pdf
Again, it's one of Obama's fellow DEMOCRATS who is bringing this action. Hang on folks, this may be a mighty bumpy ride!!!
In a recent ruling, the judge not only denied a motion by Obama's attorneys to dismiss the case, but also ordered that Obama immediately produce the following to Mr. Berg so that he may proceed with his pursuit of the injunction:
1.) A certified copy of his ORIGINAL long version birth certificate
2.) A certified copy of his "Certification of Citizenship"
3.) A certified copy of his "Oath of Allegiance"
Ironically, I guess you could say that "what goes around comes around." Obama actually won his first election to the Illinois State Senate by having his two opponents removed from the ballot (including the black female incumbent) on "legal technicalities" regarding the validity of signatures they submitted to get their names on the ballot. However, if it turns out that Berg's allegations are true, we have a blatant constitutional violation, and Obama has attempted to commit a FRAUD upon the American people. You can read the judge's order here:
http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/pennsylvania/paedce/2:2008cv04083/281573/13/0.pdf
Again, it's one of Obama's fellow DEMOCRATS who is bringing this action. Hang on folks, this may be a mighty bumpy ride!!!
Ayers Commends Obama In Book
Breaking: William Ayers Mentioned Obama in his “A Kind and Just Parent” Book
Ayers had to know Obama at a very close level to mention him in his book along with Muhammad Ali and Louis Farrakhan. The book came out in 1998. It takes about 2-3 years to write and publish a book, so this friendship can be placed going back to at least 1995. The evidence comes straight from William Ayers. Read the page at Google Book
Ayers had to know Obama at a very close level to mention him in his book along with Muhammad Ali and Louis Farrakhan. The book came out in 1998. It takes about 2-3 years to write and publish a book, so this friendship can be placed going back to at least 1995. The evidence comes straight from William Ayers. Read the page at Google Book
ACORN Told Pizza Boy To Register "10 to 15 Times"
October 9, 2008
CLEVELAND - Two Ohio voters, including Domino’s pizza worker Christopher Barkley , claimed yesterday that they were hounded by the community-activist group ACORN to register to vote several times, even though they made it clear they’d already signed up.
Barkley estimated he’d registered to vote “10 to 15″ times after canvassers for ACORN, whose political wing has endorsed Barack Obama, relentlessly pursued him and others.
Claims such as his have sparked election officials to probe ACORN.
“I kept getting approached by folks who asked me to register,” Barkley said. “They’d ask me if I was registered. I’d say yes, and they’d ask me to do it [register] again.
“Some of them were getting paid to collect names. That was their sob story, and I bought it,” he said.
Barkley is one of at least three people who have been subpoenaed by the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections as part of a wider inquiry into possible voter fraud by ACORN. The group seeks to register low-income voters, who skew overwhelmingly Democratic.
“You can tell them you’re registered as many times as you want - they do not care,” said Lateala Goins, 21, who was subpoenaed.
“They will follow you to the buses, they will follow you home, it does not matter,” she told The Post.
She added that she never put down an address on any of the registration forms, just her name.
A third subpoenaed voter, Freddie Johnson, 19, filled out registration cards 72 times over 18 months, officials said.
“It feeds the public perception that there could be [fraud], and that makes the pillars fall down,” said local Board of Elections President Jeff Hastings.
Registering under a fake name is illegal. But officials usually catch multiple registrations and toss them.
CLEVELAND - Two Ohio voters, including Domino’s pizza worker Christopher Barkley , claimed yesterday that they were hounded by the community-activist group ACORN to register to vote several times, even though they made it clear they’d already signed up.
Barkley estimated he’d registered to vote “10 to 15″ times after canvassers for ACORN, whose political wing has endorsed Barack Obama, relentlessly pursued him and others.
Claims such as his have sparked election officials to probe ACORN.
“I kept getting approached by folks who asked me to register,” Barkley said. “They’d ask me if I was registered. I’d say yes, and they’d ask me to do it [register] again.
“Some of them were getting paid to collect names. That was their sob story, and I bought it,” he said.
Barkley is one of at least three people who have been subpoenaed by the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections as part of a wider inquiry into possible voter fraud by ACORN. The group seeks to register low-income voters, who skew overwhelmingly Democratic.
“You can tell them you’re registered as many times as you want - they do not care,” said Lateala Goins, 21, who was subpoenaed.
“They will follow you to the buses, they will follow you home, it does not matter,” she told The Post.
She added that she never put down an address on any of the registration forms, just her name.
A third subpoenaed voter, Freddie Johnson, 19, filled out registration cards 72 times over 18 months, officials said.
“It feeds the public perception that there could be [fraud], and that makes the pillars fall down,” said local Board of Elections President Jeff Hastings.
Registering under a fake name is illegal. But officials usually catch multiple registrations and toss them.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
No More Welfare For AIG, No More Luxury Spa Retreats!
I could hardly believe it when I heard earllier today that insurance giant AIG is asking for an additional $37.8 billion dollar "bailout" loan from the federal government. Didn't we just loan AIG a whopping $85 billion a few weeks ago? What happened to that money? As if this isn't bad enough, another story reported today suggests a possible answer. Less than one week after whining and crying to the government about needing this massive financial favor to avoid bankruptcy, the company spent almost half a million dollars to send some of its top executives for a weekend of luxury and pampering at one of Southern California's most expensive resorts (over $20,000 on spa treatments alone).
AIG contends that the reason for this pampering was because they did not want a mass exodus of top executives because this would have made the company's economic recovery even more difficult. Regardless, how horrible does this look to the taxpayers who are footing the bill, many of whom would love even one day of luxury and pampering at the St. Regis, even without getting to spend the night in a thousand dollar a night suite?
Can you say GREED? This is absolutely disgusting, so have the Pepto ready:
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=5973452&page=1
AIG contends that the reason for this pampering was because they did not want a mass exodus of top executives because this would have made the company's economic recovery even more difficult. Regardless, how horrible does this look to the taxpayers who are footing the bill, many of whom would love even one day of luxury and pampering at the St. Regis, even without getting to spend the night in a thousand dollar a night suite?
Can you say GREED? This is absolutely disgusting, so have the Pepto ready:
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=5973452&page=1
Thoughts On Debate 2
To be honest, I was really disappointed. Both candidates seemed to do nothing more than repeat the same "talking points" from the first debate. I don't see how last night's debate would have changed the minds of undecided voters in either direction. McCain needs to "take off the gloves" and start taking Obama more to task on his past activities and associations, and also needs to remind voters that Obama has the former Fannie Mae CEO as one of his top campaign advisors (not a bad way to show his appreciation for the six figure Senate campaign donation he accepted from Fannie).
Obama decries excessive CEO and "golden parachutes" yet his own advisor got a huge such parachute when forced to resign from Fannie Mae amidst questionable accounting practices, specifically overstating profits to procure larger bonuses for the top executives (seems like Enron deja vu). This would have been a PERFECT time for McCain to take Obama to task, yet he failed to do so. However, at least he brought up the Fannie contribution to Obama, but that was about it.
Sarah Palin is fighting hard during these last few weeks of the campaign, and McCain should also if he really is as behind in the polls as the media insists.
Obama decries excessive CEO and "golden parachutes" yet his own advisor got a huge such parachute when forced to resign from Fannie Mae amidst questionable accounting practices, specifically overstating profits to procure larger bonuses for the top executives (seems like Enron deja vu). This would have been a PERFECT time for McCain to take Obama to task, yet he failed to do so. However, at least he brought up the Fannie contribution to Obama, but that was about it.
Sarah Palin is fighting hard during these last few weeks of the campaign, and McCain should also if he really is as behind in the polls as the media insists.
Monday, October 6, 2008
Program On Obama's "Friends" In Its Entirety
This is definitely worth your time to watch if you did not catch it last night. If you can't spare the 45 minutes, I'll post a summary later today of the key points:
PART ONE:
PART TWO:
PART THREE:
PART FOUR:
PART FIVE:
PART SIX:
PART ONE:
PART TWO:
PART THREE:
PART FOUR:
PART FIVE:
PART SIX:
Great Blog On Obama From the Volokh Folks
Check Out This Blog (volokh.com)- One Of the Best On the Internet!!!
[David Bernstein, October 4, 2008 at 11:51pm] Trackbacks
What is the Significance of Obama's Ties to Ayers (and Wright?): Here's my take: Obama is an extremely ambitious man. He's been interested in a national political career for many years. It's not that surprising that he wouldn't find Ayers and Wright objectionable company--in the very liberal, Hyde Park/Ivy League circles that he's traveled in since attending Columbia, people with such views are more mainstream than, say, the average conservative evangelical Christian. That itself makes Obama far more liberal than the image his campaign attempts to portray.
But what is interesting to me is that not only did Obama not personally find anything especially obnoxious about Wright's radicalism, anti-Americanism, ties to Farrakahn, and so on, or Ayers' lack of regret for his terrorist past, he apparently didn't expect that much of anyone else would care, either. How else do you explain why he didn't jettison these individuals from his life before they could damage his presidential ambitions? How else do you explain how his campaign seemed to be caught flatfooted when Obama's ties to Wright and then Ayers became campaign issues? And, perhaps most tellingly, how else do you explain that when Obama was asked in a debate with Clinton about his ties to Ayers, he analogized his friendship with Ayers to his friendship with Senator Tom Coburn, as if being friends with a very conservative senatorial colleague is somehow analogous with being friends with an unrepentant extreme leftist domestic terrorist?
In short, Obama's ties to Ayers and Wright suggest to me NOT that Obama agrees with their views, but that he is the product of a particular intellectual culture that finds the likes of Wright and Ayers to be no more objectionable, and likely less so, than the likes of Tom Coburn, or, perhaps, a Rush Limbaugh. Not only that, but he has been in his particular intellectual bubble so long that he was unable to recognize just how offensive the views of a Wright are to mainstream America, or how his ties to Ayers would play with the public, especially post-9/11.
Does that mean that Obama would be a bad president, or an extremist president? No, or at least, not necessarily. One 20th century president--Reagan--had a rather extreme worldview, but he was a good enough politician to govern reasonably close to the center, and have a successful presidency. Obama may have similar skills, though he lacks Reagan's advantage of having been an ideological convert from the other side. But in any event, he is clearly not the mainstream partisan of nonideological change that he is running as, and it at least seems worth pointing that out.
[David Bernstein, October 4, 2008 at 11:51pm] Trackbacks
What is the Significance of Obama's Ties to Ayers (and Wright?): Here's my take: Obama is an extremely ambitious man. He's been interested in a national political career for many years. It's not that surprising that he wouldn't find Ayers and Wright objectionable company--in the very liberal, Hyde Park/Ivy League circles that he's traveled in since attending Columbia, people with such views are more mainstream than, say, the average conservative evangelical Christian. That itself makes Obama far more liberal than the image his campaign attempts to portray.
But what is interesting to me is that not only did Obama not personally find anything especially obnoxious about Wright's radicalism, anti-Americanism, ties to Farrakahn, and so on, or Ayers' lack of regret for his terrorist past, he apparently didn't expect that much of anyone else would care, either. How else do you explain why he didn't jettison these individuals from his life before they could damage his presidential ambitions? How else do you explain how his campaign seemed to be caught flatfooted when Obama's ties to Wright and then Ayers became campaign issues? And, perhaps most tellingly, how else do you explain that when Obama was asked in a debate with Clinton about his ties to Ayers, he analogized his friendship with Ayers to his friendship with Senator Tom Coburn, as if being friends with a very conservative senatorial colleague is somehow analogous with being friends with an unrepentant extreme leftist domestic terrorist?
In short, Obama's ties to Ayers and Wright suggest to me NOT that Obama agrees with their views, but that he is the product of a particular intellectual culture that finds the likes of Wright and Ayers to be no more objectionable, and likely less so, than the likes of Tom Coburn, or, perhaps, a Rush Limbaugh. Not only that, but he has been in his particular intellectual bubble so long that he was unable to recognize just how offensive the views of a Wright are to mainstream America, or how his ties to Ayers would play with the public, especially post-9/11.
Does that mean that Obama would be a bad president, or an extremist president? No, or at least, not necessarily. One 20th century president--Reagan--had a rather extreme worldview, but he was a good enough politician to govern reasonably close to the center, and have a successful presidency. Obama may have similar skills, though he lacks Reagan's advantage of having been an ideological convert from the other side. But in any event, he is clearly not the mainstream partisan of nonideological change that he is running as, and it at least seems worth pointing that out.
Sunday, October 5, 2008
What Team Am I On?
Here's the answer, as straightforward as possible. Note the e-mail to me (at the bottom of this message) that generated this response. Did this pundit honestly think I would fall for it?
Hello and Thank Your For the Question . . . let me tell you what team I am on:
1.) I am on the team that truly loves America, that has no prior association with America hating domestic terrorists.
2.) I am on the the team that supports our ally Israel and the Jewish people, and refuses to even acknowledge terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah by saying that they have "legitimate grievances."
3.) I am on the team that beleives employees should have a CHOICE as to which union they join or if they want to even join a union in the first place, rather than being forced to join a specific union as a condition of being hired.
4.) I am on the team that believes in providing not just any health care to Americans, but GOOD health care.
5.) I am on the team that understands that banks should not be forced to give mortgages to minorities (or anyone else) who have no creditworthiness or ability to pay their mortgage (look at where our economy is because of that).
6.) I am on the the team that says that as long as Iran is a radical Islamic theocracy, there will be no negotiations or reestablishment of diplomatic ties until the Iranian people stand up and take back their country (just like Eastern Europeans did under communism in the late 1980's).
7.) I am on the team that REALLY supports women's rights, and refuses to believe the stereotype that just because someone is a woman, especially a petitite and attractive woman, that she is automatically a "bimbo" or "airhead" and must be intellectually inferior to an aged and bumbling white man who has a long marriage to the Washington establishment. My team belives that sexist attacks aimed at Sarah Palin are just as disgraceful as sexist attacks aimed at Hillary Clinton.
8.) I am on the team that suports the rights of racial minorites, and remembers that same Senator Joe Biden as the pathetic jerk who, as head of the Senate Judiciary Commmittee in 1992, was determined to do everything possible to keep a black Clarence Thomas off of the U.S. Supreme Court.
9.) I am on the team that realizes that Barack Obama only got into to Ivy League schools because of affirmative action policies, and has absolutely nothing to show for these opportunities that were handed to him on a silver platter, simply because he has the right skin tone.
10.) I am on the team who realizes that unlike Barack Obama, Sarah Palin was not freely given any opportunities, but had to be proactive and find them on her own. As a result, she has accompished more in her "inexperienced" political career than Barack Obama will ever achoeve in his entire life.
11.) Most of all, I am on the team who realizes that John McCain has history of getting things done (I grew up in Arizona so I know this first hand). He walks his talk, and is one of the few politicians, Republican or Democrat, who we can really take at his word. John McCain resembles what America should be, while Barack Obama is the antithesis of what has made America great.
If we elect Obama as our president, we'll get exactly what we ask for. But if that happens, don't come crying to me, because my "team" tried to warn you.
Reagrds,
Casey
----------------- Original Message -----------------
From: wheatgrass
Date: Oct 5, 2008 8:16 PM
Educational Background:
Obama:
Columbia University - B.A. Political Science with a Specialization in International Relations.
Harvard - Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude
Biden:
University of Delaware - B.A. in History and B.A. in Political Science.
Syracuse University College of Law - Juris Doctor (J.D.)
vs.
McCain: United States Naval Academy - Class rank: 894 of 899
Palin: Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester
North Idaho College - 2 semesters - general study
University of Idaho - 2 semesters - journalism
Matanuska-Susitna College - 1 semester
University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in Journalism
Now, which team are you going to hire ?
.. .. ..
Hello and Thank Your For the Question . . . let me tell you what team I am on:
1.) I am on the team that truly loves America, that has no prior association with America hating domestic terrorists.
2.) I am on the the team that supports our ally Israel and the Jewish people, and refuses to even acknowledge terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah by saying that they have "legitimate grievances."
3.) I am on the team that beleives employees should have a CHOICE as to which union they join or if they want to even join a union in the first place, rather than being forced to join a specific union as a condition of being hired.
4.) I am on the team that believes in providing not just any health care to Americans, but GOOD health care.
5.) I am on the team that understands that banks should not be forced to give mortgages to minorities (or anyone else) who have no creditworthiness or ability to pay their mortgage (look at where our economy is because of that).
6.) I am on the the team that says that as long as Iran is a radical Islamic theocracy, there will be no negotiations or reestablishment of diplomatic ties until the Iranian people stand up and take back their country (just like Eastern Europeans did under communism in the late 1980's).
7.) I am on the team that REALLY supports women's rights, and refuses to believe the stereotype that just because someone is a woman, especially a petitite and attractive woman, that she is automatically a "bimbo" or "airhead" and must be intellectually inferior to an aged and bumbling white man who has a long marriage to the Washington establishment. My team belives that sexist attacks aimed at Sarah Palin are just as disgraceful as sexist attacks aimed at Hillary Clinton.
8.) I am on the team that suports the rights of racial minorites, and remembers that same Senator Joe Biden as the pathetic jerk who, as head of the Senate Judiciary Commmittee in 1992, was determined to do everything possible to keep a black Clarence Thomas off of the U.S. Supreme Court.
9.) I am on the team that realizes that Barack Obama only got into to Ivy League schools because of affirmative action policies, and has absolutely nothing to show for these opportunities that were handed to him on a silver platter, simply because he has the right skin tone.
10.) I am on the team who realizes that unlike Barack Obama, Sarah Palin was not freely given any opportunities, but had to be proactive and find them on her own. As a result, she has accompished more in her "inexperienced" political career than Barack Obama will ever achoeve in his entire life.
11.) Most of all, I am on the team who realizes that John McCain has history of getting things done (I grew up in Arizona so I know this first hand). He walks his talk, and is one of the few politicians, Republican or Democrat, who we can really take at his word. John McCain resembles what America should be, while Barack Obama is the antithesis of what has made America great.
If we elect Obama as our president, we'll get exactly what we ask for. But if that happens, don't come crying to me, because my "team" tried to warn you.
Reagrds,
Casey
----------------- Original Message -----------------
From: wheatgrass
Date: Oct 5, 2008 8:16 PM
Educational Background:
Obama:
Columbia University - B.A. Political Science with a Specialization in International Relations.
Harvard - Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude
Biden:
University of Delaware - B.A. in History and B.A. in Political Science.
Syracuse University College of Law - Juris Doctor (J.D.)
vs.
McCain: United States Naval Academy - Class rank: 894 of 899
Palin: Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester
North Idaho College - 2 semesters - general study
University of Idaho - 2 semesters - journalism
Matanuska-Susitna College - 1 semester
University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in Journalism
Now, which team are you going to hire ?
.. .. ..
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)