Chicago Gets Googled
Asian Carp: 'Nice Try, Suckers'
Friday Afternoon Diversion: Earth With Rings
Mariotti's Photo Scuffle?
Photo via AP -- yes, we've used it before, but we can't get enough of that guy over Rezko's right shoulder
As the Democratic nomination inches closer to absolute certainty for Barack Obama, someone in the Obama camp decided they should perhaps act on that "call for transparency" that Barry keeps talking about. Not only did Obama release his list of earmarks from 2005 to 2006 (which the press has been trying to obtain for months), he also sat down for a 90 minute interview with the Chicago Tribune editorial board Friday afternoon. The topic? His connection to Tony Rezko.
Obama's opening statement:
So what I want to do, if this is OK with you guys, I want to start just by talking about my house purchase and [Antoin] Tony Rezko because that's something that I know you guys have editorialized on, suggesting that we haven't provided you guys enough information. I would love to have an exhaustive conversation about all aspects of it and ensure that by the time we leave here today, you may not be happy with all my answers—but at least you can't say that I have not answered the questions. Is that fair?
Obama goes into much further detail about his relationship with Rezko that extends all the way back to when Obama was in law school, to his first congressional race, dinners with Rezko and his wife, a trip to Rezko's home in Lake Geneva, and the big revelation that campaign dollars raised for Obama by Rezko well exceeded what was previously thought, topping out at a quarter million dollars. He also tried to clear up once and for all his now infamous Kenwood home purchase:
So, I then discuss [the home purchase] with Michelle as well as our broker and said "well maybe it's worth while us putting down an offer, but we should get a better sense of what it's valued." And our broker said, "you certainly shouldn't be paying the list price on this because it might be a little bit overpriced." And so at that point, Michelle and I talked about who did we know that knew Kenwood who might have a sense of these properties.And that's how Tony Rezko's name came up because he was an active developer in that area and owned lots in that area and had done development in that area.
It was at this time that Rezko expressed interest in purchasing the vacant lot next to the house for $600,000. As we all know now, the Obamas purchased a piece of that lot in 2006 for $104,500, sparking rumors that Obama had received a "discount" on the property, presumably to curry political favors:
I in turn asked my attorney to do an appraisal of what it would, what a fair price for that 10-foot strip would be or a 5-foot strip would be to make sure that I paid fair market value for such a transaction. The appraisal actually came back relatively low, something like $40,000.And that was attributable to the fact that there just aren't comps for a 10-foot strip of land and that was noted by the appraiser. The appraisal, which is, by the way all these documents are in there, the appraisal did note that the other parcel, Rezko's remaining parcel, would be fully developable if he sold this to me. And so rather than pay the appraised price, I paid one-sixth of the cost of his property. He agreed to sell that 10-foot strip.
The level of detail in the interview is a far cry from Obama's position at the start of his presidential run when he painted Rezko as an "acquaintance" whom he knew casually because he performed 5 hours worth of legal work for his company. It's doubtful that the Rezko connection will cause any Democrats to jump ship in the general election. But Obama's "trust" of Rezko may introduce some doubts as to his judgment when picking his cabinet, and combined with whispers of wrongdoing it may come back to haunt Obama amongst independent and Republican crossover voters. And since many polls are declaring a Obama vs. McCain matchup at a virtual tie, that voters bloc could be crucial. Read the full interview transcript here. [Trib]
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
What makes you think this is coming clean. Obama has a big closet.
This is a huge deal for Obama. He doesn't have a lot of experience or accomplishments to run on so he has pretty much staked his campaign on the idea that he has better judgment than those who have been in power. Just look at his position on Iraq. It is all about knowing back in 2002 that the war would be bad,wrong, etc., and he scores political points there because it appears that he had good judgement on that issue. But suddenly you start revealing certain actions of yours in the past to be "boneheaded" and by your own admission that you don't really know a conflict of interest when you see one (Mrs. Obama's hospital)your ability to analyze and judge any situation comes into question.
Without good judgment Obama's qualifications are even thinner than they were before.
It is no surprise that these interviews were released on a Friday afternoon. He's hoping that the initial impact will get buried in weekend coverage that nobody will pay attention to.
I don't have a horse in the Obama-Clinton race, and my support for McCain is mild. The Obama house of cards is beginning to crumble. Quint is right - for a man running on his supposedly superior judgment boneheadedness and naivety are undesirable qualities.
Clinton has been wise to persevere, and the media has cut her some slack while scrutinizing Obama more after the SNL parody. With the exception of blacks Clinton has won the majority of the traditional Democratic constituency. Obama's coalition of blacks (only 1/8th of population), college students, and upscale wine and brie urban liberals is to thin for the long haul.
The interesting thing about Obama, to me, is his general appeal. My Texas born, incredibly racist, grandmother is supporting him, as well as a libertarian crazed college friend. If he can pull well from across the the aisle, he'll have more support than just the latte crowd.
With the exception of blacks Clinton has won the majority of the traditional Democratic constituency.
Ha ha,
Got some more of whatever that is your smokin'?
Also can we get another "Rezko" photo. That down syndrome kid freaks me out.
the comments on this absolutely befuddle me. i'll cop my obama bias right now, but regardless of who(m?) i support, one of the things that has frustrated me about big-time politics for a LONG time is politicians' reluctance, resistance and downright refusal to admit when they are wrong, come clean about things they've done and just outright lay out the facts about things that were mistakes.
i think it's much more respectable and honorable to stand up and admit wrongdoing and then make amends (which doesn't just mean saying sorry ... it means saying what you're going to do to *change and repair the behavior*) for the action, then to lie and lie and lie until the bitter end.
fact of the matter is, not one of us is exempt from effin' up, and it doesn't seem too many people in washington are crystal clean, no matter how much i want them to be. the others never seem to be very viable as presidential candidates.
so, it is discouraging to see obama decide to set the record straight once and for all and to see people come and just rip the shit out of him for it. oh, someone's going to tell the truth and take responsibility for something? let's call *that* bad judgment. i think it shows GREAT judgment on his part.
@jeremy -- my not at ALL politically savvy, WI mother also voted for him in the primary *despite* the fact that she fell for the idea that "he didn't believe in god" and "was a muslim." arrrrgh. but she voted for him -anyway,- which leads me to believe he's got something that transcends even the minds that can be easily led astray by smoke and mirrors.
Obama comes from out of nowhere to quickly rise. Why? And who is his clout?
And who is his clout?
Jack Ryan not settling for conventional sex with 7of9?
@smussy - I think the problem here isn't that Obama made mistakes. We all make mistakes. That issue is two-fold. The nature of the mistakes undermines his credibility on the one issue he has successfully used to separate him from all of the other candidates - judgment. Without being able to say that he has better judgment than McCain or Clinton he really has nothing firm by way of his record or accomplishments to stand on and separate him from the pack.
The other problem is that he didn't just come clean. He was badgered, softly for a long time, by local media for months about his relationship with Rezko and Obama's camp just simply refused to address the questions. The national media got wind of it recently and Obama still refused to talk about it. The stalling certainly seemed more like traditional political maneuvering than the new age transparent leader he wants us to believe he can be.
Those are 2 big big reasons why he deserves criticism here, and he has no one to blame but himself.
This isn't going to affect Obama at all. None of the major news outlets are even picking it up (or the stuff about his minister, aside from a small blip buried on CNN) except for Fox News. Plus, your average voter--especially your average Obama supporter--isn't going to pay attention to something like this. Not when you have Rolling Stone posing him like Superman with the corny as hell tagline "A New Hope" on the cover, repeat ad infinitum, ad delirium, ad nauseum. That is the kind of crap that people who are going to vote for Obama are won over by, and makes those who already support him knees quiver.
Anyone who doesn't think the media is waaaaaaaay biased to the left has rocks in their heads. Don't worry, they aren't going to let the Golden Boy get tarnished over something like this.
Meanwhile the NYT does a front page story on the suspicion that someone once said they thought they heard someone say that John McCain might possibly have been giving the appearance of getting too close to a lobbyist.
None of the major news outlets are even picking it up (or the stuff about his minister, aside from a small blip buried on CNN) except for Fox News.
A2
There's a thing called "Google News"
Go to it.
Type in "Reverend Wright"
Click "Search" button.
Wow! Look at the results : a story on the good Rev. by nearly every MSM outlet that exists.
So are you deliberately lying? or just willfully misinformed?
Also story on Obama and Wright is on front page of U.S. section of NYT today.
a2, the wright/obama controversy is all over the news. what the hell are you talking about?
i don't know why the national media hasn't picked up the rezko/obama thing that much but it's certainly not from a lack of chicago coverage
smussy,
how are you going to feel a month from now when obama finds some more rezko money that he overlooked months ago and overlooked this time. Or when video pops up with the good Rev preaching his anti u.s. speel with obama sitting front and center after saying he would of left the church if only he had known. obama is a crook co. hack fraud and it is slowly starting to unravel, he is not setting the record straight once and for all he is feeding his adoring press some b.s. just like before but no one in the press is asking why he was lying before.
When I wrote that, no one had posted anything about it except CNN.
A few hours later the NYT picked it up in an obligatory way...they posted it far down on the page under "politics."
Now, a few hours later, it's off their front page.
Go figure.
Sorry I have to spell it out for you.
Yes, of course the story is reported by various news outlets. I was addressing a question of emphasis.
Obviously.
Yawn.
The Republicans are pretty much laying off of Obama right now.
The wing-nut radio guys aren't bothering to dump on him at the moment.
That can mean only one thing:
They have so much dirt on him, they are hoping against hope that he's the nominee!
They have zero chance against Hillary, contrary to the polls, because we no everything about her & Bill.
There's nothing left to find, but Li'l Ole Barry, why there's just got to be more shit on him, just with Rezko, than the Sanitary District has!
scooter come on, obama who could have dirt on him he is a crook co machine politican and they are all legit, next you will be smearing the good names of daley stroger and blago. obama is the underling of E jones and he is pure I am sure. As pure as the 72 virgins awaiting a jihadist in the promised land
Sorry I have to spell it out for you.
Pffft. hahaha...
Poor A2, reality don't jibe with what the political talky guy on the radio done said. I think like 2 cycles of Rev. Wright stories had already gone through by the time you'd made your first post.
left bias! left bias!
Hilarious, google news:
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,707 for rev wright. (0.18 seconds)
Navin,
MSNBC, probably the most unbiased major news organization, ran a story last year that found out of 140 major reporters, 125 had given money to the Dems.
@ leon:
My friend actually thinks he might be the antichrist. I wonder if we could go directly from the voting booth to receive our mark.
just throwing it out there...
clinton: whitewater. and let's face it - lots of other stuff.
mccain: keating 5. and didn't his wife steal drugs from the nonprofit she headed up? uhm, yeah.
really - the "i paid 1/10th share of the property" answer works for me. i work with wealthy individuals (though i myself am brokeasspoor) and you just don't/can't vet everyone you have business dealings with. if they're sneaky enough to get around the IRS, chances are they're going to get around you too. you just watch your own morality in the situation, and do you best.
in this case, most news agencies are reporting that there's slim to no possibiliy there was pay to play or favors with obama, but rather rezko was working that angle with G-Rod. so when obama got involved in politics, he met a big dem fundraiser who would've been hard to avoid in a tight night dem state. big deal. he returned the money. as long as he didn't sell anything, i don't know why we're going off on a witchhunt.
let's not confuse *judgement* with *perfection*, shall we?
nothing to see here folks!
oh geesh - typos aplenty above. sorry.
i'm afraid i might be becoming spook.