David Corn

Well, there is still about the same chance that Barack could be eaten by a bear but if that doesn't happen I think the debates will be interesting no matter what they decide to do.

I just don't think it will be much of a contest.

I predict McSame will get all red faced and angry or he falls asleep.

Ten town hall meeting before the convention? That is a little much and a bit rushed to me.

A few get togethers would do. I expect they will over do it. That will turn people off - that will serve the GOP goals so the M$M will demand it.

Obama aims to make openness an issue

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) is moving on two fronts to make transparency a linchpin of his campaign, opening his fundraisers to reporters and clamping down on the Democratic National Committee’s fundraising from Washington insiders.

The moves, announced on his second full day as the party’s de facto presidential nominee, are designed to drive a campaign message of change versus more of the same, aides said.

His likely opponent, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), closes his fundraisers to the press. Beginning last night, Obama will open all of his fundraisers to at least a pool reporter, who will share the information with the rest of the press corps.

Beginning Thursday, the DNC will no longer accept checks from federal lobbyists or political action committees, mirroring the strict standard Obama adopted for his presidential campaign.

“This is an important step that shows Sen. Obama is willing to take tough steps to change the way Washington works,” said Dan Pfeiffer, the campaign’s deputy communications director.

The policy, which will not hurt fundraising appreciably, is not retroactive.

(politico)

******

Funny thing about leadership is how obvious it is.

McSame should show the same leadership in the GOP and start to get that house in order.

Clinton supporters wowed with warm reception at Obama rally

[...]

No one is making that healing easier than Obama. Last night, after he had finished the sort of speech that leaves his followers exhilarated and exhausted, Obama did not just leave the arena. Nor did he head to the nearest television camera or the nearest fat cat.

Instead, he went to a room where the Clinton supporters had been gathered and one by one, shook the hands of the 25 people, stopping to chat with each of them.

"Chris (Coleman) walked around the room with him,'' said Stevenson, "and introduced each one of us.''

It was really pretty extraordinary.

"He shook my hand and said, 'Thank you for being here; I'm sure it's not easy,' '' said Stevenson of her meeting with Obama. "I thanked him and said that everyone involved in his campaign had been so gracious. I didn't know what to say, so I mentioned that my daughter works for a federal health clinic. And he knew right away which program I was talking about. He said, 'Oh that's wonderful.' ''

Stevenson, a feminist and Clinton supporter, had to admit this: "He's very impressive.''

http://tinyurl.com/4pkt8e

*****

I wonder why this wasn't reported by the M$M?

Obama's Evolving Position on Iran
Hawkish Stand More Like the Bush Administration's Position

By JONATHAN KARL / ABC
June 4, 2008

In his speech Wednesday before the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, Obama sounded a bit like the more hawkish officials in the Bush administration.

Sen. Barack Obama's, D-Ill., position on whether to meet with the leaders of rogue nations such as Iran has evolved.
(ABC News Photo Illustration)He said the military option is "on the table" for dealing with Iran's nuclear program, and in stark contrast to earlier statements, he said he would meet with Iranian leaders "if and only if it can advance the interest of the United States."

Obama's tone was strikingly different from it has been in the past.

During a debate last summer, he said he would be willing to meet with Iranian leaders and other American adversaries "without preconditions" during the first year of his presidency. Today, he made it clear that we should not expect a President Obama to be sitting down with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad any time soon:

"[A]s president of the United States, I would be willing to lead tough and principled diplomacy with the appropriate Iranian leaders at a time and place of my choosing if and only if it can advance the interest of the United States. That is my position. I want to be absolutely clear."

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Oh no! Can it be:

McBama?

Rezko: Guilty

For an untouchable change agent, Obama certainly has a lot of questionable associates.

By Stephen Spruiell

Talk about bad timing. Barack Obama’s friend and fundraiser Antoin “Tony” Rezko was found guilty today of mail fraud, wire fraud, soliciting bribes, and money laundering in connection to a federal investigation into political corruption in the state of Illinois. Rezko now faces sentencing on 16 of 24 counts, some of which carry punishments of up to 20 years in prison.

The verdict comes as Obama is securing the Democratic nomination and trying to put behind him yet another controversy involving Trinity United Church of Christ. It should be stated at the outset that Obama was not involved in any of the illegal acts a Chicago jury has found Rezko guilty of committing. But Obama is guilty of maintaining a close relationship with Rezko long after it had become clear that Rezko’s primary business was buying and selling political influence for personal gain.

The following fact pattern was out in the open long before Obama severed his ties to Rezko (sometime in late 2006): In 1983, Rezko started raising a lot of money for Chicago politicians. In 1989, he and his partner Daniel Mahru started vacuuming up deals with the city to develop low-income housing, despite having virtually zero experience in the field. They proceeded to obtain over $100 million in city, state, and federal grants and bank loans to develop 30 run-down properties into affordable-housing projects, earning $6.9 million for themselves. By 2007, the city had sued them numerous times for failing to heat these properties; over half of the properties had fallen into foreclosure, and six of them were boarded up.

Obama helped put one of these deals together during his time as a junior associate at Davis Miner Barnhill & Galland. Other lawyers at Davis Miner helped Rezko acquire half of the properties that fell into disrepair. And many of these properties were located in the district Obama represented as an Illinois state senator. Nonetheless, Obama told the Chicago Sun-Times that he was unaware of Rezko’s growing reputation as a slumlord until he read Sun-Times reporter Tim Novak’s two-part series on the subject. So we are to believe (yet again) that Obama was the last person to know what one of his longtime friends was up to.

Now that may well be true — but still, it indicates that Obama is the kind of Democrat who cares a great deal about securing the funding for liberal programs like subsidized housing, but very little about what happens to the money after that. In Rezko’s case, it appears to have been doled out based on which developer had the right political connections, not which one could actually do the job.

Even if Obama can claim plausible deniability about the deteriorating shape of Rezko’s slums, he faces a more difficult challenge in explaining why he entered into a real-estate deal with Rezko after the Chicago papers had run over 100 stories about the clouds gathering over Rezko’s head. When the Obamas were looking for a new house in the summer of 2005, Rezko helped them buy their dream home by purchasing an adjoining lot they could not afford, then selling them a strip of the land on which they wanted to build a fence.

Obama admitted to the Sun-Times that when he bought the strip of land, he knew Rezko “was going to have some significant legal problems,” and characterized his decision to buy the property anyway as a “boneheaded move.” Obama said he proceeded with the transaction because Rezko had always acted “in an above-board manner with me and I considered him a friend.”

Obama may have thought all of his interactions with Rezko were above-board, but they weren’t. One of the counts against Rezko detailed how he funneled the proceeds of an illegal kickback scheme into Obama’s 2004 Senate campaign. Rezko’s co-conspirator, a former trustee of the Illinois Teachers Retirement System (TRS) named Stuart Levine, told the jury that he directed the TRS to invest $50 million with a firm called Glencoe Capital. In exchange, Levine arranged for himself and Rezko to be paid a fraudulent $500,000 “finder’s fee.” Levine routed Rezko’s half to an associate named Joseph Aramanda in March of 2004. That month, Aramanda wrote a $10,000 check to Barack Obama’s campaign.

Of course, Obama may well not have known the details of such a shadowy transaction, and his campaign has donated that $10,000 — and all other Rezko-related money — to charity. But what became clear over the course of the Rezko trial is that this kind of scheme exemplified Rezko’s way of doing business. It’s hard to believe that Obama could be so clueless about Rezko’s character, just as it’s hard to believe that Obama sat in Jeremiah Wright’s pews for 20 years and had no idea that the man was a radical black nationalist.

The question now is whether Rezko will try to cut a deal with the government to reduce his sentence by cooperating with prosecutors in further investigations that stem from this trial. Many in Chicago speculate that Illinois Democratic governor Rod Blagojevich could be the next target. During Rezko’s trial, several witnesses testified that Blagojevich was aware of schemes to shake down donors who stood to gain lucrative state contracts.

In the only interview he has granted since his 2006 indictment, Rezko was asked by Chicago magazine if he would consider testifying against others to save his own skin. “Hell no,” he told the magazine. “Tell them I’ll see them in court on February 25th.” Now that his trial is over, and he’s looking at a long prison term, it will be interesting to see whether Rezko came through the ordeal with his defiance intact.

— Stephen Spruiell is an NRO staff reporter.

~~~~~~

Obummer said it best:

I'm a bonehead!

Translation~ I'm naive like John McCain has said!

Former Obama Fundraiser Convicted Of Corruption (Obama On Wright & Rezko 'This Isn't The Man I Knew'

Washington Post ^ | 6/5/2008 | Peter Slevin

Antoin Rezko, a Chicago businessman and longtime fundraiser for Sen. Barack Obama, (D-Ill.), was convicted of 16 felony charges Wednesday...

... The 16 counts included fraud, money laundering and abetting bribery ...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Blogger comment:

Obama caught saying the same thing for two different people.
Obama said of Rev. Wright "this isn't the man I knew."

Now, Obama says - concerning Rezko - "this isn't the Tony Rezko I knew."

Those excuses that Obama gives are getting old.

Either Obama is a liar or he lacks good judgment.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Answer: He's a liar!

McLaughlin: McCain Leads Obama Among Women, 49 Percent to 38 Percent?

NRO

McLaughlin: McCain Leads Obama Among Women, 49 Percent to 38 Percent A part of Robert Novak's column that is likely to be widely overlooked: This resentment is reflected in a private nationwide poll conducted this month by McLaughlin and Associates, which usually works for Republicans but is not connected with the McCain campaign. Poll-taker John McLaughlin found that John McCain had a 49 percent to 38 percent edge over Obama among all women. That is an extraordinary result, running counter to a longtime Democratic advantage.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A women scorned? Obummer will feel the wrath!

Obama's Continuing Latino Problem

New American Media ^ | 3 June | Earl Hutchinson

A day before the Puerto Rican primary election, I talked with several Mexican workers and business professionals during a visit to Mexico City. The subject was American presidential politics and the upcoming election. They had only the haziest notion that Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama was the frontrunner for the nomination. They knew virtually nothing about his positions on the major issues, especially the hot button issue of immigration reform. They all readily recognized Clinton’s name and thought that if elected she’d do a better job on the immigration question. Their haziness in knowing that Obama was the odds on...

Why Did Obama Pay Rezko an Extra $64,000 For That Strip of Land?

NationalReviewOnline ^ | June 05, 2008 | Jim Geraghty

From Steven Spruiell's must-read piece on the Rezko guilty verdict this morning:

Obama may have thought all of his interactions with Rezko were above-board, but they weren’t. One of the counts against Rezko detailed how he funneled the proceeds of an illegal kickback scheme into Obama’s 2004 Senate campaign. Rezko’s co-conspirator, a former trustee of the Illinois Teachers Retirement System (TRS) named Stuart Levine, told the jury that he directed the TRS to invest $50 million with a firm called Glencoe Capital. In exchange, Levine arranged for himself and Rezko to be paid a fraudulent $500,000 “finder’s fee.” Levine routed Rezko’s half to an associate named Joseph Aramanda in March of 2004. That month, Aramanda wrote a $10,000 check to Barack Obama’s campaign.

Of course, Obama may well not have known the details of such a shadowy transaction, and his campaign has donated that $10,000 — and all other Rezko-related money — to charity. But what became clear over the course of the Rezko trial is that this kind of scheme exemplified Rezko’s way of doing business. It’s hard to believe that Obama could be so clueless about Rezko’s character, just as it’s hard to believe that Obama sat in Jeremiah Wright’s pews for 20 years and had no idea that the man was a radical black nationalist.

Gabe Malor, over at Ace of Spades, notices Obama is using the same "he's not the man I once knew" line that he used with Jeremiah Wright.

Obama has returned $157,835 in campaign funds that Tony Rezko and his associates donated in his career.

But will he return the land that he bought from Rezko?

I can hear it now. "But Jim, this isn't a donation from Rezko to Obama," because the senator bought the land for a lot more than it was worth — "an appraiser valued the slice of land Rezko sold at $40,500, Obama decided it would be fair to pay Rezko substantially more: one sixth of his original purchase price, or $104,000."

Precisely. Rezko "widely known to be under federal investigation at the time." Paying substantially more than the land was appraised creates the appearance of a $64,000 payment to a person who, if found guilty, could discuss his longtime association and business dealings with a U.S. senator with federal law enforcement.

~~~~~~~

Sounds like Obummer is more like Tom Delay than anything resembling change!

Senate Intelligence Committee Unveils Final Phase II Reports On Prewar Iraq Intelligence

[...]

The Committee’s report cites several conclusions in which the Administration’s public statements were NOT supported by the intelligence. They include:

Statements and implications by the President and Secretary of State suggesting that Iraq and al-Qa’ida had a partnership, or that Iraq had provided al-Qa’ida with weapons training, were not substantiated by the intelligence.

Statements by the President and the Vice President indicating that Saddam Hussein was prepared to give weapons of mass destruction to terrorist groups for attacks against the United States were contradicted by available intelligence information.

Statements by President Bush and Vice President Cheney regarding the postwar situation in Iraq, in terms of the political, security, and economic, did not reflect the concerns and uncertainties expressed in the intelligence products.

Statements by the President and Vice President prior to the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate regarding Iraq’s chemical weapons production capability and activities did not reflect the intelligence community’s uncertainties as to whether such production was ongoing.

The Secretary of Defense’s statement that the Iraqi government operated underground WMD facilities that were not vulnerable to conventional airstrikes because they were underground and deeply buried was not substantiated by available intelligence information.

The Intelligence Community did not confirm that Muhammad Atta met an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague in 2001 as the Vice President repeatedly claimed.

http://democrats.senate.gov/journal/entry.cfm?id=298778

*****

That'd be the formal explanation that Bush lied, eh?

Bill Kristol At AIPAC: Obama And McCain "Don't Actually Differ" On Iran

[...]

Kristol told the crowd:

"There are actually no disputes of that nature...with the exception of Iraq this time. Obama's not for cutting the defense budget; Obama's not for pulling troops back from our forward positions around the world, with the exception of Iraq. Obama and McCain don't actually differ, at least on paper, even on Iran, where they're arguing about whether they would talk to [Iranian President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad or not -- and I think that's an important dispute. Still, at the end of the day, Obama doesn't say he would rule out the use of force. McCain certainly is committed as he said this morning to trying to increase economic pressure on Iran, which Obama has also talked about."

Of course there have been differences between the two candidates. Kristol brushed aside perhaps the greatest one: whether or not lowering the bar for diplomatic engagement might prove a tactical benefit for U.S. foreign policy. But beyond that, Obama opposed the recent Kyl-Lieberman amendment, which would have designated the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. While Obama says he shares that opinion of the group with McCain and others, he instead prefers a less deliberately bellicose approach to international relations.

But given the fact that some Obama opponents seem to believe his views are frighteningly distant from the mainstream, it was interesting to hear someone of Kristol's stature on the right make the case that the Illinois Democrat's differences from McCain are ones of degree and not kind.

http://tinyurl.com/42sb5z

******

Is the opposition to the policy or the person?

lol

McCain's Campaign Manager Announces Contest In Disturbing Video

In what Wonkette calls "the most tragically awkward video in the history of YouTube," a dazed McCain campaign manager Rick Davis stares goggle-eyed at off-screen cue cards, robotically making a call for Americans to stalk their neighbors with video cameras, and reveal what secret Islamofascists might be walking among us. The lucky winner will be flown to the Republican National Convention to enjoy a session of "Seven Minutes In Heaven" with Larry Craig at the Minneapolis airport, and then it's off to Guantanamo Bay!

This contest, by the way, is the "true story" upon which the Liv Tyler thriller The Strangers is based.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZaTgNMyw_0

******

Notice anyone (mentioned) except they doin't mention Imam?

I'm sure they left out Imam on accident. . . .

Americans saw their net worth decline by $1.7 trillion in the first quarter, as declines in home values and the stock market ravaged their holdings.

The net worth of U.S. households fell 3% to $56 trillion at the end of March, according to the Federal Reserve's flow of funds report, which was released Thursday.

The drop marks the second straight decline in net worth, which fell by more than $500 billion in the fourth quarter of 2007.

(Americanblog)

*****

Four McMore years!

Four McMore years!

Four McMore years!

Here is just some of the real John McCain in realtime, showing how McCain backed the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Neocon fantasy on every point:

How would American troops be greeted?:
"I believe... that the Iraqi people will greet us as liberators."
(March 20, 2003)

Did Saddam Hussein have a nuclear program that posed an imminent threat to the United States?:
"Saddam Hussein is on a crash course to construct a nuclear weapon."
(October 10, 2002)

Will a war with Iraq be long or short?:
"This conflict is... going to be relatively short."
(March 23, 2003)

How is the war going?:
"I would argue that the next three to six months will be critical."
(September 10, 2003)

How is it going (almost two months later, from the war's "greatest critic")?
"I think the initial phases of [the war] were so spectacularly successful that
it took us all by surprise."
(October 31, 2003)

Is this war really necessary?:
"Only the most deluded of us could doubt the necessity of this war."
(August 30, 2004)

How is it going? (Recurring question for the war's "greatest critic"):
"We will probably see significant progress in the next six months to a year."
(December 4, 2005)

Will the President's "surge" of troops into Baghdad and surrounding areas that the senator had been calling for finally make the difference?:
"We can know fairly well [whether the surge is working] in a few months."
(February 4, 2007)

http://tinyurl.com/3kv635

*******

Constantly changing his position to suit his political needs at the moment?

"That's not change we can believe in, my friennnnnds"

GOP crossover helps Obama

Illinois Sen. Barack Obama cinched the Democratic presidential nomination this week with the unprecedented help of an estimated 3 million Republican voters who cast ballots in their rival party's primaries.

About 12 percent of Obama's aggregate vote in presidential primaries came from people who normally align themselves with the GOP, based on a survey of 1,003 adults conducted by Scripps Howard News Service and Ohio University.

About 5 percent of New York Sen. Hillary Clinton's support came from Republicans.

The poll also found that Arizona Sen. John McCain, who won the Republican nomination in the early months of the primary season, received virtually no Democratic crossover votes.

(CHB)

*****

If these kinds of numbers continue, it is game set and match.

RFK 1/4/1968

WHAT DO WE STAND FOR? THE LIBERATION OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT

[...]

For the gross national product counts air pollution and cigarette advertising and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage. It counts special locks for our doors and jails for the people who break them. It counts Whitman's rifle and Speck's knife and television programs, which glorify violence in order to sell toys to our children. And the gross national product, the gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education, the joy of their play. It is indifferent to the decency of our factories and the safety of our streets alike. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials. It measures neither wit nor courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our duty to our country. It measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile, and it can tell us everything about America, except why we are proud to be Americans. Is it then that, is it then our wealth or is it our military power that we stand for in the United States?

http://tinyurl.com/2rsuor

GNP forever!

N is just before O.

"No one is making that healing easier than Obama."

Typical abusive personality. "Come on home sweetie. I won't hit you if you stay in line."