Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a tree...

Chicago Tribune says there is no hanky panky between MYDD's favorite criminal, Rezko and America's darling, Obama.  I'm sure the super detectives will get right on the horn with CT and let'em know that MYDD Clintonista's have it figured out!!  Now move on to the next issue....or better yet clean up the poo in your candidates brief case first.,0,2616801.story

"U.S. Sen. Barack Obama waited 16 months to attempt the exorcism. But when he finally sat down with the Tribune editorial board Friday, Obama offered a lengthy and, to us, plausible explanation for the presence of now-indicted businessman Tony Rezko in his personal and political lives.

The most remarkable facet of Obama's 92-minute discussion was that, at the outset, he pledged to answer every question the three dozen Tribune journalists crammed into the room would put to him. And he did....

When we endorsed Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination Jan. 27, we said we had formed our opinions of him during 12 years of scrutiny. We concluded that the professional judgment and personal decency with which he has managed himself and his ambition distinguish him.

Nothing Obama said in our editorial board room Friday diminishes that verdict."

Tags: 2008, Barack Obama, chicago tribue, obama, president, rezko (all tags)



Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

But...but...Rezko! Smoking gun! It was supposed to end his campaign! Where there's dirt, there's fire, right?!

by Kal 2008-03-15 01:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

LOL. Thank you. Now will someone please demand that HRC release her tax returns? I'm talking about 2000-2007. Obama's released his since 1997.

by kristannab 2008-03-15 01:19PM | 0 recs
haven't you noticed?

that's all Obama asks of her, that's all he has, and she'll release them in April, or earlier, like she's said. He likes to ask about those tax returns, with the implication she's hiding something?  By the way, I don't care whether there is a smoking gun, I hope there isn't, it's his judgement in not knowing what was going on in his own district that makes me suspicious, and that 'photo' of Tony and the Clintons' that was so conveniently leaked.  What he has to 'hide' it in plain sight, he lacks critical judgement and he feels little responsibility to the poor in his own district. Seems like quite enough to me, did they ask about that? Can we see the questions they thought to ask and read his answers?  Is there a transcript? If Democrats have questions for him, will he answer us?  

by anna shane 2008-03-15 04:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

I'll wait tell the trail is over before I'll believe the press, you or Obama thank you very much

by bradydundee 2008-03-15 01:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

he has yet to release all documents and email exchanges with rezko...hmmmmmm i wonder why?

by californiarose 2008-03-15 01:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

Same reason Clinton won't release her tax returns.  Too busy, yaknow?

by Cycloptichorn 2008-03-15 01:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

hmmmm then why does he complain about hillary...yawwwwn....

by californiarose 2008-03-15 01:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

Something is very strange about the article. It said that Obama said that he didn't know Rezko had was doing bad things. But the fact that he was under federal investigation was all over the place. This article and the facts don't add up. Was this an open discussion? Is there a video of what he said when he answered the questions?

by HillaryKnight08 2008-03-15 01:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

How about those tax returns? Why doesn't Hillary's supporters see anything wrong with her being so secretive? I say put it all out there now because I am damn sure that the Republicans know what is in those tax returns and are ready to RUIN her should she "get" the nomination. Everyone should be vetted NOW.

by kristannab 2008-03-15 01:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

her tax returns show that rezko financed her too...

by californiarose 2008-03-15 01:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

I agree, yes, Hillary does need to release her tax returns and earmarks. It will definitely hurt her if she doesn't. However, I'm addressing the diary and the diary isn't about Hillary's tax returns. I'm fairly confident that if Hillary did anything terribly wrong, she wouldn't have run for president.

by HillaryKnight08 2008-03-15 01:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

Think again.  It's about not getting caught.  I would be willing to bet that come April 15th, the tax returns will be "missing." WHy not release previous years?  It might not be so much that Hillary did anything illegal but I'm sure that there are a lot of conflicts of interest.  I was not a math major but I would like someone to explain to me how you leave the White House with a $5.5 million debt, move to NY and purchase a $2 million dollar home and then in seven years you are worth upwards of 50 million dollars.  I would like her to explain so that I can turn my $80K in student loans into a net benefit of $50 million.

by kristannab 2008-03-15 01:38PM | 0 recs
I'll take that bet

And bet she's not rushing because they aren't a big deal. She's known she's wanted to run for prez for at least four years now, and her old tax returns from when he was prez were released, and it was like this. The reason he started demanding them was that she'd loaned her campaign five mil, and so he demanded to see where she got that kind of money. That was end of January, and she agreed to release them when they were ready. He likes to make a big deal about this, but why? He knows there's nothing there, but he has to have something to say to counter Tony.  Whenever he's caught, he's always, she does too, whether or not it makes sense, whether or not it's true. So, yeah, glad to take that bet, how about five million?  

by anna shane 2008-03-15 04:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

Well, isn't it obvious. I mean, seriously. Obama must have some anti-American nonsensical notion that just because somebody is under investigation they're not guilty.

It's so passe' to think that somebody is innocent until proven guilty, after all.

by Walt Starr 2008-03-15 02:27PM | 0 recs
he's not anybody

he's running for president and his main qualification is his superior judgement.  

by anna shane 2008-03-15 04:44PM | 0 recs
Re: I trust Rezko

This was the headline at the tribune article:
Obama: I trusted Rezko
Senator says friend raised more money than previously known

Trying to put his past with Antoin "Tony" Rezko behind him, presidential candidate Barack Obama on Friday said he never thought the nowindicted Chicago businessman would try to take advantage of him because his old friend had never asked for a political favor.

But in a 90-minute interview with Tribune reporters and editors, Obama disclosed that Rezko had raised more for Obama's earlier political campaigns than previously known, gathering as much as $250,000 for the first three offices he sought.

later in the article
Faced with intensifying scrutiny as the Democratic primary season grinds on, Obama said voters should view his Rezko dealings as "a mistake in not seeing the potential conflicts of interest." But he added that voters should also "see somebody who is not engaged in any wrongdoing . . . and who they can trust."

After news reports of Rezko's questionable political dealings first emerged in 2005, Obama said he asked his friend about them. Rezko assured him there was nothing wrong. "My instinct was to believe him," he said. /chi-obama-rezkomar15,1,2882610.story?pa ge=1

by ricardo4 2008-03-15 01:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama may trust Rezko

but Pat Fitzgerald doesn't.
And you might want to read the John Kass editoral from today's edition of the Tribune: on/chi-obama-kass-rezko-column,0,6371273 .column
here is part of it:So I left half-satisfied, thinking Obama more naive than crooked, wondering what the Daleys of Chicago and the Kennedys of Massachusetts will do to him.

Obama was asked if coming out of the most politically corrupt city in America hinders his image as a reform candidate for the presidency.

"Look, Sen. [Hillary] Clinton comes out of New York, and there are apparently some issues there as well," he said, chuckling about the flameout of Clinton's superdelegate and soon-to-be-former-governor, Eliot Spitzer. "I think that all of you have been following my career for some time. I think that I have done a good job in rising politically in this environment, without being entangled in some of the traditional problems of Chicago politics.

"I know that there are those, like John Kass, who would like me to decry Chicago politics more frequently."

Just the corrupt parts, I said.

"I'll leave that to his editorial commentary, but I think it's fair to say that I have conducted myself in my public office with great care and high ethical standards," he said.

Except for Rezko.

by ricardo4 2008-03-15 01:38PM | 0 recs
Re: I trust Rezko

The article's main point was that Obama didn't know what Rezko was doing. I want to believe him, but that's just really hard to do. It just doesn't add up to what the facts are. Rezko was known to be under investigation for many years. It was all over the place. It is difficult to believe that Obama would choose to believe his friend over the news media.

I want to believe, but in the Rezko area of Obama's career, it looks very dark.

by HillaryKnight08 2008-03-15 01:39PM | 0 recs
Re: I trust Rezko

Do you believe the media over your friend? Hillary was shouting a Vast Right Wing Conspiracy TO the media about Bill before Bill admitted what he had done. Come on now.

by kristannab 2008-03-15 01:42PM | 0 recs
Re: I trust Rezko

And he's running on superior judgement??????

by Tolstoy 2008-03-15 04:33PM | 0 recs
Re: The other paper

Whoops, let me try that again...

That quote is taken from an overall positive story
for obama. Also from that article:

On the central question: Did Obama do something improper in the purchase of the house?

I see no proof he did, other than that he had no business at all getting involved with Rezko in any personal financial transaction.

And again:

Am I satisfied with all his answers, especially in relation to the house transaction about which I've been harping?

Not entirely. But, barring some new facts or information from some other source that would contradict him, I don't know how much further we can push the issue.

by shef 2008-03-15 01:45PM | 0 recs
Re: The other paper

I am sure more questions will remain but will anyone find any new answers? I doubt it because there is really nothing there.  I am sure that you have made some pretty naive choices in your life, everyone does.  One of the main reasons why I am going with Obama as opposed to HRC is judgment and do you learn from your judgment.  HRC REFUSES to apologize for Iraq and has actually been defiant when people have asked her to do so. She stated that if one doesn't like my vote on Iraq than I am not their candidate. No problem, Barack's my candidate then.  I'm sorry I have a really hard time trusting the Clinton's and after South Carolina I felt that someone had stabbed me in the heart and then kicked me into the gutter.

by kristannab 2008-03-15 01:46PM | 0 recs
Re: The other paper

If you are in the gutter, you put yourself there.  Hillary is not going to apologize for her vote, that vote didn't take us into Iraq, Bush did and her vote wouldn't have mattered one way or the other.  You hold her to a standard you hold no one else accountable for apparently.  Obama did not even have to vote so there is no real comparison.  Since he has been in the senate his voting record on this issue is the same as Clinton's, so he has not distinguished himself in the senate about this war, he only talks about it on the campaign trail.  His adviser has said that Obama will not hold himself to some plan he has articulated on the campaign trail about Iraq anyway so how can you be sure he would even carry out what he has claimed about Iraq in the first place?  Did you vote for Kerry?  Just checking because as I recall Kerry voted for the resolution.  The resolution was to get the inspectors back into Iraq but you conveniently forget that part eh?  It was Bush that took our troops into Iraq, not Hillary Clinton.

As for SC you bought into that nonsense didn't you?  Bought Obama's line hook line and sinker.  How easy it was to fool you then?  Because as I remember things after NH it was Donna Brazile on CNN who said that "As an AA I am insulted by Bill Clinton's tone when he refers to Obama as a fantasy"  even though she knew damned well that Clinton was referring to Obama's position on Iraq.  Then the reporters claimed the NH vote was due to some Bradley effect, claiming it was a racist vote against Obama, then Obama spread around that the Clinton's remarks were somehow racist, when it was only with a twisted reading of these things that anyone would come to that conclusion.  Then a reporter asked Clinton if he thought a black candidate could win in SC and the answer was played over and over again as if Clinton was trying to say that Obama was the black candidate to diminish him, which was a deliberate distortion of the truth since Clinton was after all answering a question put to him by a reporter.  Then the Obama campaign circulated a 4 page memo accusing the Clintons of all kinds of twisted racial comments, misconstruing anything they said as racist.  Now you can have your opinion but if you think that either Bill or Hillary Clinton are racists, you must be living in Obamaland, where anything he says is gospel and never sexist and anything she says is racist and always suspect.

You may justify your feelings any way you want to but I do remember how Bill Clinton was always supportive of the black community and how his policies did in fact benefit people from all racial backgrounds, raising poverty levels, education assistance and policing in communities and helping people have security and a better community.  He was in no way a racist, and these scurrilous accusations may be befitting Obama now but they are a distortion of Bill and Hillary and their work in the AA community.  Before Obama, Hillary had a lot of support in the AA community, now Obama has torn this wound in the democratic party that may never be healed.  It is a tragic and terrible mistake and only promotes bad feelings that are based on a false premise.

It seems easy to forget that Obama has been spreading this talk that Hillary is so divisive, that the Clinton administration was somehow bad, or at least not as full of transformative quality as Reagan or so he said.  That Obama has tried to make democrats hate the Clintons for his own promotion.  Before Obama, Clinton was considered to be a great democratic president, but now?  Obama has tried to tarnish our memories of a pretty good administration over all because Obama needs to trash her to be the alternative.  He is getting the blow back that was inevitable because of his own negative comments and a lot of democrats don't like it, maybe indy/repub like it, but democrats?  Not so much.

by democrat voter 2008-03-15 02:32PM | 0 recs

From the Trib:

So what really happened Friday when Obama detailed his Obama connection? And will his attempt to exorcise Rezko keep U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign from exploiting that connection?

Obama fleshed out his relationship with Rezko—including the disclosure that Rezko raised as much as $250,000 for the first three offices Obama sought. But Obama's explanation was less a font of new data or an act of contrition than the addition of nuance and motive to a long-mysterious relationship.

We fully expect the Clinton campaign, given its current desperation, to do whatever it must in order to keep the Rezko tin can tied to Obama's bumper.

by defibialater 2008-03-15 01:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Ouch

The Chicago Tribune is the guy's home town rag, and have been in the tank for Obama this whole campaign, so of course, they are trying to clean up Obama and attack Clinton at the same time.  These reporters think they are so slick but in fact they are just more trash talk, can find such garbage everywhere these days.  doesn't make it true, doesn't make them even right on Obama or Clinton.  No more so than any trash talking all over the blogs all the time, it is so bad the net is a cess pool frequented by the lowest life where everyone is a pundit and no one has any real legs to stand on, they all stand in a garbage pit, where anyone can and does trash anyone all the time, here as well as everywhere else.  Its all opinionated clap trap.  Mine as well as yours.

by democrat voter 2008-03-15 02:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Ouch

No they are not a rag. That would be the Sun Times. BOTH papers have been grilling Obama about Rezko for quite some time and have not been able to turn up anything.  They are suspicious of all politicians in  Chicago.

by kristannab 2008-03-15 02:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Ouch

With good reason I'd say having lived there for several years.  Simon says?  All papers serve their boards/owners and not the public, they want to sell papers but they also want to sway opinion with slanted reporting/commenting.

by democrat voter 2008-03-15 02:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Ouch
Ah yes...trash, right. Did you happen to look around this site and notice that what they say about Hillary's campaign is unquestionably true?
by defibialater 2008-03-15 03:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Ouch

Unquestionably true?  Not to me it isn't only to those Obama supporters who believe anything and everything bad about Hillary, such trash talk as you are saying is true, I'm saying is not so much truth but ugly insults, not truth at all.  Only to the warped hatred of the Obama supporters, who are so full of stars in their eyes about Obama but full of insults and disgusting crap about Hillary, not truth, no not true at all.  claiming it to be true doesn't make it so.

by democrat voter 2008-03-15 04:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

Isn't it just so predictable.  Comments about Obama seems to always turn to an attack on Clinton, and you say that Obama is such a uniter, bah humbug.

Two things.  Obama is not going to tell a bad story about Obama so predictably, he would not incriminate himself and he seems to have answers for his problem with Rezko as "I trusted him, I didn't know he was corrupt, I didn't know about those slums,(even though they were in his district and he did get money for Rezko to renovate and scam those people out of any improvements)  But isn't Obama running on his superior judgment?  What is so superior about his judgment about Rezko?

Then this thing the Obama supporters bring up about Hillary's tax returns.;  What a smoke attack that is, as if she would put anything in those returns that would be incriminating for her, so they would be as an issue a non issue, but then Obama supporters don't know there is any there there, they only want to make it appear as if there MIGHT be something there.  What are they trying to say about her tax returns?  What could be made of this kind of thing, it is a smear without any real reason to think there would even be anything that would be revealed in those tax returns that would disqualify her to be president.  If there were something, she would not put it in those returns, after all, you all claim that she has been planning to run for president for her whole life, so why would she put anything in them that would be bad in the first place?  It is a typical republican tactic to try to suggest there is something bad in some thing when there is no real fact to suggest that at all, it is merely implied that there must be something in her returns, but what?  Phishing.

by democrat voter 2008-03-15 01:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

You are way too trustworthy of Hillary. You can't pick and choose what you want to put in your tax returns, it's called fraud.  If she has nothing to hide why say that she will release them when she is the nominee? Why not let the voters judge her by them NOW. Look, the tax returns show where you are getting your money from. If she is getting her money from the Saudi's  or members of Communist China I think that gives us reason to be seriously concerned.  How are we supposed to be tough with those in the world when we owe them favors? It's dangerous. It is not a republican tactic it is about transparency and corruption.  

by kristannab 2008-03-15 02:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

What trash is that?  Saudi's or communist China?  LOL!!!  hahahahahaha

by democrat voter 2008-03-15 02:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

Do a google search.

by kristannab 2008-03-15 02:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

Don't forget Kazakhstan while you are at it.

by kristannab 2008-03-15 02:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

Transparency and corruption,  well, well, well, I'm sure YOU think so, no its about stirring up rumor and innuendo, that is what it is about, not fact, not any reality, but what some people can make out of it, not reality, but non reality.  I'm sure you think she is corrupt, I am not trusting, that is the point of my resistance to Obama, I'm not trusting at all.  I know what Hillary's faults are and I accept them, I do not think she is perfect but neither do I think she is corrupt or a criminal nor do I think is is important to try to imply it by another means, and I don't think Obama is either, I just don't accept that he is without guile or full of all truth and the American way, he is just another politician, nothing more or less.

by democrat voter 2008-03-15 02:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

Do you really know all of Hillary's faults? No. Do we know all of Obama's faults? No. But I suspect Hillary's faults far outweigh Obama's at this point and I am more willing to take a risk with Obama than Hillary. She is also way to divisive and I don't think she can win.  I want a woman president but I don't think she is the one.

by kristannab 2008-03-15 02:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

Well I am not.  I don't find Obama any more compelling than her at all.  I don't think she is a risk, we already know about her, its Obama that we do not know.  I don't like his policies, that is the main reason really.  I want universal health care, he doesn't, I don't want to have our president sit down with terrorist regimes, he does, I don't want his take on the Clinton administration, I happen to think that Administration was good for our country.  there are many reasons I don't find Obama to be qualified, he doesn't have the necessary knowledge about this federal government, for one thing.  Many reasons not the least of which is the supporters who trash Hillary daily, this is unacceptable to me anyway so he doesn't get my support.  It was never necessary to trash her for him to win, so I don't think he is an honorable guy in the least. It was never necessary to accuse her of being a racist, that made me sick at heart, knowing that she does in fact support that community with many years of work.

by democrat voter 2008-03-15 03:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

You don't seem to understand that she doesn't get to CHOOSE what's on the tax returns.  Not without breaking the law.  That's the whole point of the release of them.

by Cycloptichorn 2008-03-15 02:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

Also, this is common practice by presidential candidates. What is her problem. The longer you delay the more you give people a reason to wonder.  There have been stories for years and as recently as days that are hinting at what might be in those tax returns by bringing up the Clinton's ties to other countries. They are just waiting for those returns to fully exploit this.  The sooner she gets this out the better.

by kristannab 2008-03-15 02:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

Common practice?  Yes, when she is the nominee, but then you already know that don't you?  No it is a phishing expedition trying to find something to "get" her on, trying to find any thing that can be turned to appear as if there is some dark thing lurking in her tax returns, the implication is there would be, which I don't buy at all.  Why would she have something on those returns, after all she has made plenty of $ with her book, she has a husband whose income has been made with speaking engagements, and there is the charity work that I'm sure you will try to make something bad of, but his work in that arena has been a good and decent thing, but once the bloggers/cutthroat trash mongers get their hands on it will try to make it into some bad and awful thing that we should somehow find so bad.  Never mind all the good his foundation has done and is continuing to do, no we must find something to further degrade the Clintons over, we just simply must trash them at all costs.  Geez!

by democrat voter 2008-03-15 02:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

John Kerry released his returns BEFORE he was the nominee.  Why not put it out there. I do not want any "October surprise" situation because Hillary wants to play hide and go seek with her tax returns.   It's called vetting.

by kristannab 2008-03-15 03:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

Perhaps the very reason she doesn't release them is she has been burned before by people who try to find in anything some dark and foreboding thing, as if, how silly are people, fraud?  If she were to commit fraud?  So she would put something in her return that would be incriminating, but be afraid of fraud?  How silly!  If she were some criminal don't you think those pesky republicans could have found it?  But they didn't.  Actually they spent quite a lot of time and money trying but to no avail, even though the blogs repeat over and over these charges, they are proven to be so much hot air, just like this issue it is a non issue.

by democrat voter 2008-03-15 02:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

What is there to hide? When I applied for a job I had to agree to have a background check. Do you think that if I had said no or "I'll wait to do the background check after you hire me" do you really think that I would get the job? Hell no.  WHAT IS SHE HIDING?  If there is nothing suspicious about her assets and if nothing is found, then who looks like a fool? Not Hillary.  Why not put it out in the open.

BTW, there are serious rumors that Bill Clinton is "Client 6" in the Spitzer case.  Do you think people want to be reminded of Bill's escapades and Hillary not kicking his ass to the curb? I don't think that would play out to well with those swing voters that are needed to win an election.

by kristannab 2008-03-15 02:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

Now you are so disgusting you should troll rate yourself to suggest the Clinton is client # anything when we all know that Bill Clinton has not had to pay for a piece of As* his whole life, why start now?  You are disgusting and a dirt spreading trash talker who deserves the troll rating.  Disturbing.

by democrat voter 2008-03-15 03:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

Excuse you.

by kristannab 2008-03-15 03:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

No excuse for you.

by democrat voter 2008-03-15 03:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

Some women, not you apparently but some of them don't think it is the thing to do to kick their husbands to the curb as you suggest because of a sexual transgression, perhaps because marriage is based on more than sex, maybe she loves Bill?  Maybe she doesn't want to kick him to the curb for that, perhaps she is a woman of Honor who honors her marriage even if he doesn't.  Perhaps she took those vows till death do us part to heart, or maybe is it merely some political calculation as you think it is.  Maybe it isn't any of your damned business and you should just keep your nose out of her marriage.

by democrat voter 2008-03-15 03:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

Nope I don't. I think more highly of myself than to put up with someone who doesn't love me and continues to embarass me.  Why put myself through that. I guess as an African-American woman who has had to struggle to get where I am, not because of a man and one who seriously values self respect, I find it difficult to admire Hillary and vote for her (of course this is just one reason).

by kristannab 2008-03-15 03:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

Yes and I can guess the other reason, clear as day to me now.  It sure can't be that a woman could actually love her husband regardless of his mistakes.  Of course, I can say that not all women feel the way you do.  Some women feel quite differently about marriage.  So you must be one of those women who thinks that a woman should not benefit from the endeavors of their husband, not be able to claim any experience from being in the White House because after all she was only married to the president, and could not possibly have any input to her husband's administration or any influence or any experience but that of a WIFE which is practically no experience at all. And of course, you wouldn't want Michelle to have any either right?  No we should not think that Michelle has any reason to be proud of her country except that her husband is running for president and getting white voters to vote for him, now she is proud.  But they aren't voting for her, they are voting for him.  She should take nothing for herself from that right?  

by democrat voter 2008-03-15 03:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Chicago Tribune: Rezko/Obama not sitting in a

At least blow job queen Michelle Hussein Obama has the mansion she purchased with Rezko cash and with the salary increase she received as a result of earmarks Barack Obama submitted on behalf of The University of Chicago hospitals.

by truthteller2007 2008-03-15 02:50PM | 0 recs
oh, she's not so bad

she's just a little narrow minded and self-absorbed. Kind of entitled. She reminds me of Lynn Cheney, and they're cousins by marriage, no?  

by anna shane 2008-03-15 04:31PM | 0 recs
Re: oh, she's not so bad

As if Hillary doesn't act entitled. Girl, please.

by kristannab 2008-03-15 04:51PM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads