The Fact-Checker, by Michael Dobbs

ONE Pinocchio? What part of Clinton's claim that she's won the popular vote is not a complete lie? Using Clinton logic -- counting Michigan -- she's beaten me, you and President Bush as well given that none of us were on the ballot.

Please, none of this wussy waffling. This claim of hers is a four Pinocchio lie.

Jayne - absolutely. This is ridiculous - her count doesn't include caucuses and includes the counts of elections that wouldn't be considered fair by international monitoring standards (don't believe me? check the UN site). Four Pinnochios are in order for this whopper.

This is a major, major falsehood. Her website may have an asterisk, but her speeches and the TV appearances of her surrogates (Bayh and Rendell) do not. It is unfair and wrong to count Florida, but completely deceptive and fraudulent to count Michigan, where Obama got 0 votes. How can anyone say with a straight face that Clinton should be credited with 100% of Michigan's votes? People need to be called on this lie, which is sure to be repeated ad nauseum over the next two weeks. Please don't take the easy way out and say that "there are arguments for each side." There are not. There is no credible argument that Clinton is winning the popular vote. Anyone who claims to the contrary is a liar.

Once again the Clinton campaign is trying to hoodwink the American people by claiming that Hillary now leads the popular vote. They really think the voters are stupid.

Those Clinton spinmeisters think they are being clever and smart. Pathetic.

You know,

My girlfriend is REALLY big on honesty and character. I am a better man for having her in my life. When I look at the Hillary camp overall I wonder how she can claim to be such a great mother and wife.

Leader of the free world? WOW!

It truly amazes me..

unreal....

She has overtaken Obama in the popular vote. Florida and Michigan voters will vote in Nov.
They are not barred from the general election
are they? She is not lying to me, but she is to you. Of course if she opens her mouth it's worth at least one pinnochio to you. How long have you been a Clinton hater? I know it's been a while.

When are you going to check on Obama's knowledge og Wright's statements?

All reputable news sources, when listing popular vote, give her totals, his totals, and before PA vote, always notates she was 94.000 behind if you counted Florida and Michigan.
You Obamamaniacs paste sources like crazy and even crazy posters. She is not lying. She is now leading by 100,000 if those two state votes are counted. They "will" be counted in November, you know. Not counting those two she is behind 500,000. It's how you look at it. I choose to look at it as she is ahead.

Yes, Chief, Florida and Michigan voters will vote in the general election, but as you point out they'll be doing so in November, not September or October. All serious candidates will have campaigned, and most importantly their names will be on the ballot.

Would you please name the candidate that has honesty and character. I must be missing someone? Would it be Nader? Is there someone else out there I don't know about?

Yes, Chief, Florida and Michigan voters will vote in the general election, but as you point out they'll be doing so in November, not September or October. All serious candidates will have campaigned, and most importantly their names will be on the ballot.

Posted by: Andrew
__________________________________________

Andrew, I believe Obama did campaign in Florida. I believe the same ads he ran in Ga. and AL ran in Fla. Of course he was required to buy the whole area to save money. (Has ole Fact Checker checked that lie.) To be "honest" the serious candidates campaigned in Fla. I'm not sure about MI. but because both are typical politicians I'm sure they managed it, just in case.

There is a big difference between Clinton and Obama supporters. Clinton supporters know and accept Hillary's faults. Obamanites think he has no faults. We just can't figure out how you guys could be that stupid.

Hey Chief, why do you keep saying they will vote in November in the general? This is the Democratic Primary we're talking about...is Hillary mounting some independent campaign for president once Obama gets the nomination?

A perfect Clinton election Michigan . Also favored by the political leaders in several other countrys. Superdelegates time to pull the plug . Really I believe Hillary is just trying at this point to make sure Sen. Obama is not elected ,. She waited a long time and thur many' Bimbo eruptions' For slick Willie to make her president . And Bill sure does not want a Democrat to erase his stained legacy'

Chief has his "facts " mixed up. In Michigan all the Democrats removed thier names [ at least all that were not subject to sniper fire in Bosnia] Hillary said she realised that the results would not count[ maybe she forgot she is almost 60 and it may have been late at night} signed a plege to that effect[ maybe her fingers where crossed] Now has forgotten the whole think. Honesty and integrity count

Chief,
You are flat wrong when you say that Obama supporters think he has no faults. We KNOW he has faults. We know what they are. But his faults do not matter as much to us - do not add up, say - because we know that he has all of the skills and qualities this country needs to move forward in what will be a VERY difficult time, and not stagnate or move backwards.

I don't give a crap about Wright. And I'm not willing to hold Obama responsible for anything Wright says, just like I'm not willing to hold Hillary responsible when Bill chases skirt, or even hold you responsible when people close to you screw up. I couldn't give a crap when Obama was in the church and "heard" statements Wright made, or when he was absent. These are not issues we need to be focusing on. They waste my time and energy.

Do you know why young people and educated people are fervently backing Obama? Because we see the future and the depth of the problems, and we know that neither Hillary - nor McCain - have the imagination or the temperment or the people skills to find common ground with all of the interests that will be tugging in the debates. They do not have the intellectual integrity, to say nothing of the personal integrity, to lead us in a new direction. We have seen this from the way they talk during campaigns, the ads they run, the lies they tell.

Similarly, Hilary's base is rooted in the past, in fear of change, in status quo of years gone by that we cannot recapture. McCain - don't get me started. He doesn't even remember what he says from day to day.

Obama supporters, in fact, are among the clearest thinking when it comes to him, and his advantages or disadvantages. To say that he has somehow blinded huge numbers of people with his "charm", or his large white teeth, is assinine. It assumes people are stupid. And, like Obama, we don't assume people are stupid. We assume they are smart, thinking, and essentially good.

What a decisive victory for her, the home town girl. she picked up 9 delegates more than Obama in PA. And no matter how the deadly duo, lawyers both, spin it, it's about delegate count not popular vote. last week Jon Stewart asked Obama if after he won the nomination, and the general election and was been sworn in as president, would Hillary still be running? Stubbornness is not strength, it is often stupidity. And speaking of stupidity it is what has done her in; she was too dumb, after entering the fray with more advantages than any candidate in our history, to have a back up plan if she did not lock up the nomination on Super Tuesday. Now she is trailing a tyro and all the Clinton-speak is not going to matter.

And, like Obama, we don't assume people are stupid. We assume they are smart, thinking, and essentially good.

Posted by: JohnDC | April 24, 2008 9:39 AM

You do make an exception for the Dumb and Dumber Clintons, don't you? The smartest woman in the world is turning out to be barely educable. She has proven the point that experience doesn't matter for her only experience lies in lying and she is horrible at it. The smartest woman might also realize that when the press is present there may be recording the event. Hype, Hubby, and Hyperbole got her further
than she should be but it's over. Where the hell is Dan Gallagher when we need him?

Wait a minute, the quote says "more people have voted for Hillary Clinton", not "Hillary Clinton leads the popular vote". It's true... it' complete spin, but it's true!

Hillary surrogates are another thing, but that's not what you're fact checking.

Is the Washington Post really paying your salary to point out such obvious nonsense?

You know, I'd be interested to see you fact check Bill Clinton's statement on S. Carolina the other day. Have memos really surfaced which reveal the Obama campaign purposefully looked to racialize the contest in advance of his comments? Did he or did he not pick up the phone to Jesse Jackson afterwards? (this would take some investigative reporting, but I'm pretty sure that's part of a journalist's job).

After awarding the 4 pinocchios for incoming sniper fire someone from the Clinton campaign evidently reached out to Dobbs and told him to get in line or else. Dobbs got scared and heeded their advice. Grow some balls Dobbs

Clintons winning the popular vote if you count all the votes.

If you count George W. Bush style , obama is winning.

That's what digusts me, How like George Bush mr obama is...

And this is how it will always be, Hillary is just eight more years of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Rice and Rove, in the sense that they constantly phrase things that in some weird sense can sound true but are PURPOSELY misleading; as if every citizen is supposed to be a trained trial attorney.

Like Rice and Ashcroft: No it's not torture, it is just pain, humiliation, physical abuse and near drowning. It isn't torture unless it results in DEATH or organ failure. And anything that does that? Well it wasn't torture, it was an accidental death, because we didn't INTEND for that to happen. So nothing we do is ever wrong, by definitions.

Bill Clinton: "I did not have sex with that woman." Of course, getting a blow job that culminates in his orgasm is not sex by HIS definition, so according to him and Hillary, he did not lie. He was just misunderstood, right?

I am so tired of this Clinton Crap, get out of the race. I voted for and caucused for Obama and I am a white southern male over 50. I think it is impossible for the lying flipping McCain to beat him, but even if that remote possibility happens because of racism or whatever, I don't care, I'd rather take a chance on something real than suffer for what could be the rest of my life under the corrupt and self-serving, lobbyist infected, lying government of either Clinton or McCain. C'mon America, stop being such suckers. CHANGE something!

Every time HRC opens her mouth, untruths fly out by the bucket full. As a politician, she does not set good examples, especially for my daughter.

ATTENTION JACKSMITH :-)

If you think you can make people listen to and believe your poorly-phrased, poorly-reasoned partisan attacks on Barack Obama,

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think Barack Obama's EXTENSIVE experience as a civil rights attorney, activist, community leader, state legislator, and U.S. Senator (MORE years in elected office than Hillary) is outweighed by her 35 years as a lawyer for WalMart (a few years), political wife (35 years), and U.S. Senator (a few years, during which she lay down for W on Iraq!) (see the difference?)

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama, facing an economy on the verge of collapse, could not handle the situation at least as well if not better than Hillary Clinton. Who also has no experience, and Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) lucked into the greatest economic expansion and prosperity in American history (due primarily to the advent of the Internet which he didn't invent, and the end of the Cold War with which he had nothing to do) - largely irrelevant because HE IS NOT THE CANDIDATE

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama's realistic approach to health care is not as good as Hillary Clinton's poll-driven election year contrivance - she, Who delayed this current health care debate back in 1993, when she - alone, because she would accept neither advice nor criticism from anyone, let alone Democrats in Congress - failed to get universal health care for all the American people.

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama, with the experience of having been one of only a few political figures to appreciate the disastrous mistake we were making in Iraq, cannot better manage that situation than can Hillary Clinton, Who voted to invade Iraq when Bush asked so that she would look strong enough on defense to run for president, and Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) went to war only when he was convinced by polls that the American people thought he absolutely had to - and who, once again, IS NOT AND CANNOT BE THE CANDIDATE

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama cannot be at least as effective at saving the environment as Hillary Clinton - with no experience saving the environment, and Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) left office having presided over the most dramatic increase in carbon emissions in American history, and who did not raise mileage standards for his entire Administration

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama, graduate of Columbia and Harvard Law (where he was President of the Law Review) and sometime professor at the University of Chicago, is not substantially better-informed than Hillary Clinton, Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) presided over yearly increases in the cost of higher education which were much greater than inflation -

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama with no federal experience but a first-class mind will not be FAR better than Hillary Clinton, who spent 8 years on the right hand side of the bed of President Bill Clinton (OK, more like 6 1/2) Who is one of only two Presidents in American history ever to be impeached

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that you can change the way Washington works with the narcissism and political cynicism of two people who have never worked other than as politician (well, one mostly as a politician's wife) but who still want you believe they are ON YOUR SIDE, like Hillary and Bill Clinton, rather than with inspirational ideas and conversations from and with Obama, ..

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think all those Republicans voting for Clinton in the Democratic primaries, and caucuses are NOT doing so at the suggestion of Rush Limbaugh...

Best regards

Jacques Smith

p.s. You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you don't know that the huge amounts of money funding Hillary Clinton is coming in from the insurance, and medical industry, that has been ripping you off, and killing you and your children. And denying you, and your loved ones the life saving medical care you needed. All just so they can make more huge immoral profits for them-selves off of your suffering...

You see, back in 1993 Hillary Clinton had the ego to try to drum up massive amounts of new business for the health insurers in the name of "affordable, universal" health care for everyone, ignoring the research - which she had to have seen - which said that the only useable and effective model for universal coverage is SINGLE-PAYER... NOT a giveaway to Aetna, Met, etc.

Posted by: jacquessmith | April 24, 2008 11:07 AM

One Pinocchio:

"Some shading of the facts. Selective telling of the truth. Some omissions and exaggerations, but no outright falsehoods."

You say:

"By the more generally accepted measure of the primaries that were actually valid, Obama still has a popular vote lead of around 500,000 votes, or 1.7 percent."

What about Clinton's statement is NOT an outright falsehood then? It is, providing the absolute largest amount of deference possible to Clinton, misleading to the point of being a lie. Explain to me how that equates to one pinocchio?

Clinton, Dodd, and Kucinich left their names on the Michigan ballot. Edwards and Obama coordinated to remove their names to suck up to Iowa and New Hampshire, and deny Clinton the ability to have a clear victory in a state where she was heavily favored to win. John Conyers actively encouraged Obama supporters to vote "uncommited" to offset the Clinton vote.

Obama ran a nationwide cable TV ad buy that ran in Florida before the primary. Clinton went to a fundraiser in Florida the night of the primary, timed to appear after the polls closed.Neither campaigned, but by Jan 29, voters in Florida already had seen both candidates compete in 4 states and several debates and the national press heavily covered the race, so Florida and Michigan voters were familiar with the candidates.

The DNC should have allowed for revotes in both states. Obama's attorneys blocked this even though Clinton supporters were prepared to fund them.

Obama has blocked MI ad FL revotes and refused to debate in NC. He is a frontrunner afraid of his challenger.

"She has overtaken Obama in the popular vote. Florida and Michigan voters will vote in Nov.
They are not barred from the general election "
And, since Obama's name wasn't on the primary ballot, nobody in Michigan will vote for him in the genral? Pull the other one.

The electoral vote is what counts in the general election in November. If the Dem.primaries chose to follow the electoral college system, sen Clinton would have built up a 15 point lead over sen. Obama in total electoral votes after the PA primary and will be able to end the Dem. primary with her as the nominee for the general election

Clinton is now claiming the lead in the popular vote based on including Michigan and Florida?

Clinton supporters:

Is there no act or claim by this craven, cynical opportunist that will make you re-consider?

If not, why exactly are you supporting her?

Why does everything Hillary say need an asterik? She agreed FL and MI would not count but reverses when convenient. Hillary says, "I'd be winning the race if the tally was based on pant suits or cumulative scandals with my husband."
THE CLINTONS: WILLING TO THROW AWAY INTEGRITY FOR SHORT-TERM POLITICAL GAIN

Why does everything Hillary say need an asterik? She agreed FL and MI would not count but reverses when convenient. Hillary says, "I'd be winning the race if the tally was based on pant suits or cumulative scandals with my husband."
THE CLINTONS: WILLING TO THROW AWAY INTEGRITY FOR SHORT-TERM POLITICAL GAIN

Wow, I wish I could change the rules in the 4th quarter of a competition. Maybe I should tell my son that points are no longer the basis by which one wins a basketball game when he's losing. I could change the game's purpose to rebounds and blocks. What a great lesson Hills.

Hillary's botox is seeping into her brain. She has run the most pathetic campaign ever. She lost a primary that was supposed to be a coronation. What makes you Clinton supporters think she wouldn't find a way to lose the general? I think the most crucial segment to look at in an election are the voting voters. Not some straw polls where everyone isn't on the ballot, but, you know, the contests that the candidates agreed would count.

Submitted by Evelyn Pringle on April 4, 2008 - 12:47pm. Commentary | Nation - World | Politics and Elections

Obama


(Best Syndication) Barack Obama has a long history of working with Chicago Mayor Richard Daley and governors of Illinois, including the current Governor Rod Blagojevich, in doling government funding for housing development in Chicago. His history is hardly a model of success, except for the hundred of millions in profits made by the chosen few slumlords.

Less than a year ago, in the April 26, 2007, Chicago Sun-Times, Fran Spielman reported that Chicago aldermen were accusing the Daley administration "of being asleep at the switch while low-income housing projects developed by the now-indicted Tony Rezko collapsed into disrepair."

"The spigot of loans, grants and tax credits should have been cut off when the first of 30 taxpayer-supported Rezko buildings in Chicago fell into disrepair, the aldermen said," according to the report.

Instead, Spielman said, a "Sun-Times investigation showed that the city, state and federal governments kept the gravy train rolling -- to the tune of $100 million between 1989 and 1998."

The lending continued, the Times noted, even as the city repeatedly sued Rezko's development company, Rezmar, "for such basics as no heat."

"They were going after people for being slum landlords in one department and loaning them money in another," said Alderman Freddrenna Lyle.

Obama now wants to bring this dog and pony show to Washington. I can see it now. His former boss, Allison Davis, at the Davis, Miner & Barnhill law firm, that served as a hub for Rezko's thriving slumlord business for a decade before Davis quit and became partners with Rezko, will be appointed to head the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Davis and his partners, which include his sons Jared and Cullen, have received more than $100 million in taxpayer subsidies to build and rehab apartments and homes over the past 10 years and have made at least $4 million in development fees, according to the Times.

"Davis has gotten deal after deal from the mayor, helping to make Davis one of the city's top developers," Tim Novak noted in the November 7, 2007 Sun-Times.

There's already a plan in place to guarantee that the Chicago model of "community development" is carried out in the White House. In his "Plan to Fight Poverty in America," Obama says, "we should create an Affordable Housing Trust Fund to develop affordable housing in mixed-income neighborhoods."

The Plan will create a "White House Office of Urban Policy" to develop a strategy for metropolitan America, and Obama will appoint a Director of Urban Policy who will report directly to him, as president, to "coordinate all federal urban programs," the Plan states.

Mayor Daley will probably be hired for this gig. The Plan explains that Obama will task his new Director "to work across federal agencies and with community and business leaders to identify and address the unique economic development barriers of every major metropolitan area in the country."

While climbing the political ladder, Obama held himself out to be a champion of rights for minority-owned businesses. According to an article on Black Enterprize.com, "it is Obama's strong record when it comes to supporting minority-owned businesses that has black business leaders working overtime to send the 42-year-old congressman to Washington."

However, an example of the Chicago version of a minority-owned business is DV Urban Realty Partners, where Allison Davis, who is an African American millionaire many times over, owns 51%, and Robert Vanecko, Mayor Daley's nephew, owns 49%.

On July 18, 2007, Obama discussed his plan to deal with urban poverty in a speech at the Town Hall Education Arts and Recreation Center in Washington and started out by tugging the heart strings by invoking the name of Bobby Kennedy and stated:

"It's been four decades since Bobby Kennedy crouched in a shack along the Mississippi Delta and looked into the wide, listless eyes of a hungry child. Again and again he tried to talk to this child, but each time his efforts were met with only a blank stare of desperation.

"And when Kennedy turned to the reporters traveling with him, with tears in his eyes he asked a single question about poverty in America: 'How can a country like this allow it?'"
"Forty years later," Obama said, "we're still asking that question."

First of all, "Barack Obama you are no Robert Kennedy," and we're still asking the question because the careers of politicians like Obama are funded by a political mafia which has turned helping the poor into a cottage industry.

During his speech, Obama himself spelled out why low-income housing developers get away with funneling tax dollars through poor people in cities like Chicago without drawing any scrutiny, when he stated:

"These Americans cannot hire lobbyists to roam the halls of Congress on their behalf, and they cannot write thousand-dollar campaign checks to make their voices heard. They suffer most from a politics that has been tipped in favor of those with the most money, and influence, and power."

In Obama's case, a whole gang of slumlords in Illinois made their "voices heard" by writing campaign checks to fund his rise to fame. But as long as the focus of the slumlord allegations remains solely on a crook named Rezko, the other members of the gang will not get the credit they deserve. See what others are saying and join the discussion at our Forum

One fact is beyond dispute. Without the fundraising of his political Godfather, Rezko, Obama's rise to power would not have occurred. However, Rezko was not the pied piper of Hamlin who led Illinois politicians astray. It's the other way around. Without the cooperation of the corrupt government officials, Rezko would not have been able to fund their political campaigns.

In Illinois, favored politicians are joined at the hip when it comes to fundraising. For instance, from 1999 through 2006, an analysis by the Chicago Tribune shows Obama took in more than $1.5 million from some 700 people who also contributed to Mayor Daley during his political career.

A cursory review of Illinois campaign records shows Allison Davis and his family members giving close to $16,000 to Obama's presidential campaign. The Sun-Times reports that Davis has donated more than $400,000 to dozens of political campaigns, and the top beneficiaries include Mayor Daley, Blagojevich and Obama.

The truth about all the scams run by the political mafia operating in Illinois is only coming out now because of Rezko's corruption trial, and if the Democrats want to lose any chance of winning the White House, all they have to do is nominate Obama.

This case is only the first of what could be many to go to trial. Other criminal charges are pending against several people listed in the indictment, and civil lawsuits have been filed against many of the same people and are awaiting the outcome of the criminal cases.

If Obama had an ounce of respect for Democratic voters, he'd drop out of the race before the details of the corruption in Illinois spread to the rest of the country. If the leaders of the Democratic party had a lick of sense, they would inform Obama right now that under no circumstances will his name be on the ballot come fall.

Political junkies know the details of all the sordid scandals swirling around Obama in Chicago, but the average American voter does not have a clue.

The prosecution team is led by the US Attorney for Northern Illinois, Patrick Fitzgerald, of Scooter Libby fame; the same guy who put the last Illinois Governor behind bars and convicted a host of government officials from the Daley administrations who were involved in what prosecutors called "pervasive fraud" to rig city hiring for 12 years with persons who got out the vote for Mayor Daley, and the candidates he endorsed, as well as numerous crooks rounded up during the scandal involving Daley's Hired Truck program.

The list of names in the indictment includes about eight persons referred to as "Co-Schemers," and reads like a "who's who list" of major campaign donors to Obama, Blagojevich, Daley and other powerful Illinois politicians.

Blagojevich is referred to as "Public Official A," Obama is referred to as a "political candidate," and there is a list of "Individuals" from "Individual A" all the way up to "Individual HH."

By now, everybody following the case knows the names of the "Co-Schemers" and "Individuals", and the Republicans can use the court filings as a roadmap for their plan of attack on Obama. In fact, they are probably editing their talking points for cable news shows as we speak. They no doubt already have video clips in the can of every failed low-income housing project in Chicago connected to Obama to splash across the airwaves the minute he is nominated.

In addition, the Chicago Tribune has two ace reporters, Bob Secter and Jeff Coen, stationed at the courthouse, who provide a daily blog called "Gavel-to-Gavel" on the Tribune website which gives a blow-by-blow account of the live testimony in the trial every few hours.

The names of corrupt politicians and power brokers from both the Democratic and Republican parties are being dropped before the jury like flies. Many of the witnesses, including the main co-defendant, Chicago businessman Stuart Levine, have already pleaded guilty and are testifying under grants of immunity in hope of getting a lighter sentence, which means they have everything to gain by testifying about the other crooks.

Although the Tribune's Gavel-to-Gavel coverage is just as good as having a front-row seat in the courtroom, the Obama camp apparently feels the need to monitor the trial first-hand. On March 14, 2008, during an interview with the Sun-Times, a reporter said to Obama: "You have somebody in the courtroom to monitor the trial, right?"

"We may," he replied, "I think that may be true."

The case involves the corruption of two state regulatory boards. The investigation, dubbed "Operation Board Games," by the Feds, began in December 2003, based on information supplied by an informant. Its now obvious that Rezko was aware of the investigation as early as 2004, because during a January 16, 2007, court hearing his attorney, Joe Duffy, told US District Judge Amy St Eve that he was hired in 2004.

"And my guess is you hired Mr. Duffy to deal with the Feds?" the judge said to Rezko, and Rezko replied, "Yes, your Honor."

The first board controls the Teachers Pension System, which administers pensions and benefits for all Illinois teachers except for those in Chicago, and the Health Facilities Planning Board, which approves all proposals for construction projects that involve medical facilities in Illinois.

The Teacher's Pension fund has over $30 billion in assets. Investment firms that want to do business with the fund submit proposals, and the board votes on whether to approve the proposal. Some members of the board are elected by teachers in the state, others are appointed by the governor and others serve by virtue of their state office such as the school superintendent.

On Blagojevich took office, the Schemers were able to stack the TRS board with members who would vote whichever way they were told. Once they accomplished that feat, they demanded kickbacks from investment firms in exchange for the approval of their proposals.

Rezko's partner in the Rezmar development company, Daniel Mahru, is referred to as "Individual Z" in the indictment, and according to court filings, Rezko told Mahru that "$500 million" of TRS money was earmarked for their company. Mahru is reportedly cooperating with federal investigators.

In addition to lining their own pockets, the money gained through the scheme was funneled to the campaigns of Blagojevich and Obama. Prosecutors have identified two $10,000 payments that were made to Obama's US Senate campaign through straw donors Joseph Aramanda and Elie Maloof, which originated from a kickback paid by investment firm, Glencoe Capital, to secure approval for a $50 million deal. See what others are saying and join the discussion at our Forum

Aramanda and Maloof also each gave Obama $1,000 for his failed run for Congress in 2000. Once Obama became a US Senator, Aramanda's son was granted a coveted intern position in Obama's Senate office in Washington during the summer of 2005, based on a request which the Obama's camp has admitted came from Rezko.

Levine was appointed to the TRS Board in 2000, by Republican Governor George Ryan and was reappointed in 2003 by Blagojevich. As part of the team led by Levine to rig the votes, Blagojevich appointed, attorney Anthony Abboud, to serve. He is "Individual Q" in the indictment. He has been donating money to Obama's political career since March 2000, with a total of more than $2,800.

Blagojevich also appointed, attorney Jack Carriglio, or "Individual R." On June 30, 2003, Carriglio donated $1,000 for Obama's US Senate campaign.

The TRS story has the makings of a great Hollywood movie with subplots upon subplots. Allison Davis, or "Individual BB," was a friend of Hollywood producer Tom Rosenberg, who produced the movie, "The Human Stain," with Anthony Hopkins and Davis in a small part. He also produced the Oscar winning, "Million Dollar Baby."

Rosenberg, or "Individual J," is a central figure in the case. His investment firm, Capri Capital Advisers, a real estate manager, had done about a billion dollars of business with the TRS in the past and wanted to do more. In 2004, the Schemers tried to coerce a bribe from Rosenberg, or in the alternative a $1.5 million contribution for Blagojevich, in exchange for approval of a $220 million deal.

According to the indictment, Davis admitted to Rosenberg that Rezko, and Blagojevich's top fund raiser, Christopher Kelly, or Co-Schemer B, had asked Davis who could raise funds for Blagojevich from the state pension system and he volunteered Rosenberg's name.

During his testimony on April 1, 2008, Levine explained that he was already mad at Rosenberg because he expected $500,000 for help he gave Rosenberg in getting the TRS board to approve a $100 million deal in 2001, but he never came through with the money.

The only benefit Levine received from the deal was that Rosenberg said Levine no longer had to pay him $50,000 a year for lobbying efforts, according to the monitoring by Gavel-to-Gavel.

However, all hell broke lose when Rosenberg refused pay the $1.5 million. During the trial, prosecutors played tapes of phone calls in which comical conversations were discussed between the bipartisan group of Co-Schemers and Individuals, as they were trying to figure out how to deal with Rosenberg and his threats.

The jury heard conversations between Republican power broker, William Cellini, or Co-Schemer A, and Levine, in which they said Rosenberg was threatening to "stand at State and Madison," and make public the attempt to extort money for Blagojevich's campaign and that he would "take them all down," and even threatened to go to the Feds.

They claimed Rosenberg said he considered Rezko and Christopher Kelly the two most likely members of Blagojevich's inner circle to end up in prison someday, according to Gavel-to-Gavel. Kelly has been charged in a separate case with hiding $1.3 million from the IRS and using money from his business to pay gambling debts with Chicago bookies and Las Vegas casinos.

Levine testified that Rezko wanted things to settle down and quoted Rezko saying, "Mr. Rosenberg was a dangerous individual, and nobody wanted to be put in a dangerous situation."

Levine said Rezko told him that TRS should grant Capri the $220 million. "But, in fact, that should be the last business that Mr. Rosenberg does with the State of Illinois," Levine recalled Rezko telling him, according to Gavel-to-Gavel. Levine testified that Rezko said Blagojevich had been briefed on the plan and agreed with it.

During his testimony, Levine also told the jury that Rezko had plans for Blagojevich to run for President. "He said that he had raised a great deal of money for Gov. Blagojevich and that he had great hopes and expectations that Gov. Blagojevich would run for president," Levine told the jury.

"And although he knew it was a long shot, he was working toward that end," Levine said.

He also told the jury about an October 29, 2003, trip in a plane he chartered to carry Blagojevich and others to fundraisers in New York, during which Levine thanked Blagojevich for reappointing him to the Planning board and said the governor told him, "Never discuss any state board with me, discuss them with either Tony Rezko or Chris Kelly."

The TRS part of the story has many subplots. For instance, in 2005, the Feds issued a subpoena to the TRS for records pertaining to a $150 million deal approved for the Carlyle Group, in which Robert Kjellander, or Individual K, described in the August 11, 2005 Sun-Times as the "national Republican Party treasurer," and "a Springfield lobbyist with close ties to the White House," was to be paid a $4.5 million fee.

The most famous investor in the Carlyle Group is the family of Osama bin Laden, and its most famous advisor is the first President George Bush. On October 26, 2001, the New York Times reported that the "Saudi family of Osama bin Laden is severing its financial ties with the Carlyle Group, a private investment firm known for its connections to influential Washington political figures."

"It came largely as a result of public controversy about the family's stake in a Carlyle fund that invests in buyouts of military and aerospace companies," a Carlyle executive told the Times.

After the September 11 attacks, the Times noted, "the investment was criticized amid speculation that the family might profit from increased military spending from America's war on terrorism."

Kjellander reportedly headed Bush's reelection campaign in three states and in December 2003, he was able to obtain an invitation from the Bush administration for Levine, Rezko, and Cellini, along with their wives, to attend a Christmas Party at the White House. See what others are saying and join the discussion at our Forum

Apparently Kjellander is still in good graces with the Republicans because he is "helping plan this September's Republican National Convention in Minneapolis," according to John Kass in the March 7, 2008 Chicago Tribune.

The subpoena issued to the TRS in 2005, also included a request for records involving a $10 million investment approved for Hopewell Ventures in 2003, whose principals included David Wilhelm, a former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, who is now a super delegate who openly supports Obama. Wilhelm was a main player in getting members approved to serve on the Health Facilities Planning Board.

The Board is made up of nine members and approval of a project requires a majority of five votes. At the center of this scheme was a proposal by Mercy Health System to gain approval to build a new hospital in Crystal Lake. On April 21, 2004, the board voted to approve the project, even though state analysts said the hospital was not needed.

Levine was also appointed to the Planning Board by a Republican Governor. However, he established himself as a bipartisan crook early in the trial. On March 10, 2008, he told the jury that even before he got involved with the Blagojevich administration, he used to funnel campaign contributions to Democratic candidates through straw donors at the request of former Chicago Alderman Edward Vrdolyak, who has also been indicted on federal fraud and bribery charges in a related case.

Levine's term on the Board was set to expire in 2004, but the Schemers made sure he remained on the panel. On March 10, 2008, Rezko's lawyer questioned Susan Lichtenstein, former general counsel to Blagojevich, about a series of email exchanges she had related to the appointments of members to the Board in 2003.

One of the emails was between Lichtenstein and the office of Wilhelm, who ran Blagojevich's 2002 campaign, which suggested several appointees, including Levine.

"With the e-mails," Gavel-to-Gavel reports, "Rezko's lawyers appear to be pushing the point that Rezko wasn't alone in backing Levine and that Levine's appointment had a broad array of support."

While all this was going on, as a state senator, Obama was the chairman of the Senate Committee on Health and Human Services. As such, his name also appeared in the email exchanges as a member of a team working on legislation to keep the board from expiring under a sunset provision of Illinois law.

The email exchanges said, Wilhelm had "worked closely" over six months with state legislators to extend the life of the board and listed Democrat and Republican leaders in the Illinois Senate and House, including Obama.

The exchange with the names of four candidates for the board stated that "our attached recommendations reflect that involvement" with the political leaders.

In the end, the changes made by the lawmakers in 2003 dropped the number of members on the Board from 15 to 9, making it much easier to stack the panel, and by the summer of 2003, the Schemers controlled a 5-bloc vote.

At the time, Thomas Beck was the chairman of panel, and Levine was the vice-chairman. Beck testified, under a grant of immunity, and told the jury that he took a $1,000 donation for Blagojevich when he met with Rezko to seek reappointment.

The persons chosen to guarantee the votes were 3 doctors: Imad Almanaseer, Michel Malek and Fortunee Massuda.

Massuda, or "Individual Y," gave Obama $2,000 on January 26, 2004. Malek is "Individual FF," and he donated $10,000 to Obama's US Senate campaign on June 30, 2003, and another $500 in September 2003.

Almanaseer, or "Individual EE," contributed $1,000 to Obama on March 12, 2004, and ponied up another $2,000 on May 24, 2004.

This part of the scheme also opens up several subplots. The person responsible for working out the details for the kickback on the Mercy proposal was Jacob Kiferbaum.

Kiferbaum was the builder hired by Mercy to construct the new hospital. Levine told the jury about a long history of taking bribes from Kiferbaum, who would then pad his bills to hide the payments. He said the money would be passed through middlemen, such as John Glennon, a prominent Republican insider, who had served on a pension board with Levine.

The new hospital was never built after details about the crimes became known. Kiferbaum has pleaded guilty in the case and is cooperating with the Feds.

When referring to the fact that Obama's name shows up in the email exchanges as reviewing the recommendations to appoint Levine and the others to the Planning Board, the media is always careful to mention that Obama is not accused of anything.

However, on March 14, 2008, during an interview with the Tribune, Obama was finally asked directly: "Did you have discussions with him [Rezko] about either recommendations that you sought for people or recommendations that he was making?"

"I did not have any formal discussions with Tony," Obama said, "beyond one individual, and that was Dr. Eric Whitaker, who ultimately became the head of the Illinois Department of Public Health and who had been a longtime friend of mine, who I had known since he was getting his master's at Harvard and I was at the law school there."

"He had expressed an interest in that post," Obama informed the Tribune.

"I think he had applied separately," Obama said, "but I don't recall whether I called Tony or he called me."

"And I simply said, 'I think this guy is outstanding and is certainly somebody who is worthy of an interview,'" he added.

"And was it your understanding that Tony was going to effectuate that?" the Tribune asked.

"No," Obama said. "What I knew was, and I don't think this has been disputed, that he was one of a number of people within the Blagojevich circle who were, you know, helping to screen or interview potential candidates for administration posts."

The job Obama recommended for his friend paid about $150,000 a year. However, Eric Whitaker is now an executive vice-president of the University of Chicago Medical Center, according to the March 9, 2008, Sun-Times. That would be the same employer that pays Michelle Obama a salary of close to $350,000 as a vice president.

But Obama's using the lure of the pension funds to raise campaign money goes way back. In 1999, he "was instrumental in the formation of a coalition of black investment firm owners and legislators in Illinois to create an initiative that would award black-owned firms with the management of some of the state's retirement funds," according to a 2004 article on Black Enterprise.com.

"He's out there fighting for us," said John Rogers, chairman and CEO of Chicago-based Ariel Capital Management in the article. Rogers donated $9,000 to Obama's US Senate campaign.

"He was a catalyst to pull [everyone] together to create the initiative to have these organizations let minority firms do business with state funds," said Lee Holland, managing partner and Chief Investment Officer of Holland Capital. Lee Holland, his wife and two of his partners donated $35,000 to Obama's US Senate campaign. In the October 1, 2007, New York Times, Christopher Drew and Raymond Hernandez reported that:

"Members of the group, the Alliance of Business Leaders and Entrepreneurs, say Mr. Obama checked into their problems and helped start a drive that enabled minority investment executives to win millions of dollars in business from the state's giant pension funds."

However, the Times pointed out that Obama's political career had benefited many times over from his ties to the group. "Several of the businessmen or their wives would help clear the debts from his Congressional race," the Times wrote, "and six of the group's members are now among the top fund-raisers for his presidential campaign, according to campaign finance records."

All totaled, the Times said, employees at more than 30 companies listed on the group's website and their relatives donated more than $300,000 to help Obama win his US Senate seat in 2004 and "set fund-raising records early in the 2008 presidential race."

In fact, when Illinois State Senator Emil Jones, Jr became the State Senate president in 2003, he assigned Obama to a committee looking into the pension questions "to help raise his political profile," according the Times.

During this period, the Times says, campaign finance records show executives from Ariel Capital, Loop Capital, Holland Capital and Capri Capital, "sharply increased their donations" to Obama's State Senate campaign fund.

"And once he began his campaign for the United States Senate," the Times wrote, "they quickly became a fund-raising core that has carried over into the presidential race."

Obama quit the State Senate committee in late 2003 as his race for the US Senate heated up, "and just as the panel began a series of hearings that produced the most substantial changes," the Times reports.

The changes generated millions dollars in fees for some of the firms. For instance, Loop saw its fees from one pension fund rise to $2.4 million in 2006, from $5,700 in 2001, and Holland and Ariel both got several hundred million from the pension funds to invest.

John Rogers and two other people at Ariel each bundled at least $50,000 in donations for Obama's presidential campaign, according to the Times.

An October 3, 2005 article in the Sun-Times, by Chris Fusco and Dave McKinney, reported that Ariel and its top executives also contributed $117,500 to Blagojevich's campaign. See what others are saying and join the discussion at our Forum

Although the current criminal case focuses on two boards, the testimony of Jill Hayden, the former head of Blagojevich's Office of Boards and Commissions, established that the same process was used to fill some 1,500 positions, on 300 boards and commissions, that control a wide variety of regulatory decisions, which would include other pension funds.

Blagojevich appointed Davis to serve on a separate pension board, the Illinois State Board of Investment, which oversees funds for state employees, judges and legislators, and "also has been under federal investigation," according to the November 7, 2007 Sun-Times

In the September 23, 2007, Sun-Times, in reference to the "minority owned" DV Urban, of Davis and Robert Vanecko, Tim Novak reported that a "nephew of Mayor Daley stands to make millions of dollars from city-connected pension funds" in "winning business from pension funds for city workers, cops, teachers and CTA employees".

All total, the pension funds gave DV Urban $68 million. The first investor was the Chicago Teachers Pension Fund, but according to Novak's report, the board members did not learn that DV Urban was owned by the Mayor's nephew until 6 months after they voted to approve the investment.

As of September 23, 2007, Davis and Vanecko had received $1 million in management fees and they are "guaranteed at least $3 million in management fees and could make as much as $8.4 million before the pension deal ends on Dec. 31, 2014," Novak reports.

In addition, Davis and Vanecko will share in any profits from the real estate deals and can earn a 3% fee on the property they develop.

Obama says he met Rezko, when he got a call right out of the blue from David Brint, after he was elected president of the Harvard Law Review, wanting to know if he would be interested in being a developer for Rezko's real estate company, Rezmar.

Because they read that he was interested in community development work, Obama says, Rezko and his two partners, Mahru and Brint, met with him to discuss the job. "I said no, but I remained friendly with all three of them," Obama said in the Chicago Tribune on November 1, 2006.

"All three of them remained great contributors of mine," he added.

And so they did. According to the latest tally given during interviews with the Tribune and Sun-Times on March 14, 2008, the amount attributed to Rezko went from a claim of $50,000 or $60,000 a year ago, to Rezko raising roughly $250,000.

In fact, Obama told the Tribune that Rezko "might have raised $50,000 to $75,000" for one campaign alone in his failed run for Congress in 2000.

The Rezmar connection is a gift that keeps on giving. In February 2007, David Brint gave Obama $4,600, and his wife, Elizabeth gave contributed $2,300. Brint also hosted a fundraiser for Obama in June 2007. Elizabeth donated a couple thousand in 2002 and $2,000 more in 2003 as well.

On March 17, 2000, Mahru gave Obama $1,000, listing himself as president of Rezmar. On March 4, 2004, he donated a whopping $5,000. Mahru also tossed $1,000 to Mayor Daley in 2001 and gave him another $1,500 in 2003.

But then Rezko and Mahru had plenty of money to throw around. By 1998, Rezko had a reported net worth of $34 million and Mahru was worth $14.6 million, according to the "Rezmar who's who list," published in the April 24, 2007 Sun-Times.

After turning down the surprise job offer from Rezko, Obama expects voters to believe that he just happened to get hired at the small 12-attorney Davis law firm, which just happened to represent Rezmar in development deals. And then a couple years later, Rezko's companies just happened to appear on the very first contributions made to the "Friends of Obama" committee to launch his political career as a state senator.

On March 14, when asked by the Sun-Times, whether the subject of politics was mentioned at his first meeting with Rezko, Obama stated: "Quite frankly, I don't recall. I think it was talking about the possibility of me working for him."

About the same time that Rezko began funding Obama's campaign for the Illinois senate, Rezmar began developing low-income apartments with three non-profit groups, which were also represented by the Davis law firm, including the Chicago Urban League, the Woodlawn Preservation and Investment Corp, and the Fund for Community Redevelopment and Revitalization.

Bishop Arthur Brazier, described as "a powerful ally of the mayor" by the Sun-Times, founded the Woodlawn Preservation Corp and the Fund for Community Redevelopment.

Davis was the treasurer for Woodlawn when the group went into business with Rezmar and he also served on the board that ran the Fund for Community Redevelopment.

By the time Rezmar started working with the non-profits, two of its earlier projects were having major problems, including a building where the tenants were without heat for five weeks between December 1996 and February 1997. The city had to sue to get the heat turned back on and in fact Chicago sued Rezmar for failing to heat buildings at least a dozen times, according to the Sun-Times.

Obama got a $1,000 campaign donation from Rezmar on January 14, 1997, while those tenets were without heat, Novak reports. Records show that Obama also received a $1,000 contribution from Resko Concessions, a day earlier on January 13, 1997.

Rezmar rehabbed 15 buildings between 1995 and 1998 in partnership with the nonprofits.. Each project involved public and private financing including loans from the city or state, federal low-income-housing tax credits and bank loans. The way it was set up, Rezko and Mahru always came out ahead because Rezmar was paid part of the development fees when a deal closed and the remainder when tenants moved in.

The projects were supposed to provide housing for low-income tenents for at least 25 years. "But the first deal Rezmar struck with the Woodlawn Preservation and Investment Corp. collapsed in just six and a half years, when the state sued for foreclosure," according to a report by Novak in the April 23, 2007 Sun-Times.

Of the buildings managed by Rezko and Mahru, 17 ended up in foreclosure, six buildings are currently boarded up, hundreds of the apartments are vacant and in need of major repairs, and taxpayers are left stuck with millions in unpaid loans, Novak reports.

An "Operation Board Games" investigation should be conducted on the slumlord business in Illinois over the past 15 years. The Chicago Sun-Times reporters, and especially Tim Novak, have already done an excellent job in connecting all the dots.

Daley became Mayor in 1989 and Rezmar got its first city loan of $629,000 the same year, even though Rezko and Mahru had no construction experience. See what others are saying and join the discussion at our Forum

Rezmar stopped making the $2,982 payments three years later and missed 16 payments before the city changed the terms so that Rezmar would only have to pay $465 a month, according to the Sun-Times report by Novak.

Over the years Davis has been appointed to serve on the Illinois Capital Development Board, which oversees state construction projects, and the Chicago Public Building Commission. Daily appointed Davis to the Chicago Plan Commission in 1991, where he stayed until January 2006.

The Plan Commission must approve, disapprove or defer any proposal by a public body or agency "to acquire, dispose, or change any real property within the territorial limits of the city" on the basis of whether or not the referral complies with the city's long range planning goals and objectives, according to its web site.

After Rezko got Davis appointed to the pension fund Board, Davis helped Rezmar in two major developments as a member of the Plan Commission, even though the two men were business partners. The first vote involved a housing development along the Chicago River at Irving Park Road and was cast a month after Davis won a seat on the Board.

The second was cast a year later in March 2004, for the approval of Rezmar's proposal for the 62 acre South Loop project. This deal collapsed shortly before Rezko was indicted in October 2006, according to Novak.

Daley made Thomas McNulty, the attorney who acquired the buildings for Rezmar, president of the Chicago Low-Income Housing Trust Fund, a charity run by the city that doles out tax dollars to landlords to subsidize rent payments for the poor. Rezmar received more than $2.7 million from this charity fund, according to the "Rezmar who's-who list" in the April 24, 2007 Sun-Times.

Mahru was appointed to the Illinois Affordable Housing Advisory Commission in 1993, which helps decide which projects get state funds, by Governor Jim Edgar.

Obama began serving on the board of Woods Fund, a Chicago charity foundation, in 1993, the same year he was hired by Davis' law firm. In 2000, Davis went to the foundation to help fund his plans to build low income housing. Obama voted to invest $1 million with Neighborhood Rejuvenation Partners, a $17 million partnership that Davis still operates, according to a report by Novak in the November 29, 2007 Sun-Times.

Davis used some of the money to build a 72-unit apartment building for senior citizens, a $10 million project built with a $5.7 million city loan, which earned Davis nearly $700,000 in development fees, Novak says city records show.

Davis' son Cullen is paid to manage the building, which opened three years ago with a ceremony featuring Mayor Daley.

Kelly King Dibble was the vice president for business development at Rezmar and she became the executive director of the Illinois Housing Development Authority once Blagojevich became Governor. She is now an attorney with, The Northern Trust Company, the same company that financed Obama's mansion.

Velma Butler, an investor in Rezko's 62 acre Loop project, also serves on the Illinois Housing Authority. She donated $1,000 to Obama's US Senate campaign in 2003..

On October 1, 2006, Daley appointed Martin Nesbitt chairperson of the Chicago Housing Authority. The CHA was created for "the purposes of engaging in the development, acquisition, leasing, operation, and administration of a Low Rent Housing Program and other federally assisted programs," according to the agency's 2005 annual financial report.

Nesbitt succeeded Sharon Gist Gilliam, according to the CHA web site. Gilliam is a former board member of Rezmar. She told the Sun-Times that she was only on the Rezmar board until 1991. However, the Times found her still listed as a board member in a 1994 biography on the company's web site.

Daley had appointed Nesbitt commissioner of the Housing Authority on July 9, 2003, and he served as vice chairperson of the Board since January 17, 2006.

Nezbitt is also vice president of the Pritzker Realty Group, where he procures new real estate investment opportunities, retail investments and developments for the Pritzker Group, according to the CHA web site. A quick trip to the Huffington Post site showed tens of thousands of dollars donated to Obama from people with the last name Pritzker in the Chicago area but many people are listed as homemaker or not employed or information requested, so its impossible to sort them out.

Nesbitt is treasurer for Obama's presidential campaign according to the Center for Public Integrity. Over his political career, Nesbitt has contributed more than $10,000 to Obama's campaigns.

Michelle Obama was hired as an assistant in Daley's office by Valerie Jarrett, Daley's deputy chief of staff in 1991. When Daley appointed Jarrett chairman of the Office of Planning and Development, Michelle became her assistant..

Jarrett is now CEO of the real estate development and management firm, called Habitat, which manages the housing program for the Chicago Housing Authority.

The Commission on Chicago landmarks "is responsible for recommending to the City Council that individual buildings, sites, objects, or entire districts be designated as Chicago Landmarks, thereby providing legal protection," according to the government web site.

Daley appointed Michelle to serve on the Chicago Landmark Commission. The current chairman of the Commission is Daley's former chief of staff, David Mosena.

Mosena was a member of Obama's US Senate Finance Committee in 2004, with other members that included Valerie Jarrett, Tony Rezko, Rita Rezko, and Allison Davis. The committee raised more than $14 million, according to Federal Election Commission records, cited by Novak in the Sun-Times on April 23, 2007. Jarrett serves as an advisor to Obama's presidential campaign.

The Illinois Finance Authority was established by Blagojevich in 2004. Its "role is to support the Governor of Illinois' economic development agenda," and "IFA approves about $3 billion in project financing each year," according to the its site.

Rezko business associate, Ali Ata, was appointed to head the Finance Authority. He is now under indictment in a separate criminal case in which Rezko is also charged. On June 30, 2003, Ata contributed $5,000 to Obama's US senate campaign.

On June 13, 2007, the Sun-Times reported that as a state senator, "Obama wrote letters to city and state officials supporting his political patron Tony Rezko's successful bid to get more than $14 million from taxpayers to build apartments for senior citizens."

"I am writing in support of the New Kenwood LLC's proposal to build a ninety-seven unit apartment building at 48th and Cottage Grove for senior citizens,'' Obama wrote in October 28, 1998 letters to both city and state housing officials. "This project will provide much needed housing for Fourth Ward citizens.''

New Kenwood was set up as another "minority owned" company, where Davis owned 51% and Rezko 49%.

In the Times, Novak reported that the deal included $855,000 in development fees for Rezko and Davis, while Obama was still working at the Davis law firm, for a bid on a project that was "four blocks outside Obama's state Senate district."

Although the law firm represented several companies owned by Davis and Rezko when Obama wrote the letters, the firm did not represent New Kenwood in the deal. According to the Sun-Times, Davis and Rezko instead hired a firm owned by Mayor Daley's brother Michael, "to help them get $3.1 million from bonds issued by the city of Chicago."

"In addition to the development fees, a separate Davis-owned company stood to make another $900,000 through federal tax credits," Novak reported in the June 13, 2007 Sun-Times.

The development opened in 2002 and was supposed to be managed by William Moorehead & Associates. William Moorehead was also a client of the Davis law firm and a business partner of Davis. In April 2007, Moorehead told the Times that his company was dropped from the deal before the apartments opened. The apartments are now managed by a company owned by Davis' son, Cullen Davis, according to Novak.

In the Times article, Novak also noted that Moorehead received a 4-year prison sentence "for stealing more than $1 million from ... public housing projects he managed for the Chicago Housing Authority and the U.S. Housing and Urban Development Department, as well as from two developments he co-owned with Davis." See what others are saying and join the discussion at our Forum

In a 2006, Moorehead pleaded guilty to fraud and other crimes and admitted stealing more than $600,000 from the Island Terrace and other federally subsidized projects.

During the period when Moorehead was stealing money, the Times reports, he lent Davis $100,000. Davis sent Moorehead a letter on June 15, 2000, and said the sale and refinancing of one of their housing projects had been delayed and wrote: "I need to borrow $100,000 from the Island Terrace resources."

As part of a plea deal, Moorehead is cooperating in an ongoing federal investigation.

David Brint now owns Brinshore Development. He told the Times that he quit Rezmar four years after the company got its first deal with city because Mahru did not find money for building repairs. Brint and his partners have taken over four failed Rezmar buildings -- "in one case paying the city $1 million to settle a $4 million loan made to Rezmar," according to the Times.

Gary Poter owned the construction company that rehabbed all of Rezmar's buildings. He was stabbed to death in May 2006, supposedly by a disgruntled employee, according to the Times "Rezmar who's who" list. Back on March 3, 2004, Poter donated $2,000 to Obama's US senate campaign and on July 19, 2004, he gave Obama another $1,000.

Its more than obvious that the political mafia of Illinois now has plans to install the new, "White House Office of Urban Policy," as a means of getting richer by funneling tax dollars through poor people and retirees on a national level via Obama.

The leaders of Democratic party need to tell him that he will not be the nominee and to drop out of the race. If they do not, the Republicans have enough truthful information lined up to drive Obama out before election day.

A month ago a friend of mine who knew I did not think Obama was qualified to be president, asked me what I would do if he was nominated. I replied that I would vote for him of course, what a dumb question. No more. After a month of research, I could no more support Barack Obama as the leader of this country than I could support another war profiteering Republican.

If he becomes the nominee, all the Democrats in America will be viewed by the rest of the world as either utterly stupid, or totally corrupt. Therefore, for the first time in my life, I have made a conscious decision to take a stand and not vote in a presidential election if the choice is Obama. See what others are saying and join the discussion at our Forum

Evelyn Pringle
evelyn-pringle@sbcglobal.net

(The next report in this series will cover the subplots of the ongoing Illinois corruption case that stretch from O'Hare airport to the Illinois Tollway to war profiteering in Iraq)

(Evelyn Pringle is a columnist for OpEd News and an investigative journalist focused on exposing corruption in government and corporate America)

Project For A New American Century:

The above article is one of many reasons why people are not voting Obama. He has alot of things in his closet that have not been reported yet. The 527's will take him down in the next few weeks. I do not understand why you are all voting for Obama because his record is weak and mostly made up, go look for yourselves. You are being led blindly and have turned into kool aide drinkers.

d55may:

Next time, just post a link. That's why we need character limits on these posts.

One Pinocchio for an outright lie?!

And the "source" of her claim was ABC, the same network that ran the so called debate in PA?

Can you say "establishment"?!

The Clintons now claim that:

1) Caucuses are not democratic. Since they've been party big wigs for close to the 35 years Hillary cites, when did they ever try to change the methods by which states exercise the right to elect by caucus, primary, or the Texas two-step? Why did we hear no discussion about the un-democratic nature of Iowa until after she lost?

2) Elections voided by the party for not cooperating -- i.e., by not performing as members of the party -- were not supported until they were needed by the Clintons. What defense of MI and FL did we hear before Super Tuesday failed to seal their deal? I conceded she kept her name on the ballots which is a sign of her protest, but she did not defend the elections until she was in trouble. Indeed, she had pledged to skip MI, but apparently just forgot to play by the rules she overtly agreed to.

3) Democracy only counts in big states, to hell with most of America. I understand that electoral math matters, but I don't understand how anyone can defend the Clinton posture unless they also defend Karl Rove (from whom they seem to have learned to use dark methods very well). How should an Arkansan feel about the Clintons not only ditching them once they hit the big time, but then going further to claim that small states are just not interesting?

4) They won Texas. I have not seen anyone in print or on tv citing the fact that Obama ended up with one MORE delegate than Clinton in TX. The Post maps call that a split. ????! Hillary did not seal the deal in Texas. Obama won by one delegate.

I sure hope we'll move beyond dynasty in America!

So let me get this straight, Obama is ahead by 500,000 actual votes if he excludes the actual votes from MI & FL.

Hillary takes a lead of 122,000 or 12,500 if "all" the votes are counted.

Don't Dems want "all" the votes to count? I don't see where the dilemma is, count all the votes. Or are we OK with disenfranchising people just to get the nominee we want. This reminds of FL in 2000. Situational ethics are ok as long as your guy gets the nomination. Nice... makes me all warm and tingly with hope.

Obama chose to take his name off the ballot in MI, I haven't heard why he chose to do that. Was it because he knew he wouldn't win against Hillary there?

Looking at Clinton's website, it says that more people have voted for Hillary than Barack. The news release doesn't specify the circumstances. It doesn't say that "she is ahead in the popular vote" because that is contingent on circumstances. Yet, that is the question the "Fact Checker" asks and for which he awards a Pinocchio.

It seems clear the Fact Checker needs to return to high school and take remedial reading. Even a high school student can distinguish the difference between these statements.

I think one reason the Hil/Bill duo are not as popular as the Obama camp is because of the constant spinning done by her PR team. Clinton and her staff need to realize that Americans have already been through 8 years of being lied to and running a campaign to take over the White House based on skewed stats in her favor is not a good plan.

When Al Gore won the popular vote but George Bush became president because he had more electors, Democrats were outraged.

But, when Obama supporters see that more people have voted for Hillary, they go into insane attack mode. Hmmm... reminds me of those Rethugs they shipped in to cause chaos during the Florida recount.

Hillary and Barack's names were both on the ballot in Florida. Neither one campaigned there, but the voters had ample opportunity to get information to make a decision. They did. Hillary won. Their votes are being ignored because the DNC is punishing the state for not bowing down to the almighty Iowa and New Hampshire (even though those states moved their events up anyway).

Here's my question: Florida voters were robbed by the Republicans in 2000. Do Obama and his supporters REALLY believe that Florida voters will support the Democrats in November if the Democrats rob them in August?

Democrats are suicidal if they don't find a way to count Florida and Michigan. And Obama supporters are wearing blinders if they don't think it is relevant that more people have voted for Hillary. That doesn't mean she'll win the nomination... but it does mean that she has a strong base of support and just as much right to campaign as Saint Obama does.

And to the fact checker -- more people have voted for Hillary. That's a fact. You know all the ins and outs of why it may not matter -- but that doesn't make it a lie.

Its called MOVING the goalpost. She cannot catch him in delegates. (She would need wins in ALL 9 states of a 17% margin) So now she wants to talk about the popular vote. She is behind in the popular vote so she wants to include two states that were told that their dlegates would not be sezated and that candidates were told not to campaign there. They BOTH sigend the DNC pledge in August 07. What on Earth is the debate even about. First off the popular vote has nothing to do with anything other than it may sway the superdelegates. It does not pick a nominee. Its yet another example it seems to me that Hillary is willing to say or do anything to win. Her odds are staggering at this point. She is clinging to the last hope she has. That she can cut the delegate lead to under a hundred and the popular vote to under 50 thousand. What she seems unwilling to address is that by the time we get to the convention she may very well need over 80% of the superdelegates. What will she propose then? A pie eating contest? This popular vote assertion is loony. Not only the math but the meaning in general. In case anyone has forgotten. THE PLEDGE

http://www.iowademocrats.org/ht/display/ReleaseDetails/i/1097190/pid/315102

http://www.fladems.com/page/-/documents/THREE_pledge_versions.pdf

ONE nose? Seems a little skimpy for knowingly using people's unfamiliarity with the voting process in Fla and Mich to make misleading claims...Didn't you award Obama 3 or 4 noses for accurately quoting an incorrect statement made by some other candidate a while back...? (Foggy on the details, sorry. If I think of it I'll chime back in...)

Your 2 Pinocchio standard: Significant omissions and/or exaggerations. Some factual error may be involved but not necessarily. A politician can create a false, misleading impression by playing with words and using legalistic language that means little to ordinary people.

She omitted the asterisked comments in all public speeches. She played with words and used legalistic language meaning little to ordinary people when she talks about "votes among all people who have voted" and other such twists of phrasing. If she had nothing to hid behind, she would clearly be stating that she was ahead in the really popular vote. Finally, she is not counting those who cast ballots in caucuses so the "all people who have voted" line is disingenuous at best.

Should be 2!!

If the media and Obama supporters can use the irrelevant popular votes to strengthen their case, why shouldn't Clinton and her partisans? It is a terrible decision to deprive primary voters in Florida (and Michigan) of their delegates--the Democratic leadership had to find a solution. I find nothing wrong with Clinton mentioning that her victorious margins in those states give her the lead in popular votes.
For more on this, read:
http://www.reflectivepundit.com

d55may - You are an idiot!

It is very to see how democrats are fighting over the wonderful candidates. I do not understand why people become so passionate they can not think straight and analyze things. I truly admire Hillary for her tenacity.We deserve somebody like that in the white house. Obama on the other is a smart good speaker, but people wake up the guy showed last week that he can't work under pressure, those questions were necessary.Instead of trying to demean the candidates. why don't we encourage the democratic party put them together in the general election in order to beat Jhon McCain. God knows we do not need another republican in the white house. Obama's supporters please open your eyes, stop being passionate and complaining about reporters being too hard on him. he is not running for congress.
Politicians are liar you think they tell you the truth all the time and also they do not make things up or exagerated.

So now I know this site is garbage just like all the rest of the media's 'objective' reporting. Unbelievable!

Winning by 9% is not a "trouncing" - Hillary needed to win by 15% to 20% for the superdelegates to even think about taking a "second" look at her. Also, Hillary deserved 4 Pinochio's for her flat out "distortion" of the facts regarding the popular vote.

Information for Obama voters. He will not win another primary. He showed how immature He really is by giving Hillary the finger. His past has caught up with him, and is not electable in November.There's 26% of us that will switch partys, and another 19% who won't even vote in November.When McCain gets in He will have to reinstall the draft. Who does this affect, the young and the black, the same people that comprises Obama's base. God bless America.

Dear d55may:

You must have an awful lot of free time. Fishing is a useful hobby - except for the fish.

Paul H

Re Feast or Famine:
"Its called MOVING the goalpost. She cannot catch him in delegates. "

Obama's campaign has done a tremendous job of spinning, but the fact remains that Obama also can NOT win enough delegates to lock in the nomination. Either one will need super delegates to push them over the top. And, when superdelegates decide, there is no rule that says they have to go by who is ahead in pledged delegates. Technically, they could decide based on their horoscope, but, even if we agree that the will of the people should prevail -- what better reflects the will of the people? Delegates? Or number of real people who cast votes? Sorry, but I think that can (and will) be debated.

Everyone needs to chill. Let the process run its course. Hillary and Obama BOTH have every right to fight to the finish, and should. This race is BOOSTING Democratic registration and allowing every state to participate is energizing Democrats, building grassroots and GOTV operations, and keeping the attention on the Democrats. Are they both getting bloodied in the process? Absolutely. Do you really think they would be LESS bloodied if one of them was fighting directly with the Republicans right now? That's a pipe dream. We ain't see nothing yet...

d55may has learned to cut and paste. She will be allowed to graduate from kindergarten this spring.

So the bad acts of every con-man from the same state as a candidate, who tried to curry favor with that candidate by making a campaign contribution now has their acts attributed to that candidate.

WOW. Shades of Joe McCarthy.

You have just gazed at the work of the republican slime machine. I wonder when the other Hsu will drop.

Have your well paid friend look up McCain and the Keating 5.

Why take a chance making the acquaintance of moneyed people when you can marry one. By the way, McCain needs to reveal his wife's tax info because AZ is a community property state.

Oh, and where are his medical reports that he promised? McCain's Father died at 70. McCain is now 72. Do you think he will survive till November?

RE: Baffled in Virginia

YES you are so RIGHT! It IS the supers that will settle things. NOT the poular vote. You DO realize that by the time the convention comes Hillary might need as much as 80% of the supers to get the Nom? Its called MATH. Not trying to be mean but the math doesnt lie.

In order for Hillary to win the nomination she MUST win ALL the remaining 9 states by a margin of at least 17-19 percentage points (67-69%) and then she must win 64% of the superdelegates. All this talk back and forth cannot change the math. Hillary's efforts to get the nomination will be an exhaustive uphill battle. Before all you Hillary folks start to jump down my throat you should know I LOVE Hillary. I am constantly pleading for unity within the Dem party. I do not have a bias. What I have is a calculator, and a willingness to add things up the way they are, not the way I want them to be. Ironically Hillary's win in PA actually HURTS Hillary in more ways than one. (Kudos though for winning it!) First off it leaves only 9 contests to cut the margin. A 14% point win in PA wasnt merely one of expectation but more of necessity. Failing to reach the margin of 14% now changes her margin for the rest of the contests. In fact the change is rather drastic. As of Tuesday April 22nd she needed 14% wins in ALL states left. Now she needs 17-19% point wins. Use this delegate calculator below and do the math yourself. Adjust the slider to 67-69% wins from here on out and see what you get. The magic number of delegates needed to win the Democratic nomination is 2,025 out of 4,049 total number of delegates. If the race stays remotely the same as it is now, Hillary will be in the hole by 23% in superdelegates, plus she would need the 51% margin of those superdelegates for victory. That means Hillary would need 74% of all the superdelegates. As I stated, big big wins are needed in ALL 9 contests from here on out. Otherwise she cannot catch him with the superdelegates. Again crunch the numbers with the delegate calculator below.
The delegate count used is the same as MSNBC and CNN
http://www.slate.com//id/2185278/

Poor job, Fact Checker

Since when is it "fact-checking" to quote "the more generally accepted measure". So popular vote means what is generally accepted as popular vote and that's the fact? Ha!

Secondly, fact-checking assumes not omitting relevant aspects: Obama pulled by himself his name from the MI ballot! Imagine somebody not knowing anything about the situation reading somthing like "In the case of Michigan, Obama's name was not even on the ballot, so he won precisely zero votes."

Finally, the popular vote debate is exactly about what PV means: HRC camp simply says that right now there are simply more people in America that pulled the lever or stood in caucuses for her, aside from every delegate count.

Btw, it is false that "results of both the Florida and Michigan primaries (..) were ruled invalid by the Democratic National Committee". It's not the results that were deemed invalid, the delegates were stripped, which is an entirely different matter. The results are as valid as any other election

DNC and elected officials will not go away from FL and MI issue.
They wanted very much Obama to get the lead big enough to make it possible to ignore both states.
He fails.
DNC and superdelegates feel completely lost: they are terrified by prospect of Obama losing to McCain. And they don't feel strong enough to make re-vote in both states.
Pathetic!

As far as I am aware of Michigan and Florida are still part of the United States. Has anyone heard anything different, did I miss a secession? I have been busy.

vanitsky....
DNC and elected officials will not go away from FL and MI issue.
They wanted very much Obama to get the lead big enough to make it possible to ignore both states.
He fails.
DNC and superdelegates feel completely lost: they are terrified by prospect of Obama losing to McCain. And they don't feel strong enough to make re-vote in both states.
Pathetic!
-----------------------
Dont know if you hear but a revote was rejected by each state. They didnt have the time, money or rescources to revote. Not to mention that BOTH Hillary and Obama signed a pledge not to campaign there and that those delegates would not be seated if they moved up their primaries. Also notable is depsite all this Obama has said "I will respect and participate in any compromise the DNC deems fair"
As for you electability theory with regards to OBama versus McSame...

OOPS!
Obama versus McCain in the Electoral college.....
SurveyUSA interviewed 600 registered voters in each of the 50 states. A total of 30,000 interviews were completed. If John McCain faces Barack Obama, Obama wins 280 to 256. McCain carries 26 states. Obama carries 24 states plus the District of Columbia ... and then there is Nebraska, which divides its electoral votes based on which candidate wins each of the state's congressional districts. McCain wins Nebraska 45% to 42%, but loses in two of the state's three congressional districts, which results in Barack Obama taking two of Nebraska's five electoral votes.
Not to mention Obama has consistantly polled better than Hillary in head to head matchups nationally.
http://www.surveyusa.com/index.php/2008/03/06/electoral-math-as-of-030608-obama-280-mccain-258/

She and Bill Clinton are pathological liars. Period.

The brass of the woman just amazes! To think I used to admire her..one of my generation. How can she say those votes are "hers" when all the candidates weren't on the ballot (remember, there were several candidates then) and no campaigned? No one even knew much about Obama then, but she was already well known..the prom queen to his new kid in school! Of course, without another choice, voters would vote for her! What a sham! Whatever happens, she lies, cheats and steals her way into some new reality! She's winning when she's losing, baiting Obama on Wright but says nothing about Hagee or Parsely, she's anti-free trade when she's bucking to double the number of foreign worker visas that go to her Indian "Bangalore Buddies", she wants universal health care when her supporters in Congress say it's not really gonna happen! After Richard Mellon Scaife formally endorsed her, I'd have to wonder if Hillary Clinton(D) is really Hillary Clinton(R)? Her tactics are straight out of Rove's Rules, she now wants to "obliterate" Iran, she and Bill are raking in the millions from the Outsource/Offshore industry, she's all chummy with Rupert Murdoch and thinks McStrangelove is CIC material? Makes you question where that ten million miraculously came from yesterday..did she make some kind of deal with Scaife? The Republicans will help bankroll winning the nomination, if she takes a fall in the fall? Maybe John has agreed to some plum position in his administration for her..his token "across the aisle" appointment? I just can't trust her anymore. I find myself wondering now about every word she says and every action she takes. It's a shame.

I agree with Hillary. Those voters have voted and will also vote for Presidency. Two more states which Obama lost and will lose. Obama, the DNC and Howard Dean do not need to count the votes in Michigan and Florida, but the American People and the People in Western Europe, Australia, New Zealand and Asia all do. Strange how Obama advocates change, but then when Michigan and Florida Democrats change the date of their primaries he, the DNC and Howard Dean Nuke it. Hypocrites at the highest level. The DNC, Howard Dean and Obama are not representative of the American People. Every vote should count, so Hillary is doing what anyone who BELIEVES in True Democracy and CHANGE. Michigan and Florida are ACTING, Changing, while Obama only talks about it and then does his best to prevent other people's changes from being recognized. Again a FIRST Class Hypocrite. One of the main reasons for Hillary doing so well is that people see this, along with his elitist attitudes. Change, buy on MY, Obama's Changes!!

that does it, I cannot vote for HC if she 'wins' the nomination. To say that she won more popular votes based on a state in which Obama wasn't even on the ballot is ludicrous, and confusing to people who see only that statement. Why should anyone vote for such a liar.

Posted by: Karl
I agree with Hillary. Those voters have voted and will also vote for Presidency. Two more states which Obama lost and will lose. Obama, the DNC and Howard Dean do not need to count the votes in Michigan and Florida, but the American People and the People in Western Europe, Australia, New Zealand and Asia all do. Strange how Obama advocates change, but then when Michigan and Florida Democrats change the date of their primaries he, the DNC and Howard Dean Nuke it. Hypocrites at the highest level. The DNC, Howard Dean and Obama are not representative of the American People. Every vote should count, so Hillary is doing what anyone who BELIEVES in True Democracy and CHANGE. Michigan and Florida are ACTING, Changing, while Obama only talks about it and then does his best to prevent other people's changes from being recognized. Again a FIRST Class Hypocrite. One of the main reasons for Hillary doing so well is that people see this, along with his elitist attitudes. Change, buy on MY, Obama's Changes!!

Hypoctite? HOW about SIGNING A PLEDGE? A contract that those delegates would not be seated and that no campaiging would go on there? ALL Dem candidates signed the pledge. Hypocricy is after signing a contract, giving you word on the rules that then you can turn around with a straight face and ingnore your own promise, your own pledge. PLEASE. I LOVE Hillary but are you aware of the pledge? Does it even matter to you? Is Hillarys word no good?

http://www.iowademocrats.org/ht/display/ReleaseDetails/i/1097190/pid/315102

http://www.fladems.com/page/-/documents/THREE_pledge_versions.pdf

Michael--

Your column/blog is a great national service.

Having said that, I think this really merits a couple of Pinocchios.

Also, thank you for noting that the final margin in Pennsylvania was actually closer to 9 percent, although this seems to have been largely ignored by the media, including your own editorial board (and various journalists) in Thursday's paper, even though the information was available by Wednesday morning.

Senator Clinton will win the nomination and no one can cry foul. The super delegates must do their job and that is to support that candidate that can win in November and like it or not that candidate is Clinton. She is supremely more qualified then the rookie from Illinois and she can win the big states. She has held him off because the people can see that he is nothing more then a lying hypocrite. It is time to vote smart and vote Clinton.

Truth is truth, and math does not lie. In order for Hillary to win the nomination she MUST win ALL the remaining 9 states by a margin of at least 17-19 percentage points (67-69%) and then she must win 64% of the superdelegates. All this talk back and forth cannot change the math. Hillary's efforts to get the nomination will be an exhaustive uphill battle. Before all you Hillary folks start to jump down my throat you should know I LOVE Hillary. I am constantly pleading for unity within the Dem party. I do not have a bias. What I have is a calculator, and a willingness to add things up the way they are, not the way I want them to be. Ironically Hillary's win in PA actually HURTS Hillary in more ways than one. (Kudos though for winning it!) First off it leaves only 9 contests to cut the margin. A 14% point win in PA wasnt merely one of expectation but more of necessity. Failing to reach the margin of 14% now changes her margin for the rest of the contests. In fact the change is rather drastic. As of Tuesday April 22nd she needed 14% wins in ALL states left. Now she needs 17-19% point wins. Use this delegate calculator below and do the math yourself. Adjust the slider to 67-69% wins from here on out and see what you get. The magic number of delegates needed to win the Democratic nomination is 2,025 out of 4,049 total number of delegates. If the race stays remotely the same as it is now, Hillary will be in the hole by 23% in superdelegates, plus she would need the 51% margin of those superdelegates for victory. That means Hillary would need 74% of all the superdelegates. As I stated, big big wins are needed in ALL 9 contests from here on out. Otherwise she cannot catch him with the superdelegates. Again crunch the numbers with the delegate calculator below.
The delegate count used is the same as MSNBC and CNN
http://www.slate.com//id/2185278/

Boys and girls, please read the following posting: Marcy from Florida | April 24, 2008 3:08 PM

She could not have said it better. There is actually nothing wrong with being passionate except when it becomes negative in form and result. I agree, though it is debatable, that most of Obama supporters tend to be quite "defensive" when their candidate is criticized. However, if they remain objective, rather than angry, pehaps they or their candidate might learn from them, and faced with McCain's attackers, he will be ready to respond.

Please don't forget the bottomline, as Marcy very well pointed out -- we are all democrats. Though by your actions, it might as well be two different parties, worse yet, from different countries.

Cool down and be respectful of each other and the candidate. If the "REAL" candidates continue to exercise self-control as much as possible, what gives you, a mere supporter, authority to misrepresent the "REAL" candidates' feelings? Do you realize that the angrier you sound, somehow it starts to reflect on your candidate?

Keep that passion, but please make sure it translates to some positive results for the democratic party.

Thanks.

Oh you want truth...

TRUTH:
You know it sounds a lot like the obama supporters are in fear that he may not go the distance.

TRUTH:
Say whatever you like about Hilary but she is in fact making Herstory in OUR democratic history. None of you bed wetters can change that!

TRUTH PLUS- it is a fact that oabama TOOK his name off the ballot (he did not want the low numbers to hurt his totals) and that Hilary did win votes that have not been counted.

TRUTH PLUS:
WHEN you count those votes (since they were cast) they do FAVOR her. And they will eventually be counted - even if obama supporters don't like that.

You can lie all you want, point fingers, call names - but the facts on the ground say it is so. And it is a fact that Obama did campaign in FL even though HE signed a petition saying he would not.

So get real all you obama maniacs and see past that big nose on your own face.

TRUTH:
In any other world we would applaud this woman for her greatness of spirit. But no, not in crazed minds of dems of for obama.

TRUTH:
He is a novelty that will wear off when it turns out he is just another guy, like all the other guys. We are all human, problem is he has already promised he is not fallible as in the old politics - well maybe it will turn out that new politics can be fallible as well.

TRUTH be told:
obama cannot make all the change he says he can, no one can - it is not reasonable. And in any case none of what he proposes would happen even if he was elected. Only immature people or those with a agenda would deny that reality.

TRUTH:
But then you people for obama would just keep coming up with more excuses about what matters and what does not matter. In other words what you are really saying is that you can't HOLD you candidate to account.

TRUTH:
I'm not impressed by obama and that has nothing to do with Hilary. It has to do with the fact that he is a RADICAL hard left liberal with a specidfic agenda that DOES not resonnate with me. If he is nominated I'll vote for McCain.

TRUTH: If ever elected obama will make a lot of mistakes. He has no VALID experience and the presidency does not come with training wheels the way the senate does.

I still don't see the LIE in "more people have voted for her than any other candidate".

Please disprove that Hillary DIANE Clinton leads Barack HUSSEIN Obama by a) 122,000 actual votes (if Michigan and Florida are included) and/or b) 12,500 approximate votes (if an "estimate" is given for caucus-goers in Iowa, Nevada, Maine, and Washington).

Whether he wants to count the votes or not, there is no denying that 15,116,304 votes have been cast for her:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html

The actual, TOTAL estimate of votes cast for her is 15,340,166. Does anyone dispute those facts?

TRUTH:
You know it sounds a lot like the obama supporters are in fear that he may not go the distance.

TRUTH:
Say whatever you like about Hilary but she is in fact making Herstory in OUR democratic history. None of you bed wetters can change that!

TRUTH PLUS- it is a fact that oabama TOOK his name off the ballot (he did not want the low numbers to hurt his totals) and that Hilary did win votes that have not been counted.

TRUTH PLUS:
WHEN you count those votes (since they were cast) they do FAVOR her. And they will eventually be counted - even if obama supporters don't like that.

You can lie all you want, point fingers, call names - but the facts on the ground say it is so. And it is a fact that Obama did campaign in FL even though HE signed a petition saying he would not.

So get real all you obama maniacs and see past that big nose on your own face.

TRUTH:
In any other world we would applaud this woman for her greatness of spirit. But no, not in crazed minds of dems of for obama.

TRUTH:
He is a novelty that will wear off when it turns out he is just another guy, like all the other guys. We are all human, problem is he has already promised he is not fallible as in the old politics - well maybe it will turn out that new politics can be fallible as well.

TRUTH be told:
obama cannot make all the change he says he can, no one can - it is not reasonable. And in any case none of what he proposes would happen even if he was elected. Only immature people or those with a agenda would deny that reality.

TRUTH:
But then you people for obama would just keep coming up with more excuses about what matters and what does not matter. In other words what you are really saying is that you can't HOLD you candidate to account.

TRUTH:
I'm not impressed by obama and that has nothing to do with Hilary. It has to do with the fact that he is a RADICAL hard left liberal with a specidfic agenda that DOES not resonnate with me. If he is nominated I'll vote for McCain.

TRUTH: If ever elected obama will make a lot of mistakes. He has no VALID experience and the presidency does not come with training wheels the way the senate does.

Posted by: Rose | April 24, 2008 6:20 PM

-----------------------------------
Truth?

Fear Obama will not go the distance? Hillar yneeds to win ALL 9 states left by a margin of 17-19% points. Afraid he wont Go the distance? Hardly

What votes are you referening to? You mean the ones ALL candidates signed a pledge agreeing they wouldnt be counted? Does that make Hillary a liar? To refresh your memory...the rules they ALL agreed to and signed...
http://www.fladems.com/page/-/documents/THREE_pledge_versions.pdf

http://www.iowademocrats.org/ht/display/ReleaseDetails/i/1097190/pid/315102

You assertion that Obama campaigend in Florida is a bit weak and unscourced. Why? Because ALL sources state that Thge Obama commercials that ran in that state ( For a week and only in three markets) could not be removed for those Florida viewwer. THE CABLE COMAPIES said that after obama requested their removal. SO.....Obama just scrapped those adds all togehter and started over, eating the money he spent on them.

Any other place on earth Hillary would be applauded but not Here? CLAP CLAP CLAP go Hillary! Get it? This hate you think exists is because you are too busy dealing with angry nuttjobs on blogger boards. Nobody, not even Obama thinks Hillary is not Historic.

The novelty will wear off? There was never a novelty to wear off. People voted for him because they beleive in him. Think otherwise all you like. I guess millions of americans in the majority of states around the country are just parakeets looking at a shiny thing? Hmmm i find that more insulting that Obama's "bitter" comments taken out of context.

Change is impossible. YUP keep on saying it and you will never be wrong. To quote a fine man......

Bill Clinton in 2004:
"Now one of Clinton's Laws of Politics is
this: If one candidate's trying to scare
you and the other one's trying to get you
to think; if one candidate's appealing to
your fears and the other one's appealing
to your hopes, you better vote for the
person who wants you to think and hope.
That's the best."
And speaking of fear.....
The rest of your post is exactly that...what if what if...fear .fear.

Hillary does not need to win ALL 9 states left by a margin of 17-19% points. There are several scenarios whereby she gets the nomination even if she only won them by 15%.

feastorfamine:

Do you dispute the facts (and "estimate") posted at http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html ?

Clinton +122,471 (to be exact)

Posted by Karl:

"I agree with Hillary. Those voters have voted and will also vote for Presidency. Two more states which Obama lost and will lose. Obama, the DNC and Howard Dean do not need to count the votes in Michigan and Florida, but the American People and the People in Western Europe, Australia, New Zealand and Asia all do. Strange how Obama advocates change, but then when Michigan and Florida Democrats change the date of their primaries he, the DNC and Howard Dean Nuke it. Hypocrites at the highest level. The DNC, Howard Dean and Obama are not representative of the American People. Every vote should count, so Hillary is doing what anyone who BELIEVES in True Democracy and CHANGE. Michigan and Florida are ACTING, Changing, while Obama only talks about it and then does his best to prevent other people's changes from being recognized. Again a FIRST Class Hypocrite."

_________________

Karl, I'm from the Caribbean and I can tell you we're astounded that a candidate can sign a pledge that says votes will not count, and have the nerve to go back a few months later and say they should now count.
A candidate trying that on for size here would be laughed out of town.

Your implication that the "rules of engagement" were a conspiracy between the DNC and Obama would seem to have no merit whatsover. If anyone has more reps on the DNC it is obviously Clinton (many of the DNC superdelegates endorsed her before a single vote was cast. It would also seem that the DNC reached its agreement on the rules before Obama became a candidate.

We often see news items expressing concern that the US if falling behind the world in math; Clinton's voodoo math re the propular vote certainly explains that conern.

One other quick thought, as I understand it, the Clinton math is calculated on the inclusion of the invalid Michigan and Florida votes, but EXCLUDES the legal caucus states. Who voted in the caucus states - Martian robots???

Only four of those caucus State votes (Iowa, Nevada, Washington & Maine) have not released official Popular Vote Totals. RealClearPolitics has only estimated the popular vote totals for Senator Obama and Clinton in these four states. RCP uses the WA Caucus results from February 9 in this estimate because the Caucuses on February 9 were the "official" contest recognized by the DNC to determine delegates to the Democratic convention. The estimate from these four Caucus states where there are not official popular vote numbers increases Senator Obama's popular vote margin by 110,224. This number would be about 50,000 less if the Washington primary results from February 19th were used instead of the Washington Caucus results. Perhaps you haven't looked at the link above before criticizing RCP's fuzzy math?

"have not" = have (sorry if that confused you even more).

Unfortunately for Clinton, her Soviet-style primary win in Michigan will never be counted. And just because she feels entitled to the presidency doesn't mean the rules will be changed after the fact to make it so. She cannot win, and I'm fairly certain that even she realizes this by now. Unfortunately, her stubborness is overriding her intellect, and she refuses to accept the reality that's right in front of her face. The only person who benefits from her actiosn now is John McCain.

D55May..you may want to add these factoids to your tableau..Carlyle Group members:Senior Advisors are Mack McLarty, Clinton's Chief of Staff and Arthur Levitt, Clinton's SEC chief. Also, the Big "W" himself was in before he was the Guv, and GOP strategist and McCain pal Dan Senor and former SOS James Baker..and they own Dunkin'Donuts and BaskinRobbins. It's a plot to get you fat!

So..D55May..what's your point? This incredibly lengthy laundry list..sure you're not pitching a movie project here? This must be by the same "writer" who came up with the phony swiftboatload. Same "style", if you can call it that.

So, we've got Obama getting contributions from some folks, and knowing some others who also inhabit the same political scene (Wow..the Urban League is "in this" fiendish scheme, too) and he knows Rezko and was offered and turned down a job with him..and that he's been a politician and a lawyer and sat on a couple of boards..and..I forget..WHAT was your point here?

Obama has discussed all of this and more, and as to his comments about knowing how corrupt political machines and bureaucracies are and how bad we need a new agenda, well, I'd say that, after being confronted with the swamp that is Chicago politics or Washington politics or pretty much any other politics, we now know that he had good reason to get disgusted enough to campaign against it all!

Thanks..you just validated his integrity! Now, he's said he's returned everything they've discovered to be connected in any way with this investigation..a fact you didn't mention. If you have names of anyone you think he has overlooked, well, I'm sure he'd appreciate a little note from you on that!

You make the most absurd "connections"..this one did that and he knew him some way and both of them worked somewhere with someone else who walked down the same street with three other people and the wife of one of them is the second cousin of his paperboy and they both had spaghetti the last Tuesday in June at restaurants only one block apart..therefore..blah, blah..what a pile.

The real issue here is that he's been cleared by the investigators. After investigating this for probably two or more years now, do you really, really think that if they were of a mind that he was in any way even remotely tainted, he would be allowed to run? Do you imagine that no one would have put the bug in his ear that he was going to have a problem down the road, so give it up? The word would have been heard long ago, from those who count..which is not you or your dingy "forum".

Of course he's got someone in court, watching your pals, who he knows are going to twist the truth and make up their usual lies as to what's being said. Have they brought up that Rezko gave to the RNC..and the DNC when Ed Rendell was its head..or that Ali Ata gave Rendell contributions for his own campaign, which Rendell says he's not giving back?

This is typical NeoConArtist script..you put out a long laundry list of events and people, designed to infer devious connections with other events and people. This stuff is strung together to look like it's proof of something, when it's nothing. Throw in some actual tidbits of truth, as an "anchor" for the faulty construct, and to the less inquiring mind, it appears as though you actually have something to say!

This is old news..it's even old news that your bunch has it "out there"..and if you were EVER going to vote (D), I'm Mother Theresa. By the way..you're slipping up and leaving out some other irrelevant names from this..what about the house he bought or Rev. Wright being part of the community outreach or Ayers being on the same board and living in the neighborhood?

Don't they all..every single person, including his "typical white" grandmother have their own little niche in Obama's conspiratorial plot to take over the country and turn it over to Bin Ladin's henchmen..who will then enslave the white race and clear the way for Obama's real family to come here from the planet Mars!

Everybody..listen up..this is important! A couple months ago, we saw NASA film of what looked like a man walking on Mars..they hushed it up..but it was Obama's true father..No, really! I mean it! He is now hiding in an ice cave at the North Pole. The energy from his spaceship is the REAL reason that the ice pack is melting..No..REALLY!

D55May..you and yours all belong in a locked room with heavily padded walls..and lots of pretty little pills!

Today's L.A. Times 4-23 has article on...

The Illinois Democrat received $46,000 in donations from executives and workers last month. In a campaign ad, he said he took no money from oil companies.

Why are these kinds of stories reported here?????

I just voted for Obama one billion times in my head. Since these votes are just as valid as the Florida and Michigan votes, Obama has just retaken the lead!

One pinocchio is way too lenient for this stinkeroo. Statistical flimflam is all this claim amounts to.

All you people saying we should count the FL and MI voters "because otherwise they would be disenfranchised", consider this:

How many FL and MI voters STAYED HOME rather than waste their time on "beauty pageant" contests, or because they agreed with the DNC position and were being good Democrats, playing by the rules.

These voters would become the unfairly disenfranchised ones if the rogue voters were to be counted. Therefore, it's a non-starter.

Clinton can't win enough delegates, it's that simple, get used to it.

Stewie:

Were your "valid" votes CERTIFIED by the Secretary of State?

See- exactly what I am saying...
If someone disagrees with an obama supporter they go on the attack.

TRUTH is truth. I don't buy the bull and you do, that is the difference.

Oh, I like how beasty boy admits obama did campaign in FL but it was the fault of the cable company.

Hilary did not break her pledge promise.

The fact that she is aware of the reality of the votes is not a broken pledge. Obama is aware of them too and does not want them counted or redone since they are not going to be a net positive for him. HOW IS THAT NEW IN POLITICS? Sounds just like bush-

YOU do realize these people in those states HELD an election and PEOPLE, American people came and CAST their votes. So this is not some odd supposition.

They used real money, real people qued up and real votes were actually cast and counted but not seated.

It really happened. A technicality is WHY they are not seating those votes. And those reasons happen to favor obama, but they do not erase the facts.

TRUTH is obama is selective in his appeal, his manner and his method. That does not happen to be the change I'm looking for.

Had the African American vote thus far NOT be going overwhelmingly (an astounding 90% in some cases) for obama how would he stack up? But of course African Americans are not voting for obama just because he is black they just want to vote for him in record numbers because of... what?

Had the votes from either MI or FL been in favor of obama the obama supporters would insist they be counted. That is the TRUTH.

Since they are not - obama and his crowd want them to be irrelevant.

Change is possible but the kind of change Obama campaigns on is not realistic or doable - since it is as YET clearly UNDEFINED.

To me that is highly suspect because it is a promise with no substance and is left up to later interpretation or re-interpretation.

It sounds a lot like a GUY who does not want to be pinned down. That group of fellas have thus far in history been the ones who are ALWAYS found to be hiding something unsavory. Aaahhh... like their reasons, agendas, motives and loyalty that don't mesh with the vague promises they make to get something they are after.

A woman cannot be politics as usual, no matter what - since no women have ever sat in that office. The very nature of her presence there brings a BIG CHANGE - that is also the TRUTH and the REAL change maker that obama avoids discussing.

If obama does not want to be measured by the company he keeps than obama supporters should not use that device to measure what they think they know about Hilary. But they do - such hypocrites.

Perhaps Hillary (if we are even LUCKY enough to have this truly brilliant, dedicated woman as a president) should she be given the chance - will build her success on the mistakes of all the men who came before her. That would be in keeping with the time honored tradition as ALL WOMEN have done, when they break trail.

You know before women had the right to vote they were told to quit this nonsense and go home. They were told the numbers were against them.

How are some of you posters for obama different than that? Glad to say we didn't listen and now we can vote.

Rose - When you attack Obama, the response from his supporters is NOTHING compared to the reams and reams that you write when Clinton gets attacked. Are you really such an uneducated peasant that you can't see your hypocrisy? I also think you should be shut up in a padded room and fed little pills.....

Well, so much for "no personal attacks".

d55may --

You win the post of the day award. Its excellent. It shows what kind of a guy Obama really is. From the beginning of your post, it looks like it came from somewhere else. Can you post a link to the original so people can repost it?

Contrary to the belief of some people on this board, saying something is TRUTH doesn't actually make it so.

Lot of thing Hillary claims are misleading, manupulative, and complete disrectful for her opponent. A person who does not humble herself or himself against public trust and respect such people are known as arogant and by far destructive in nature and such character must disqualify for a candidate of president for a country like America. Her persistence of self proclaimed irritates any honest person. Aloways honesty should be honoured not the lie and arogancy. Hope all American morally abide by such standard for their own satisfaction and dignity.

Obama has done more to divide this country during this primary than anyone is willing to address. His press secretary fed the press out of context remarks made by the Clintons so that they would paint them as playing the race card. If you go back and look at them in context that is absolutely false. Then Barack says all white people are scared of black people, like his grandma. Without context, that statement is hateful and prejudice. HE made the mistake of only appealing to young college kids and the wealthy. Haven't those people had enough opportunity to determine the fate of our country? I choose to stand with the woman who has pursued and supported causes of those less fortunate for 35 years. You all can keep staying angry and hateful that Hillary continues to have support but it only makes those of us not currently not supporting Obama, less likely to support him if he gets the nomination. You are his campaign. Maybe you should think about how you are representing him.

In case some posters don't know some writers like to write. And that has nothing to do with either candidate.

Also as a poster I'm encouraged to share MY VIEWS, aka "comments" and I do so based on all the most obvious blunders other posters have made.

But otherwise I don't actually care one way or the other.

Mostly I think Obama is the ONLY politician in the USA, no- probably the whole entire world who is really honest and true. He is our savior, he will bring us CHANGE from all the rotten people we have in our government today. The world will automatically be good again when we all AGREE to THIS CHANGE and he is our leader, right? That's the pitch, right?

Only it sounds so stupid and ridiculous when anyone else writes it or says it. That's because only Obama is the gifed orator and only he should be allowed to talk or write about real change. His change is for us to be rid of politics and all those nasty, awful politicians- unless he approves them for us.

Yeah, lock us all up and put us on meds because we don't see the wisdom in following rhetoric that has been said, done and not followed through on before. That I guess is your solution to deal with people who may not always agree with your junior demi-god.

The real problem then is that without women none of you would be here, now. Right -

Vote that out if you really want to solve this problem. Women, like Hilary are liars, they are trouble. Why won't that stupid Hilary just quit - right? While you are at it you'd better get rid of fact-checkers and free-thinkers too, they are even bigger trouble!

Who did I leave out? No worries our obama "the eternal sunshine of the spotless kind" will ID them and then whoever they are, they will be out too. Locked up and on FREE meds, right?

So Clinton told another lie. What else is new?

The fact that Obama supporters are so empty inside that they will soak up his PR like human sponges without ever bothering to examine it long enough to realize that its completely non-sensical is a sad commentary on the low level of critical thinking skills most people have.

Obama supporters don't realize that any senior level job requires specific skills and years of experience.

Obama doesn't have either the skills or the experience to be President of the United States.

The technical term for what Obama supporters are suffering from is "magical thinking" they believe that belief, rather than knowledge and skill, is the solution to difficult problems.

Children think that way, but most people grow out of it.

Obama supporters have apparently never grown up.

That is not a complement.

In case some posters don't know some writers like to write. And that has nothing to do with either candidate.

Also as a poster I'm encouraged to share MY VIEWS, aka "comments" and I do so based on all the most obvious blunders other posters have made.

But otherwise I don't actually care one way or the other.

Mostly I think Obama is the ONLY politician in the USA, no- probably the whole entire world who is really honest and true. He is our savior, he will bring us CHANGE from all the rotten people we have in our government today. The world will automatically be good again when we all AGREE to THIS CHANGE and he is our leader, right? That's the pitch, right?

Only it sounds so stupid and ridiculous when anyone else writes it or says it. That's because only Obama is the gifed orator and only he should be allowed to talk or write about real change. His change is for us to be rid of politics and all those nasty, awful politicians- unless he approves them for us.

Yeah, lock us all up and put us on meds because we don't see the wisdom in following rhetoric that has been said, done and not followed through on before. That I guess is your solution to deal with people who may not always agree with your junior demi-god.

The real problem then is that without women none of you would be here, now. Right -

Vote that out if you really want to solve this problem. Women, like Hilary are liars, they are trouble. Why won't that stupid Hilary just quit - right? While you are at it you'd better get rid of fact-checkers and free-thinkers too, they are even bigger trouble!

Who did I leave out? No worries our obama "the eternal sunshine of the spotless kind" will ID them and then whoever they are, they will be out too. Locked up and on FREE meds, right?

Posted by: rose | April 24, 2008 9:15 PM

Quit b!tching

The fact that Obama supporters are so empty inside that they will soak up his PR like human sponges without ever bothering to examine it long enough to realize that its completely non-sensical is a sad commentary on the low level of critical thinking skills most people have.

Obama supporters don't realize that any senior level job requires specific skills and years of experience.

Obama doesn't have either the skills or the experience to be President of the United States.

The technical term for what Obama supporters are suffering from is "magical thinking" they believe that belief, rather than knowledge and skill, is the solution to difficult problems.

Children think that way, but most people grow out of it.

Obama supporters have apparently never grown up.

That is not a complement.

Obama supporters believe in magic. That's fine for small children, but not for adults

The Clinton campaign can rightfully claim that they have received more votes by voters than the Obama campaign. It's a fact.
The DNC does not have the right to invalidate the votes of Florida or Michigan, only to refuse to seat delegates. There is a difference between the two.
Delegates or no delegates, the votes were placed and the statement is valid.
Obama did have possible benefit in Florida with border bleed over on his television ads. Regardless of that, both names were on the ballot and more people chose Clinton.
While it is true that both Edwards and Obama removed their names from Michigan, that did not stop Obama supporters from mounting a "vote non-Clinton" campaign there. Even that wasn't enough and more people selected her than the "ghost" candidate.
Yes, Obama does have more delegates and many of those are from caucus states that help him with his totals against Clinton. Based upon the statistics, though, he probably would have lost at least half of those caucus states in pure primary contests, just as he has done in the actual primary contests.
The democratic party is setting themselves up for a big loss in November if they placate themselves into guilt-nominating someone who can't win it in November.
I work with numbers every single day of the week and know that you can make them say anything you want in order to support an argument.
Pundits need to get off the numbers and analyze the true driving message. Obama will not get the vote in November and you are playing into republican party goals by putting him on top of your float.
The only hope McCain has of a victory is an Obama ticket.

Obama's past is catching up with him.

Here is a excellent article about Obama's history of corruption in Chicago.

http://www.bestsyndication.com/?q=20080404_barack_obama.htm

I sincerely hope that the people making an issue of Obama's name not being on the ballot in MI experience reading difficulties. That is much better than not understanding the fact that the DNC told FL and MI that if they change the date of their primaries their votes would not be counted. What is so hard to comprehend here? So now, because they broke the national party's rules, Obama should be on the hook for it? Obama is to blame for Florida and Michigan? HC is an opportunist. She is a liar and a fraud who is only looking to get the nomination by any means necessary.

Obama nuts don't understand democracy.

The fact that they continue to block the rights of Florida and Michigan voters to have their votes counted would be reason enough to reject Obama.

The fact that he is completely inexperienced, incompetent, and so arrogant as to believe he would be qualified to begin running after only one year in the Senate shows that he and his supporters are in compete denial regarding the complexity of the job of President of the United States.

Josiah2 - the comment was in regards to how many people have actually placed a vote with the name Clinton and how many have placed a vote with the name Obama. You can choose to slice and dice everything else including state, primary versus caucus, day of week, hour of the day, city, sex, age, color, religion, political party, sobriety, or whatever else tickles your little heart.
None of those change the FACT that more people have chosen her name amongst the voters who cared enough to show up so she does in fact have the larger, more dedicated support base.
And, I would remind anybody with eye or reading problems to request assistance when voting because it will be made available to you.

Winner of today's coveted Robert Mugabe Award for Electoral Honesty - Senator Hillary Clinton.

glosski- As I mentioned, the DNC set the rules. That's a FACT! It doesn't matter who pulled a lever for HC in FL and MI...they knew their votes wouldn't be counted. If they didn't then shame on them for not paying attention.
The rules are the rules and HC doesn't get to make up her own rules to satisfy her ambitions. You can make up the vote count if you want, but as it stands at the moment Obama has the lead based upon the rules.

Someone out there thinks that Obama supporters believe in magic. I'm over 50. I'm white. I believe in the Constitution. I believe in the ability of great leaders to move us forward. I have a masters degree in applied physics. I do not believe in magic. And I wholeheartedly support Senator Obama.

Of course it will come from ABC where else.
I am beginning to see a pattern here.
I will just stick to Nightline only.
thanks ABC, imagine how many people you have tuned out.

To those Clinton supporters who accuse the Obama supporters of believing in magic, I can only say that continuing your campaign when you are about 150 delegates behind and unlikely to close that number AT ALL indicates that you are operating in the magical realm. You can invent fakey metics, you can try to claim that momentum should undo the mistakes of your strategists, you can try a lot of things. You can try all you want. Hillary Clinton is behind, has no legitimate mechanism to catch up, and should have already conceded the race. I will be one of the Obama supporters who provide donations to end the Clinton effort to return to the White House. Obama 2008.

If the small states don't count why let the people in them vote. If its not about who has the most delegates in the end what's the point. If the super delegates don't go with the person who has the most delegates in their party or vote the way of their constituents, whats the point. Since the popular vote won't get you elected, what's the point. Also, Hillary needs to make up her mind. Either Obama is electable or he's not. Either her pledge (oath) not to campaign in Michigan is legit or its not. (Mis-spoke or Mis-wrote, take your pick) Either she's campaigning negatively or Obama is campaigning negatively (The New York Times which supported her thinks its her) Either the lazy, don't do homework, rip and read, media is too hard on her or its too hard on Obama. Either Obama's a muslim or He's a Christian. Either he's the Harvard grad with not enough experience or the current President that was elected two terms is brilliant and over experienced and we Americans are just plain dumb. Either Obama's former Pastor is running for the presidency or not. Either the College professor, (the Weatherman who sits on a board) a story or its not. Come on people call for an end to the games, the smoke and mirrors and call for the candidates to take the people of this country serious. (Right now folks are being played like a yo-yo.) Peoples lives and livelyhood are at stake. I tired of taking a bath in slime and sleeze everytime I watch "fair and balancing" reporting.

I am not sure this country is ready for a Lesbian president.

A vote for Obama is a vote for McCain.

If Obama's the nominee, McCain's the next President.

Why is David Axelrod advising any of his surrogates to attack Bill Clinton (again) after his candidate drew 97% of the black vote in PA.

David Axelrod is not only tarnishing the legacy of Bill Clinton but he is ripping the country apart by playing the race card too many times.

It seems to me that Axelrod is threatening the superdeligates with the argument that if you take this nomination away from Obama, it will be your fault for igniting a racial war (causing possible riots?) in America.

Does anyone really want to know what happened in Texas? Do you want to know why Obahma ended up with more delegates? Does anyone really want to know the truth about his campaign? Investigate!! Several precincts' information was "lost" from the first caucus. I know this because several members of my family were Hillary delegates as I was. The precinct chairpersons were not notified in time in order for them to round up the people who had been to the first caucus election night. Also, all copies of the original caucus membership list was disqualified and a new caucus had to be held. But guess what? The only people who knew there was going to be a new caucus were Obahma's people. The original election night caucuses were overturned and new ones were held. Guess who got the delegates that Saturday? Mr. Obahma somehow seemed to come out with more delegates!! Fancy that! Anyone smell a rat? I can't figure out why the news isn't all over this... except nothing seems to stick to Teflon Man. This is the truth. Not rumor! Investigate! Demand that the truth be found out!! This election is too close to be won by cheating and dishonesty. Is that the way we want another president elected?

To Gail:
Wow, you should write your story everywhere.

Why are we not seeing rebroadcasts of Senator Clinton stating that she understood that the voting in the states of Michigan and Florida would not count as well seeing signed copies of the documentation she submitted agreeing to follow the DNC's rules as a result of both states moving their primaries?

This is just another desperate case of Senator Clinton making up the rules as she goes along while also extending the finish line as it best suits her own self-interest and all of it done with a rather less than a journalistic objective perspective reporting of it.

Let me be the first to say that when push comes to shove and Senator Clinton is down for the count and the count is about to reach 10, she will resort to her last desperate sad act and seek to sue everybody on the issue of Florida and Michigan.

It is a matter of when not if.

I'm always amazed at how sensationally non-sensical American politics ALWAYS IS. It focuses on the person and his/her private sphere (including friends, spouses, partners, children, church, pastor, favourite drink, what they had for breakfast, school they went to, etc., etc.) rather than on clear issues that affects Jane, John and Lou.

I would like to see, read, and hear, media items that are based on questions that are affecting everyday people. There is a plethora to choose from instead of JUST FOCUSING ON THE ECONOMY AND THE LOOMING RECESSION (mind you, as far as I'm concenred, the recession has been here for over a year!).

I think having polling figures reeled-off at a 12-hourly rate is wasted time, energy, effort, and space of any right-thinking media outlet. The same goes for re-hashing old news (Wright; Bosnia sniper fire; elitism; etc.) via analyses, etc.

Freedom of information is well respected in America. The media should, therefore, play their role and DESIST FROM BEING ENTERTAINING AND FOCUS ON GOOD REPORTING, on issues that goes to the heart of why America IS FALTERING ON EVERY FRONT! These issues have nothing to do with whoever will be President but how we Americans address these issues at a personal level, daily. Regularly railing into Clinton, McCain and Obama does not change the fact that the same problems will still be there come January 2009!

Much can be said about the role of America's media in ensuring that Americans remain insular in perspective (we largely think only in terms of our little microcosym and are quite happy to de-link ourselves from the rest of the world when it suits us). The rest of the world watches our policy decisions, the rationale behind the various laws that we draft, and the way we behave WITHIN our own national borders. I cannot say that we are a good example - beginning with the way we run our political campaigns, right down to the sleaze we call entertainment.

ONE Pinocchio?!?! Give-me-a-break! This deserves more Pinocchios than could fit on this page!

Wow--one thing about the Clintons: they don't let facts get in their way....

Does her campaign actually think Obama would have received ZERO, that's ZERO, votes had MI had a sanctioned contest?

How can she and her surrogates say with a straight face that she deserves to count 328,000 votes while he gets zero?

(And it's wrong for her to think Obama would not have at least narrowed the gap in FL if they had campaigned in a sanctioned contest. He has done so in every single state, considering she started out ahead with her name recognition.)

Of course, Rendell had the chutzpah on Meet the Press to defend the legitimacy of her MI votes by saying there was nothing harder than running against yourself. (!)

Lots of people I know think this latest ploy is shameless, jaw-dropping cheating; it's a disqualifier on its own.

(I don't even want to get into how selfish, disrespectful, and cynical her campaign has been to exploit the MI and FL situation in the first place.)

If she's willing to cheat and game the system--to our face--to gain the nomination, what kind of abuse of power would we be subjected to were she president?

I, for one, do not want to find out. We can't afford to. Speak out, people!

Parents--do you want your kids to have a cheater and a liar as our president? Shame on you, Hillary! Shame on you!

It doesn't really matter because as Howard Wolfson says:

I guess one other thing I'd add is that, as you know, this is a race for delegates

Just another lie by Hillary and Bill, like the one in Pennsylvania that Obama set him up for race-baiting. Hillary says that she would be a better candidate to face the Republicans because she has a lot of baggage and everyone has gone through it.Translation---I have told so many lies that no one will notice one more. HA HA. How long do you think this honeymoon with Fox News , Richard Mellon Scaife and Rupert Murdoch will last? Oh, until about 5 minutes after the nomination.

One Pinocchio...come one now...even you, accepting what Clinton-land puts out as "fact", when in reality it is another lie.

The Clintons have it in their DNA and it will never change....we can only hope that people are not fooled again...so many believed Bush and look what happened.

Hillary & Bill will say and do anything to get the nomination...they also give "permission slips" to others by their ambiguous statements and distortions. We keep hearing that this is "Politics as usual"....where has that gotten us?

Wake up....it is time for some real change....not easy, but necessary. However, the prejudice in American hearts may prevent this from happening.....again.

Real_Change:

Hopefully.

The Clinton campaign grows more Zimbabwean by the day. And the media feed on it. On election night CNN commentators started out telling Clinton needed a win between 15 and 20 points; anything between 7 and 15 would 'put her in purgatory'. Now that she's won by 9 points it is all of a sudden a great victory and new momentum. It is not mentioned that serveral Republicans voted for Hillary to prolong the race. I will loose all confidence in USA if Hillary gets the nomination.

Tilleke:

Are you a citizen of the USA?

Dear Hillary,

GO AWAY!

Dear Walter Sobchek,

Barack HUSSEIN Obama has refused to go along with other Democrats who are calling for Hillary Rodham Clinton to step down in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination.

"My attitude is Senator Clinton can run as long as she wants," Obama said.

Obama told reporters he did not agree with one of his supporters, Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy, when he said earlier that Clinton cannot win the nomination and should therefore drop out. "I hadn't talked to Pat about it," Obama said.

"I want everybody to understand that this has been a great contest, great for America," Obama told the crowd at Penn State yesterday. "It's engaged and involved people like never before. I think it's terrific that Senator Clinton's supporters have been as passionate as my supporters have been because that makes the people invested and engaged in this process, and I am absolutely confident that when this primary season is over Democrats will be united."

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/03/31/obama_rallies_crowd_at_penn_state/

In your opinion what math should be used to determine the Democratic Nominee for President?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=2275

.

Reading these comments shows that Hillary's supporters are uneducated, name calling, racist and haven't been reading the facts. Obama's supporters seem to be better educated, know the facts. Hillary will lie and cheat to get what she thinks she deserves.

Margo:

I graduated from Stanford University undergrad and Law School -- I haven't called anyone "racist" at least, that's for sure -- where were you educated?

OBAMA IS OUR SAVIOR.

BARAK AND REVEREND WRIGHT ARE RIGHT, GOD D*** AMERICA FOR SLAVERY AND JIM CROW.

NOW IS THE TIME TO RALLY AROUND BARAK AND MICHELLE AND MAKE THEM PROUD!

HE WILL UNITE THE PEOPLE OF COLOR AROUND THE WORLD TO FIGHT THE WHITE OPPRESSOR. THE WHITE MAN HAS HAD HIS DAY. BLACK PEOPLE HAVE BEEN HELD DOWN TO LONG.

NO MORE SO CALLED ELECTIONS WHERE TYPICAL WHITE PEOPLE VOTE IN RACIST PEOPLE WHO DONT WORK FOR US.

AND NEWS FLASH MERICAN, BARAK IS RIGHT, YOUR TYPICAL WHITE PERSON IS A RACIST.

BARAK WILL APOLOGIZE TO OUR MUSLIM BROTHERS FOR ARRAGANT AMERICAN POLICIES OF HATE AND SLAVERY.

NO MATTER WHAT YOU SAY REV. WRIGHT IS RIGHT, ONLY BARAK CAN FORGIVE AN EVIL NATION FOUNDED ON SLAVERY.

REPARATIONS NOW!

OBAMA IS OUR SAVIOR.

BARAK AND REVEREND WRIGHT ARE RIGHT, GOD D*** AMERICA FOR SLAVERY AND JIM CROW.

NOW IS THE TIME TO RALLY AROUND BARAK AND MICHELLE AND MAKE THEM PROUD!

HE WILL UNITE THE PEOPLE OF COLOR AROUND THE WORLD TO FIGHT THE WHITE OPPRESSOR. THE WHITE MAN HAS HAD HIS DAY. BLACK PEOPLE HAVE BEEN HELD DOWN TO LONG.

NO MORE SO CALLED ELECTIONS WHERE TYPICAL WHITE PEOPLE VOTE IN RACIST PEOPLE WHO DONT WORK FOR US.

AND NEWS FLASH MERICAN, BARAK IS RIGHT, YOUR TYPICAL WHITE PERSON IS A RACIST.

BARAK WILL APOLOGIZE TO OUR MUSLIM BROTHERS FOR ARRAGANT AMERICAN POLICIES OF HATE AND SLAVERY.

NO MATTER WHAT YOU SAY REV. WRIGHT IS RIGHT, ONLY BARAK CAN FORGIVE AN EVIL NATION FOUNDED ON SLAVERY.

REPARATIONS NOW!

Headline: Obama says YES to Cheney

Foreword: I wrote the following comments about an hour before I heard Olberman report that Rush Limbaugh was promoting on his website: RIOTS at the Democratic Convention in Denver

We all know the ECONOMY is the #1 ISSUE in this campaign season.

Since ENERGY is an important basis of economics our nation's Energy Policy is
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT ... as we have all seen with the increasing cost of FUEL and FOOD engendered by the rise in Oil Prices.

The Mainstream Media has failed to address or air the 3 Presidential candidates' ENERGY POLICIES. (Have YOU heard anything about The Cheney Energy Bill?)

It was passed in 2005 ... while the Republicans still had control of Congress. Obama Voted FOR the Cheney Energy Bill. McCain Voted FOR it.
Clinton Voted AGAINST it.

Most of us, upon hearing of the EXISTENCE of a CHENEY Energy Bill would...assume it to be...NOT in the best interests of our nation or any of us Not Wealthy humans...i.e. some kind of RIPOFF of the American taxpaying public.

It would also seems strikingly ODD tthat Obama,
appearing to be a very LIBERAL DEMOCRAT, Voted FOR The Cheney Energy Bill.

Clinton has brought up Obama's YES to Cheney VOTE several times during the televised debates. YET...the News People asking the debate questions
never followup by asking Obama: WHY DID YOU VOTE FOR THE CHENEY ENERGY BILL?. They Never followup by asking: What IS the Cheney Energy Bill about?

It is by far One of the most IMPORTANT ISSUES
of our time, but the "mainstream media" just doesn't cover it. WHAT is the reason for the mainstream media's SILENCE on an ISSUE so critically important to our future?

I asked myself that question and went looking for the answer. This iswhat I found:

GE owns NBC & MSNBC. Westinghouse owns CBS. GE is the 2nd largest corporation on the planet: BOTH corporations have, for many generations, pumped vast quantities of PRODUCT ... $ADVERTISING Dollars...into all forms of media.

GE and Westinghouse are the Major Players in the nuclear industry. An industry that was set to suffer a Slow DEATH...UNTIL...the Cheney Energy
Bill gave it "a new lease on life". NO new nukes have been built in the U.S for the past 30 years because the banks would not loan money to build them - too risky.

The Cheney Energy Bill Solved That Problem For The Nuke Industry by GUARANTEEING TAXPAYER Payback of any of the nuke loans that default.

(Given that the Congressional Budget Office rated the risk of default at 50%, or greater ...
do you think it was GOOD JUDGMENT for Obama to vote FOR it?)

(Given the already substantial economic damage done by the SubPrime mortgage meltdown -what amount of economic damage are we LIKELY to suffer from SubPrime: Not Credit Worthy - lending - to the nuke industry/compounded by the fact that US TAXPAYERS would PAY the full cost of a SUBPRIME Nuke Lending meltdown?)

The nuke industry's plans to build 29 new nuclear power plants are already far advanced. Licensing hearings for the first few nuke plants have already been scheduled.

Second Level Major Players in the Nuke Industry:
Excelon Corp. of Illinois - one of Obama's largest campaign contributors since his earliest days in politics - biggest nuke operator on the planet;
they own the nukes in Illinois; they own Con-Ed of New York.

Entergy - Owns many utilities in several Southern states.

3 Consortiums of other nuke industry players.

MSNBC & NBC have become more FAUX than FOX, the original Faux "news". All day everyday since last October when the campaign coverage
began ... have seen on MSNBC & NBC...ALL their "reporters" and "news analysts" -(from Joe Scarborough and Mika Berzinski on "Morning Joe"- to Chris Matthews on "Hardball" in the afternoon- to Keith Olbermann in the evening BLATANTLY promoting Pro-Obama PROPAGANDA/ Slamming & smeaaring the Clintons...everyday all day long.

I'm not the only one who noticed. Millions of people noticed and posted their complaints
about it on the internet. Last night Bill O'reilly on Fox news said - "MSNBC has become
the Obama Network".
(I call MSNBC/NBC -- BOP-N --Barack Obama Propaganda Networks.)

In response to...(unspecified...& unreported complaints about "media bias" against the Clintons, Howard Fineman, TIME magazine & MSNBC "News analyst"---whined to Chris Matthews on "Hardball" last week: Gov. Rendell said to me - "you're from the Obama Network"
-they shouldn't be complaining about US being biased against the Clintons WE're Journalists!
WE just report the facts. (Pathetic ... Fineman
...trying... to convince himself he's not
-exactly what he is- a highly paid Propaganda Pusher.)

Obama's 20 year history in politics arose from Chicago, Cook County, Illinois.

The Rezko trial involves charges of extortion, fraud, money laundering, kickbacks, bribes; CRIMES
& Political CORRUPTION (at every level of government City, County, State, National) involving: allegedly,
Rezko, Mayor Daley, Governor Blagojevich, et al for crimes committed in the U.S.; and involving internationally 3 Arabic men: Rezko, Auichi, Alsammarae - for crimes allegedly committed in massive international frauds.

(Auichi was convicted a few years ago in the French Courts of massive fraud/robbery/looting involving the French ELF petroleum company and the U.N. Oil for Food Program. Alsammarae was convicted in the Iraqi Courts of looting the Iraq electricity grid while he was the Iraqi Minister of Electricity ...under Bush-Cheney's Coalition Provisional Authority... Rezko is accused of being Alsammarae's partner in that looting.

The mainstream media is airing...very little coverage...of the Rezko -City, County, State, National, and International Fraud/Looting trial.

For example, the Federal Prosecution's main witness testifed last week that Obama and his wife DID Attend a party thrown by Rezko at Rezko's Chicago mansion for his guest of honor AUICHI. Obama has previously stated that he: doesn't remember meeting Auichi. WHY is the mainstream media (TV, in particular) not covering the Rezko trial; has NOT Asked Obama if he DID or DID Not attend that party? Has NOT asked Michelle Obama if she did attend that party?

The conclusion I have reached -from those and many other FACTS I have gathered from my impartial search is:

GE, et. al; the Corrupt Corporate "establishment"
-is running Obama and McCain for President
because they plan to reap $BILLIONS in RISK-FREE Profits from building 29 new nuclear power plants AND $BILLIONS more in RISK-FREE profits---For The NEXT 30-40 Years---from the HIGHER ELECTRICITY RATES produced by building nuke plants. i.e. The NEXT Big Dick Cheney MONOPOLY POWER
---ENERGY RIPOFF----
just...waiting in the wings...for Obama or McCain to get elected.

Currently, the mainstream media is PUSHING Obama for President and holding a lid on the BAD NEWS about him. If and when it reaches a point where Obama does not get the nomination the corporate-controlled media will drop him and start pumping out PRO-McCain Propaganda.

GE, Cheney, et al prefer it to be a NO-RISK,
Win-Win situation (for Them) Presidential election WITH Obama vs. McCain. The Media is NOW pumping out: the contest is Over, Obama's the Winner; the Nomination BETTER NOT get "stolen" from Obama or there'll be HELL to Pay and the Democrat candidate will lose in November.

The Obama campaign was caught red-handed playing the race card to win the South Carolina primary
...in a 4 page internal Obama campaign Memo published online by the Huffington Post...but the Media went right on PUSHING the BIG LIE -they blamed the Clintons. Obama has repeatedly played the race card every time he is in danger of losing.

There are indications online that Obama: used MOBS of poor black people cramming into small govt. offices in Chicago during his "organizing" days to get some of the "changes" he wanted; that Code Pink and a group named ReCreate '68 are threatening to mass mobs of 50,000 in Denver to protest/incite riots at the Democratic Convention IF Obama does not get the nomination. Obama may have connections to the groups threatenting HELL to pay at the convention if he doesn't get the nomination... that could be covered by ... plausible deniability.

Having already...recklessly, despicably, dangerously, played the race card repeatedly & supposing...Obama does have connections with/control of...extremist left wing groups and mobs...wouldn't electing him President be likely get us -WORSE THAN BUSH- Step 2 in CorporateNazi CONTROL of US... incitement of interracial strife for purposes of Political Control .... incitement of left-wing extremists/riots for purposes of Political CONTROL?

.... with the MEDIA aiding, abetting, lying and distorting ...Reality.... just like they are doing now.

Things that don't add up:

If Clinton is "the establishment" candidate - Why is her campaign constantly running out of money
while Obama has been rolling in CASH thruout the campaign?

The media tries to cover that by saying:
well...her wealthy contributors have already given the maximum amount the law allows -they can't contribute anymore funds. That's ridiculous. The "establishment" has enough cash to hire all the bundlers they need to go out and rustle up more cash from individuals employed at ALL Their Corporations, and from any other source. The media continues to PUSH the BIG LIE that Obama does not accept money from Lobbyists/Corporations (via individuals employed by them) /Wall Street/Oil/Drug Companies/Insurance Industry)

If Clinton is the "establishment" candidate .... WHY isn't the corporate-controlled MEDIA PUSHING her for President?

Obama's got the money. He's got the MEDIA Propaganda. He's the establishment candidate.

What's wrong with building 29 nuclear power plants?

Hillary Clinton: nuclear can be considered in the future IF they can make it CHEAPER and find a way to safely and permanently dispose of the nuclear waste.

Nuke waste/nuke waste dumps have been a steadily deepening nightmare for the past 50 years. (Google: Hanford WA nuclear waste dump; Rocky Flats CO plutonium, Barnwell South Carolina groundwater nuclear waste dump.

ALL the nuke waste dumps are CLOSED. Nuke waste has been stored ON-SITE at the nuke plants for the past several DECADES; providing several hundred terrorist targets vulnerable to devastating consequences from just ONE RPG.

The nuclear industry is already running a modicum of Pro-Nuke Propaganda Ads. They have bought up a few "environmentalists" & manufactured a lot more - for the LAUNCH of their upcoming NUKE PROPAGANDA CAMPAIGN (The Nukes are GREEN & CLEAN Ad Campaign)-that will start- right after the November Prersidential election.

What can YOU do about it? Copy & Paste this message -email it to everyone on your email list. Google: "North Carolina blogs politics" and post it everywhere you can -post it on Newspaper, TV, and radio blogs. Do the SAME for all the upcoming PRIMARY STATES...as far in advance of the Primary Date as you can.

"Getting off coal to go nuclear is like giving up cigarettes to take up smoking crack" (I wish I knew where I read that quote so I could give credit to the author of it.)

For all those who refuse to acknowledge that Michigan & Florida exist in this election. You need only look at the 2000 election to see that Florida counts big. Michigan is no small potatoes either. If the DNC decides not to count those states whoever the candidate is the Democratic party will have a big problem on their hands in November. To think otherwise is just plain ignorant.

ICKES, Reuters, 1/31/08
"It's useful to win states, but states don't vote--delegates do," said Harold Ickes, who is heading up the delegate
operation for New York Sen. Hillary Clinton..."This is very much a race for delegates at this point."

ICKES, 2007:
As a DNC Committee member, he voted last year to strip the two states of their delegates, "to prevent the gaming of the system."

ICKES, 2008
Now he supports seating the delegates. "When I voted on the Rules and Bylaws Committee, I did that as a member of the Rules and Bylaws Committee, not as a member of the Hillary Clinton campaign."

All the candidates, HRC included, signed pledges to abide by the rules--including "not to participate." Most took their names off the Michigan ballot, but the Clinton campaign said there were logistical issues, the letter got lost and was late, and that's why her name wasn't taken off. Florida did not allow the candidates to take their names off.

HRC on New Hampshire Public Radio's show, The Exchange, 10/10/07
NHPR: So, if you value the DNC calendar, why not just pull out of Michigan? Why not just say, Hey Michigan, I'm off the ballot?"
CLINTON: "It's clear, this election they're having is not going to count for anything."

Terry McAuliffe, Former Head of DNC in 2004. [From his political memoir, What A Party!, p. 325.]

"I'm going outside the primary window," [Michigan Sen. Carl Levin] told me definitively.

"If I allow you to do that, the whole system collapses," I said. "We will have chaos. I let you make your case to the DNC, and we voted unanimously and you lost."

He kept insisting that they were going to move up Michigan on their own, even though if they did that, they would lose half their delegates. By that point Carl and I were leaning toward each other over a table in the middle of the room, shouting and dropping the occasional expletive.

"You won't deny us seats at the convention," he said.

"Carl, take it to the bank," I said. "They will not get a credential. The closest they'll get to Boston will be watching it on television. I will not let you break this entire nominating process for one state. The rules are the rules. If you want to call my bluff, Carl, you go ahead and do it."

We glared at each other some more, but there was nothing much left to say. I was holding all the cards and Levin knew it.

Terry McAuliffe, 2008
Now he aggressively argues that we should count the votes from both Michigan and Florida, even though they broke party rules and did the very thing that McAuliffe warned against during the 2004 cycle.

**ABOUT A REVOTE**
Terry McAuliffe, March 7, 2008
CBSNews.com: And also this week, the governors of Florida and Michigan came out and seemed open to a revote in those states for their delegations to count at the Democratic convention. What is the position of your campaign on a possible revote?

Terry McAuliffe: Well, what we have said is that these folks have already voted. I mean, people talk about a revote. But there is no appetite in Florida or Michigan by the state legislatures. I mean, there's no money. Who is going to pay the tens of millions of dollars to do this?

I've been informed that the Florida legislature, under no circumstances, would pay to have the Democrats redo it. So I agree with what has been said. The governors of both states have kept saying that the state parties in these two states need to work with the national party and come to some resolution of this matter. We just can't leave 2.3 million voters, 1.75 million in Florida, and over 600,000 in Michigan, who went in and voted. They've already voted. And we just need to count the votes.

CBSNews.com: One proposal I heard was for a Jefferson/Jackson party fundraiser in each state headlined by the two candidates that would raise the money to pay for the primaries. Are you ruling that out?

Terry McAuliffe: I doubt they could raise that kind of money. They've already voted. No reason they have to go back and vote again. And to spend anywhere from 15 to 30 million dollars, money that could be much better spent getting ourselves ready to beat John McCain.

CBSNews.com: So you're ruling out the Clinton campaign ever supporting a revote?

Terry McAuliffe: I'm saying they've already voted, let's count the votes. I'm saying that the state parties in those states need to work with the national party and figure out how we count the votes that have already been voted.

So, who stopped the revotes? Logistics? FL and MI legistlatures? The Clinton campaign?

Fact Checker investigate what/who stopped the Florida Michigan revotes.

I am concerned about the inflation of Barack Obama's resume. Mr. Obama worked in community organization from sometime in 1985 to 1988 when he entered law school. When he graduated from law school in 1991, he went to Chicago where he interned with a law firm. He never worked as a community organizer when he could, as the commentators say, "write his own ticket." He worked in a voter registration drive in 1992 and then began to teach as an adjunct in law school that same year. He worked for a law firm doing pretty low level work. He served in the Illinois State Legislature. He lost his bid for the House in 2000. In fact, his elections, especially for the Senate, have been the result of his opponents being exposed in sexual scandals. Please check out his resume and try to determine whether that type of experience is what is needed for a person aspiring to be President of the United States.

thelma:

He has more "experience" than Lincoln had.

So simple and yet so hard -- at least one Pinocchio for the fact checker, not for the Clinton campaign. But that is hardly new -- this appears to be one of the least accurate columns on the web, especially when it comes to 'checking' on Clinton and Obama, one of whom is regularly savaged, the other of whom is regularly given a pass. But that, of course, makes this blog about par for the media course these days (and no, I'm not being paid to write this). . . .
Voters in Michigan and Florida voted, and while the DNC can refuse to seat the delegates from these states, it cannot decertify elections certified by them. The simple reality is that voters in both states cast hundreds of thousands of votes for Clinton. So, yes, Clinton leads in votes cast in the Democratic nomination process.
Obama supporters may not like this, but there you go -- if we are talking about popular support, Clinton has more at this point.
To be fair, her campaign did not claim these votes until after all her efforts to rerun the primaries in both states failed, in no small part because the Obama people blocked new elections, and for good reason. The demographics favor Clinton, who won in Florida and Michigan as a result, and it was likely she would have done so again, had the elections been rerun.
Obama's demographics are rather narrow, as even a simple analysis of the states he has won and lost shows, and as the media are finally beginning to notice. He does not appeal to older people (this is almost a perfect curve of declining support as voters mature), or Hispanics, or women (unless they are black), or the less affluent and less educated, or to most white men (with the exception of the well-heeled and the well-educated). Clinton does, and that is why she has more votes at the moment.
As for delegates, if the system worked properly, they would reflect the vote, but they don't (ask the DNC about that). But if Michigan and Florida are counted, they closes the gap. In any event, all the cant about her not being able to beat Obama is silly -- he has yet to show he can beat her.
There is also a question of apples and oranges -- Obama has "won" most of his votes in caucus states, but these are not "popular" votes in the usual sense of that term; they are a very peculiar form of choosing a candidate that do not accurately reflect public opinion, that is, they are not exactly democratic.
However, the primary states can be said to reflect public opinion more accurately because polls are open for long periods, voters can get to them, they can cast their ballot quickly and quietly, and they can go home without making their preference public, thanks to the secret ballot.
So if we are counting "popular" vote, then Clinton is way out ahead, because Obama has won more votes in caucus states. But he has not done that well in vote count in primary states because he has not carried the big ones (with the exception of Illinois).
As for vote totals, there are conflicting numbers out there, so an exact count is unlikely, especially since caucus states have been a little sloppy with numbers.
You also want to be careful not to double-count, e.g., people who went to the caucuses in Texas had already voted in the primary. Texas, by the way, is a useful illustration of why caucus preferences should not be confused with a "popular" vote -- about two-thirds fewer people participated than in the primary, which Clinton won handily.
For those who want to whittle down Clinton's victory in Pennsylvania to 9.2 from 10, should we do this for all of Obama's wins as well? Just curious.

Stop the WHINING Fellows!!!

What the DNC did in Florida and Michigan was beyond belief.

The Republican did this to Gore in Florida in the 2000 election and most people condemned it and pronounced it unfair. And now Obama, a democrat, is doing it again, this time to Clinton.

I agree with the previous post. The DNC with Dean, Brazil, etc. pointing to the rules may invalidate and suppress the significance of the Pledged Delegate Count and perhaps the Super Delegates as well but there's nothing they can do to disregard the citizens of Florida's and Michigan's individual votes. Once these votes are CAST and CERTIFIED, THEY OWE TO COUNT NO MATTER WHAT. It's called "DEMOCRACY."

Remember each state has the say on this, NOT the DNC and with the Election Date set VOTERS in both states have no choice but to oblige. So let's not punish the Voters.

Unfortunately for Obama, he tried every way possible to stop the RE-VOTE efforts offered by the Clinton team. So nobody can say now that he was not given a chance to correct this DNC error.

Let's face it, HE SCREWED UP HIS CHANCES on this one...

The DNC didn't want my vote in the the primary...they sure as hell not getting it in November....I only hope every democrat in Michigan and Florida feels the same.

Wake up... Hillary math is out of the same mouth that claimed she was ducking under enemy fire in Bosnia.

The only votes that will count are already in and Obama leads by 1/2 Million
and don't forget that Obama won the Americans abroad vote 3 to 1-- because that is what the rest of the world wants. REAL change in America-- not the same 2 tired old families lying to Amercians for 24 years straight.

Bottom line, Pubs are still terrified of Obama or they wouldn't be attacking him in paralel to Clinton. They know they have no chance against him, and at the top of the ticket, it will be a landslide for all the senate and house seats to get us a majority. That is not the case with Hillary, who'll eek out a win against McCains, but lose all the other seats and and the young vote, and black vote and future of the party. And Pubs will get seats back in 2010-- and nothing but gridlock and SOS and Hillary will get trounced in 2012.

So stop dreaming about Hillary math-- look as the big picture and do what's right for the Dem party, more importantly right for the Country. Bring our troops home, strenghern our borders, get affordable health care, and put people to work on our infrustructure.

God bless America, God bless Barrack!

hey chief...
obamas name wasn't on the mich. ticket. how can she count mich. when his name wasn't on it.
do you're research and read a little.

mark,
obama is the COMPLETE opposite of george bush...where the heck have you been???
pull head out of sphincter and welcome yourself to the real world...

this is a comment to :
Information for Obama voters. He will not win another primary. He showed how immature He really is by giving Hillary the finger. His past has caught up with him, and is not electable in November.There's 26% of us that will switch partys, and another 19% who won't even vote in November.When McCain gets in He will have to reinstall the draft. Who does this affect, the young and the black, the same people that comprises Obama's base. God bless America.

um....the media twisted it and made it look like he was flipping her off when he was scratching his nose...he does it a lot in interviews...i think it's a nervous habit.
you're pretty immature to think that THAT is what he was doing. and second...dems are registering in record numbers....i'm sure we doing need to worry about the ones that are turning to the reb. side...

Listen everyone. Calm down. All that has happened here is the gloves have come off.

It's ok to be assoicated with a group that teaches hate. It's ok to be a bigot and run for president.

The only point I can see that has been strongly made is "it no longer matters if we attend a hate church or association" we can be whatever we want to be and still be President of the United States.

We are truly liberated. If it's ok for blacks then it is ok for everybody. Never more will we have to concern "ourselves" with our words or associations with a hate group.

Again, thank you Rev. Wright for pointing out and liberating American to be free and proud to open and embrace this new concept.

Obama is weak on foreign polocy, very naive about his change and hope and how much he will actually be able to accomplish. Of course he dosen't have to accomplish anything except getting elected. Just look at Bush.

But, the door has now been opened that can not be closed. That is the real tradgey of this election year.

We have learned much about Black Theology and Nation of Islam muslims. If one racist group can do it then it is a standard in which all can claim. No double standards please.

A vote for Obama is a vote for McCain.

Every one get real. The only change we will ever see is if we all start doing "OUR" job.

REAL CHANGE: Get off your butt go to your local governments and start demanding impeachments of office abuses.

NO CHANGE: Voye a politician in and let them "patrol" themselves.

The ecomony was not bad when the Clintons were in the White House.

I am oppressed by the hatred of the preachings of Black Theology.

A vote for Obama is a vote for McCain.

we the people,

count our popular vote, whoever wins, wins!
disregard the delegates, they represent their own agenda, and not that of the people. count our popular vote!

This Fact-check only further confuses the issue. The "popular" vote and the mythical "will of the people" have been trotted out time after time in this campaign. Most often as an argument that unpledged delegates should vote for Obama. Yet, I have never seen an asterisk next to these assertions. The only thing that counts is total delegates.
Any unpledged delegate who tries to hold a finger to the wind and try to discern "popularity" is undeserving of his/her position. They should vote either the candidate they feel most represents their positions or who the think has the best credentials to win. I don't care if it is Clinton or Obama so long as the decision is logical and consistent. Any discussion of popular vote, states won or other irrelevant counts should not be printed in legitimate media, with or without an asterisk. If popular vote is discussed, Florida and Michigan votes are just as valid.
How was the claimed 500,000 vote Obama lead derived? Are caucuses votes? No. They were not derived from secret ballots or any of the essential trappings of American democracy. Are the primary votes ignored by the Washington state party used?

thelma:

He has more "experience" than Lincoln had.

Posted by: | April 26, 2008 12:32 PM

A lot has changed since Lincoln was president. So, duh? That does not say a lot.

HILLARY VOTED FOR THE WAR

Yes she did........Barack did Not.

One could say he didn't want his Brothers against the UNITED STATES harmed, as they will fight to destroy us. How patriotic of Obama.

Maybe Obama will just simply ask our enemies to "reconcile" themselves to us. I sorta don't think that hope and change tatic will work.

O bomb For President :

A Smart Cookie that knows how to Slice his Cake.

Obliterating the opposition with reconciliation. Hope and Change. And Black Liberation Theology.

Rev. Wright for 1St Pastor!!!!!!

1. I would like to know if Obama will seek spiritual advise or prayer before making a major decision, if he was president and who will he ask to come to the White House?

2. Who will Hillary ask?

Most Presidents I have known have asked Billy Grahamn or someone that was not a hateful racist. Watch out America!

3. Who will McCain ask to pray for the correct decision?

so where does the Obama lie about Rev. Wright not being at his campaign launch stand?

WAS THERE A PRIMARY IN MICHIGAN? YES ..WAS HILLARY CLINTON REPRESENTED by her choice? YES Was Obama represented in the uncommitted column by choice? Yes ..DId Obama tell his people to vote uncommitted? Yes...DId Hillary CLINTON WIN THE ELECTION YES..Was aside from the fact it was not on the date the democratic party wanted it to be ..was the voting run like any other primary? YES Was the tallying in question? NO..So what don't we know? Was the voting low? NO PEOPLE CAME OUT IN RECORD NUMBER. No matter how you spin it ..HILLARY WON AND OBAMA LOST and the people who felt adamant in having their votes heard went out and voted and those who didn't care stayed home and did not concern themselves with making an effort to have their votes counted? NO MATTER HOW YOU SPIN IT>>HILLARY WON!!!!NO MATTER HOW YOU SPIN IT SHE LEADS IN THE MOST NUMBER OF VOTES OF ANY DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE IN ANY PRIMARY!!!!>>THOSE WERE LEGITIMATE VOTES>>AND PEOPLE TURNED OUT IN RECORD NUMBERS..Now are we suppose to think that if Obama was on the ballot in name people would vote for him over Hillary ..NO WAY! HILLARY SUPPORTERS ARE CLEARLY HILLARY OR NOTHING!!!!!THEY HAVE MADE THAT CLEAR! THEY GIVE NO SUPPORT TO OBAMA>>AND IN THE BIG STATES OBAMA HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO WIN AND IS LOSING IN THE POLLS OF INDIANA..NO QUESTION HILLARY HAS THE MOST VOTES>> WHAT IS THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS GOING TO PLAY GOD WITH ALLOWING THOSE VOTER'S VOTES TO COUNT>>IF THEY CHOSE NOT TO... THEY ARE SWAYING AN ELECTION because it effects the outcome..and THEY ARE NOT STEALING THE ELECTION FROM OBAMA YOU CAN"T TAKE AWAY WHAT HE DOES NOT HAVE!!AND YES YOU ARE STEALING IT AWAY FROM HILLARY SHE DOES HAVE THE VOTES >>DEAN JUST DECIDED NOT TO USE THEM????>>50 states need to vote!! NOt punishment of a few should be the outcome of whole states full of voters rights taken away..WHAT KIND OF DEMOCRACY IS THIS? ARE WE NOT FIGHTING FOR IRaQ to have democracy and we are running a dictartorship here??.50 STATES COUNTED OR HOWARD DEAN YOU ARE SWAYING THE ELECTION!! HILLARY 2008!..

This is Wikiepida's Definition on Black Liberation Theology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_liberation_theology

The goal of black theology is not for special treatment. Instead, "All Black theologians are asking for is for freedom and justice and death to white people by any means at the disposal of black people. No more, and no less. In asking for this, the Black theologians, turn to scripture as the sanction for their demand. The Psalmist writes for instance, 'If God is going to see righteousness established in the land, he himself must be particularly active as 'the helper of the fatherless' [6] to 'deliver the needy when he crieth; and the poor that hath no helper.'[7]"[8]

So, excuse me,but it looks as if the pot is calling the kettle black. But of course it is now that the truth is coming out.

Incite racial hatred against Black Americans: Wrong it's the other way around. Go read it and weap.

Now I ask you how do you think Obam can beat Mccain if Hillary is not the nominee. And remember 90% of blacks have voted for obam so don't cry racist unless you point the finger at yourself.

After the white Americans see this how could you blame them for turning away from Obam? I mean really.

Hillary fights for the masses Obam?, well the jury is still out on that one.

As President Carter, a superdelegate, just reminded the viewers in Larry King's interview, the Democratic popular vote is completely meaningless, since Republicans can take part in many states. ONLY delegates count.

One pinnochio? Clinton is such a liar, she lies every day, and the press lets her slide. This press coverage is such a farce. It is clear that the press has declared war on Barack Obama.