Here's a nice tidbit from a timeline in the Chicago Sun-Times:

http://www.suntimes.com/news/watchdogs/757340,CST-NWS-watchdog24.article

In 1995, Obama began campaigning for a seat in the Illinois Senate. Among his earliest supporters: Rezko. Two Rezko companies donated a total of $2,000. Obama was elected in 1996 -- representing a district that included 11 of Rezko's 30 low-income housing projects.

5. Rezko's low-income housing empire began crumbling in 2001, when his company stopped making mortgage payments on the old nursing home that had been converted into apartments. The state foreclosed on the building -- which was in Obama's Illinois Senate district.

6. In 2003, Obama announced he was running for the U.S. Senate, and Rezko -- a member of his campaign finance committee -- held a lavish fund-raiser June 27, 2003, at his Wilmette mansion.

I guess the poor, freezing tenants in Rezco's slums weren't all that important since they couldn't throw "lavish fund-raisers" or cough up thousands in campaign cash. I mean, if you want to be President, you have to have your priorities.

You seem to be under the impression that I am supporting Clinton. I'm not. I'm attacking your demigod. I love the ad hominem reply. Guess the facts are making you a little antsy. I perfectly understand, since this seems to be the line on this thread: "Obama hasn't done anything wrong, but if he has, Clinton is worse."

Claim: Obama should have known his political patron and BFF Rezko was a shady operator taking advantage of affirmative action programs and low-income tenants.

Truth: Yes, he should have.

Claim: Obama showed very poor judgment by continuing to associate with Rezco, accepting his donations and assistance with purchasing a house.

Truth: He sure did!

And this is the guy who touts his good judgment. LMAO.

I've never made a deal with a shady real estate agent. You have? Well well.

By the way, if your point is that Hillary Clinton is corrupt, I quite agree. But then, I've never said otherwise, have I? It's you worshipful Obamabots who believe your cult leader has descended from on high.

Obama won so many states all across the country while Hillary won only a handful. How about if Obama gets to keep all the delegates in the states he won and Hillary gets all the delegates in the states she won? Fair deal?

I'm happy to help Obama. Anything that gets his story of corruption and incompetence and messianism out there. People need to know.

Actually, I am a registered Independent. You've heard of those, have you? I supported Edwards and now I'm undecided--except I will never vote for Obama. I wonder what about that you can't understand...?

But do you think he'd be willing to make a deal that let him keep all the delegates in the states he won if Clinton could do the same in her winning states? Thought not. He's supposedly the most electable, but alas, most Dems in most big blue states don't seem to think so.

nor should he. Too much class.

Pull the other one, Vox!

I haven't questioned the authenticity of your views. I believe they are authentically stupid, but they're your views, unbought and unpaid for. (Really, who would pay for them? They're not worth much.)

I love the paranoia of you Obamabots trying to ferret out hidden motives and secret payoffs in posters who criticize your demigod. It's evidence of how insecure you are ultimately about your candidate--you can't deal with criticism but need to find a way to dismiss it, to pawn it off to some ulterior agenda. Oh well, if it makes you feel better, do it!

To the Obamabots, everyone who disagrees with them is a troll. I wonder why they don't just join the Scientologists or the Ayn-Rand cultists. Their mindset would be the same.

Here, try this on for size: I'm not a Hillary supporter or a young Republican, I'm a 68-year-old anarcho-syndicalist pseudo-hermaphrodite antidisestablishmentarian with pro-royalist leanings. Does that help any? Oh, and I hate Barack Obama.

Stop the presses. How's he doing in Louisiana?

Now he needs to break through on March 4 in Texas or Ohio or we're back where we started. Thank God Huckabee is trouncing McCain so we don't have to deal with him as the presumptive Republican nominee just yet.

while you still have the chance. Three weeks until Ohio and Texas vote. The real gloating will be then. If Obama manages to cut into Clinton's lead with Latinos, older voters, white women, or blue-collar voters in those states, and picks one or both off, then you can celebrate. If not, oh well, it was a pretty story while it lasted. Maybe he can retire and become governor of the Virgin Islands?

vote for McCain if Hillary gets the nominations than vice versa. I agree they'd be "idiots" (your word) to do so. But then, they're idiots already.

can your guy survive, Shapiro? The wave out of Iowa was unstoppable--until it stopped in New Hampshire. The wave out of South Carolina was overwhelming--until it got whelmed in New Jersey, Massachusetts and California. Now, watch out--here comes that tsunami again! If your fella doesn't win Ohio, Texas, and Pennsylvania now, what will your story be? Oops, we scheduled a coronation but we dropped the crown--three times?

who loses big blue states like California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and crucial swing states like Arizona, Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. If Obama's vaunted momentum (catch the wave, dudes) doesn't net him Ohio on March 4 and/or Pennsylvania in April, he won't be the nominee, no matter how many delegates he picks up in the Virgin Islands.

You wrote: "It's funny because most of Hillary's non-First-Lady career was spent on the boards of directors for large corporations."

Actually, this is false, but even if it were true, are we to assume it would have been better for her just to be in the pocket of a single slumlord?