Listening to news reports on Rezko, and reading the various character hit jobs on him, you would think the man was corrupting CEO, major environmental polluter, child molester, Islamo terrorist, serial murder/rapist, Evangelist showman bilking senior citizens out of their retirements, or worst of all; an Abramoff style lobbyist.

Well, Rezko is none of the above, and lets focus on what he really is. The list of offenses that Rezko may be responsible for go as follows.

1 Neglectful slum landlord of 30 building in the poor south side of Chicago.

2 Possible mis-user of government funds to complete non-proof building rehabilitation projects for low income housing in the South side Chicago area, to the tune of millions of dollars over a period of dacades.

3 Possibly using one straw man to give a donation to Obama (that Obama could not have had any knowledge of).

4 Using an African American partner to obtain a minority set-aside for a fast-food franchise at O'Hare Airport.

5 Is facing federal charges for a scheme to extort money from investment firms seeking business with the state.

6 "Cooked up a deal to help the newly elected senator (Obama) buy a gracious Georgian-revival home."

7 Help fund raise around $200,000 in contributions towards various Obama campaigns.

Of the list of offenses, Rezko is only facing criminal charges for items #3 and #5, though the case for #3 looks very weak, and the case for #5 looks defendable to the Rezko legal team, as the strength of Republican fundraiser Stuart Levine's testimony doesn't look promising.

Of the list only #6 and #7 come close to Obama, and both implied accusations are extremely disingenuous. First off most of the campaign contributes, that Obama has mostly donated to charities, came not from Rezko himself, but from participants of fund raising events that Rezko organized. And it would be quite impossible for any politician in the Chicago area not to have some association with Rezko, because of his extensive fund raising organizing, which Rezko did for every promising Chicago politician.

Item #7 is even more disingenuous, and a word for word character hit job on Obama propagated by Edward McClelland.

McClelland, the deal for the Obama's to buy their residential home (the home they live in) was not cooked up by Rezko, and you implying that it was could be considered libel. The truth is the Obama wanted the house but not the vacant lot, but the Rezkos, who are real-estate developers, did want the vacant lot, and have profited off of reselling it. Both the Rezkos and the Obamas got what they wanted out of the deal, and the original owner of the property got what he wanted as well. The real-estate transaction was an all around good deal, made entirely in the open, with nothing that could possibly be considered a "favor" to any of the three parties involved. To imply otherwise is shameful, and misleading reporting.

the worse you can say about Obama is that he struck up a friendship with a slum landlord, but who here doesn't have a friend or two of less than admirable character?

Sounds awesome, I want one. It's probably just a matter of clearing the pipes with a little alone time in the restroom after intercourse.

I am definitely going to do some more study on this.

It sounds like women would really like this one to, but I wonder how one could be certain if the valve is closed or not, and could a man prove that to a woman? I would not want to be mistaken on that one.

I knew eventually BC would be a matter of turning a switch on or off.

I canceled my cable a while back, so all I am looking at cnn.com for results.

Of course the Floridian votes count, but it is hard to take a closed primaries seriously as Clinton's victory only represent 41% of the states total vote. But it is a victory for Clinton, and she'll probably get a much needed bounce for Super Tuesday (we'll see). However I thought she looked funny in her "victory speech" jumping around like a clown and exhibiting strange hand gestures and facial expressions.

Go Hillary.

On the Republican side it has a lot of meaning that McCain, the independents' choice, appears to have won, and that makes two in row for him, and makes him the odds on favorite to win the nomination.

Rudy and Huck are effectively out of it, and they both like McCain, so I see Romney as doomed.

The question remains, who will Edwards endorse, and I really wish he would endorse either Obama or Clinton before Super Tuesday to give the Democrats a clear front runner. If Edwards stays in the race through Super Tuesday or stays neutral, then that will make Clinton the front runner by default.

Rudy will go down in the history books as having run the worse presidential campaign ever.

After his forth place finish in NH, I had completely written Rudy off as even a consideration. NH was his own back yard, and I sensed that if he couldn't do well there, then he wasn't going to do well anywhere else.

So long Mayor 9/11, but look at the bright side, there are still Yankee's games that you can attend, and your legal battles against your ethics troubles are sure to keep you busy.

I believe you meant "beat the Republicans, or more specifically the necons" (not beat the Democrats).

I can't watch or read one of Obama's speeches without starting to tear up.

Hillary and Bill Clinton may have been playing the game since the Monday before the NH primary, but they have been playing the game in the wrong way. They are golden rules; don't get choked up when you are publicaly talking about yourself, don't attack fellow party members, don't attack praise of a much beloved dead president, and try to stay positive in your message before you have secured your party's nomination.

But I still love Hillary Clinton, and will still fully support her if she wins the nomination.