Read other letters about this article

• Saturday, March 1, 2008 10:30 PM

  Obama and Rezko

  Actually, there is nothing in the NYT article that contradicts anything that Obama has said about his relationship with Rezko. I did a little (and by little, I mean typing "Obama + Rezko" into Google and clicking on one of the first links) digging and this article from the Chicago Sun Times in 2006 came up:

  http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/124171,CST-NWS-obama05.article

  In this article, Obama answers a lot of questions. He clearly states that he has known Rezko since Obama was elected the first black president of the Harvard Law Review. He explains that he regrets any suggestion of impropriety in his involvement with Rezko in the purchasing of his house and the adjacent lot, but that there was nothing illegal in the transaction or in their relationship. He's given all of the money that Rezko raised for him back to charity. Until there is actual evidence of a crime or of unethical behavior on Obama's part, what more can he be expected to do?

  And again, you are completely missing the point of why Obama is so popular if you believe that his entire campaign is about representing a new kind of politics. It is much more sophisticated and intelligent than that. I still don't understand how if you are comfortable give the Clintons a pass for all of their double dealings, shady-ness and questionable ethical decisions, why can't Obama be given at least some of the same benefit of the doubt?

  —little lord baltimore Read little lord baltimore's other letters
  Permalink
  Flag
  Click "Submit Flag" if you feel this post is inappropriate. Explain why below if you wish.

  Cancel