but...but...but....

Have the godhead suddenly lost his luster for you, Mr. Grieve?

Another link to a video of former NOW President who was for Hillary but said she lied on Obama so she is switching. She's tells a compelling story:

Check this page out The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/01/the-backlash-be.html 'The Backlash Begins? 24 Jan 2008 11:45 am A disgusted liberal pro-choicer switches from Clinton to Obama. Permalink :: Trackback (0) :: Sphere It!' (clipped with Yahoo! Toolbar)

This is interesting:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/24/AR2008012402799_2.html?nav=hcmodule&sub=AR

After Obama was elected to the U.S. Senate, he and Rezko's wife bought adjoining pieces of property, then she turned around and sold him hers for just a fraction of what she'd paid for it. According to the Sun-Times, it was "widely known" at the time of that deal that Rezko was under federal investigation; he was indicted less than a year later. T.G.

If Obama thinks that there is nothing to explain here, he is dangerously underestimating the American people.

Now if Hillary is such a monster, why hasn't she exploited this fact further? restricting herself to a mere mention in the SC debate. The Chicago Sun Times as told to whomever is willing to listen about this deal and about the fact that on top of Obama's lot there was also a cute mansion.

"...then she turned around and sold him hers for just a fraction of what she'd paid for it."

I live in Chicago and have been following Obama's career since his Senate campaign. The Chicago Tribune ran a good, detailed critique of the Rezko relationship many, many months ago. One key point is that Rezko's wife sold the Obama's a 10 foot wide strip of their property so the Obama's could enlarge their side yard. It is misleading to say she sold "hers" for a "fraction" of her cost. She sold a fraction of "hers" for a fraction of her cost. The Sun-Times is the New York Post of Chicago. Please look in the Tribune archives for better written and researched articles about Obama. It should also be noted that Rezko has been indicted for shenanigans related to his cozy relationship with our corrupt governor (also a Dem, unfortunately).

Obama had a little bit of a relationship with a guy who later turned out to be involved in illegal activity. YES it would be really, really interesting if we could turn this into a John Grisham legal thrilled full of wild plot twists and murders -- but it's not that interesting. Obama is not a made-man working for the mafia. He's a dude who happened to work with someone who was involved in fraud. I think the mainstream media is made up of wannabe fiction writers as opposed to journalists. Not everything is THAT intersting. Sometimes shit is actually boring and routine.

Am I the only one thinking HRC's campaign gave the Today show the picture? It is so easy an argument for Billary to swat away but keeps the Rezko connection in the news (speaking of, I am going to check out the Chicago Times article a recent commenter referenced).

I have long said I will support whoever is the Dem nominee, even though I am a Barack backer. However, Billary is making it very difficult to stomach a vote for them, I mean her...and is creating a lot of ammunition for the Republicans.

How come its okay for Billary to attack the Rezko connection, but if Barack were to bring up similar Billary dealings (Whitewater, Monica, et al) it would be horrible?!

And it still hasn't suck to Obama. What seems to be lacking in every story about the "relationship" between the two men is this - What exactly did Barack Obama do wrong? Not what did he do that might possibly in some fevered politico's imagination seem to possibly maybe give the impression of some minor wrong doing but this - What exactly did he do wrong?

Please answer that question instead of saying the relationship raises questions. Go ahead and raise those questions and lets get them aired out. The campaign by the Sun-Times has come up with no concrete questions that Obama has not answered satisfactorily.

that Hillary Clinton feels its fair to make this an issue raises the question - did she feel it was fair when she was investigated for Whitewater/Vince Foster's death/filegate/travelgate or is she just passing on the abuse?

Actually, the Rezkos bought the adjoining land AT THE SAME TIME AS THE OBAMAS. Obama says he was unaware of Rezko buying the land. REALLY? The adjoining land was vacant. The fence land of 10 feet was appraised at about three times the value that it was sold to Obama for. Sweet deal.

"After Obama was elected to the U.S. Senate, he and Rezko's wife bought adjoining pieces of property, then she turned around and sold him hers for just a fraction of what she'd paid for it."

The truth is that the Obamas bought one sixth of the vacant lot that Rezko's wife owned at one sixth of the price that Rezko's wife had paid for the entire lot. The house is the Obama's residential home, and they bought the one sixth of the vacant lot to extent a walk way.

The rest of the report is factually accurate, but you failed to mention that Tony Rezko was a huge player in both Illinois and Chicago politics, and gave money to just about every Democratic candidate in his district, and quite a lot to governor Blagojevich (in fact he is more associated with Blagojevich than with Obama).

Tony Rezko wanted to be big inside man in Illinois and wield substantial influence over government in Illinois, but Illinois politicians and lobbyist refused to play ball with him, which is why he is now indicted.

I don't want to get into too many details, but there are a lot more dubious characters in Clinton's fund raising past than Rezko, and I have no doubt that Clinton would have accepted his money before the scandals surrounding Rezko broke (just like every other Democrat did).