McCain is being exposed for what he is. Another Washington hack!!!

I think the point of the NYT story was that McCain wasn't breaking any rules regarding lobbyists. He was just testing the "razor's edge" and then making more rules so that others wouldn't break them.

That's legit.

If I were the Times, though, I'd still try to see if they could unearth evidience that McCain's staffers kept Vicki Iseman from him. If they did - just because she was a woman - they violated her civil rights.

McCain is four more years of Bush...No Thanks!

Obama blasts lobbyists--except the lobbyists who contribute money to him.

Reminds me of that classic scene in Casablanca, where the police inspector (Claude Rains) was Shocked! to find gambling going on in Bogart's bar, while pocketing his payoff from the bar.

Obama--just another hypocritical politician.

More on Obama the hypocrite, who claims not to take money from lobbyists: a 60-second google search uncovers plenty of lobbyists who pour big money into his campaign, including lobbyist Jim Demers who contributed the $2,300 maximum to Obama on 3-17-2007. The facts are there for all to see on the FEC records; http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/search.asp?key=stdn9&txtName=demers&txtAll=Y&Order=N&Cycles=A&page=2

Lobbyist Jim Demers is Obama's New Hampshire co-chair. And, as The Hill points out, 3 of Obama's aides--people on his payroll--are also paid lobbyists. See http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/12/20/3-obama-aides-on-08-payr_n_77688.html
for the details.

Even his media flak and guru, David Axelrod, is registered as a lobbyist.

Hypocrisy, thy name is Barack.

Obama should have kept quiet on this one!!

Obama = Rezko, Rezko, Rezko!!!!

This story is about to break wide open. All you Lib's who are attacking McCain will be eating your own words in a few weeks. Oh that's right...Obama is a Democrat..."he's doing it for the good of the people" or some other lame excuse!!!!!

To all GOP - after feeling what your actions have caused over the last 8 years, no thanks to your offer of 4 more. It is time for a change that will benefit ALL Americans.

Obama is such a hack that he doesn't even keep up with the news, only the soundbites that his lobbyist campaign manager, Axelrod, gives him. If he had bothered to read the papers today, he would have found that the NYT's ombudsman criticized the NYT for printing that hit piece on McCain. So we have a great choice in this election: A leader, John McCain, vs. an amateur politician. No amount of name-calling by Obama or his people or his supporters can change that scenario.

Wow, Alice Palmer desperately wants us to hate Obama on the lobbyist issue, but ignore that McCain's campaign is literally run by lobbyists whose interests fall under the purview of McCain's commerce committee work. Why the double standard, Alice? Give St. McCain the Reformer his due: he's a hypocrite.

Sorry Obama backers. He's no different than any other politician. Drink his Kool-Aid, you will be disappointed.

Alice Palmer needs to get a life.

Obama didn't mind making dozens of speeches to lobbyist groups like AIPAC. Too bad they would never truly back a peacenik like Obama. This is gonna get good as soon as Hill wakes up and splits.

Wow, Alice Palmer desperately wants us to hate Obama on the lobbyist issue, but ignore that McCain's campaign is literally run by lobbyists whose interests fall under the purview of McCain's commerce committee work. Why the double standard, Alice? Give St. McCain the Reformer his due: he's a hypocrite.

Posted by: trace | February 24, 2008 11:02 AM

Two words for you Trace: REZKO-YIKES

Republicans are deathly afraid of having to run against Obama because his positions on all the major issues coincides with those of the large majority of voters. There's no contest between 100 more years of Iraq and healthcare. They can't win on the issues, so they resort to swiftboat tactics.

The effort to falsely portray Obama as a tool of lobbyists is pathetic in light of his support by countless thousands of small donations from the grassroots. Sorry Alice, but it won't work this time.

Pretty lame backing of McCain. Feels weak, looks weak. Hell Hillary fought back harder over mailers than McCain. Clearly Rove planted th ebigger story to deflect from the smaller story of McCain's love afair with lobbyists. I can't believe the NYT fell for the affair-bait, but nonetheless, the scrutiny on lobbyists is welcome. And the comaprisons w/ Obama are a laugh on this issue. Keep trying.

This morning I woke up and wondered what it would be like to be a woman named Alice Palmer.

The First Stage Of The Automatic Republican Outrage Machine Is Denial. McCain Is A Crook Who Has Crooks Working For Him Right Out Of His "Straight-Talk Express" Bus:

McCain’s campaign manager, Rick Davis, co-founded a lobbying firm though Davis on leave from the firm at the moment. Charlie Black, an unpaid senior adviser to McCain, is chairman of the Washington lobbying firm BKSH & Associates. Both of their firms have represented telecommunications companies whose business falls under the jurisdiction of the Senate Commerce Committee on which McCain is the senior Republican member.

[snip]

A McCain campaign aide who asked not to be identified said Davis has not been a registered lobbyist for two years. The aide said Black “is an unpaid volunteer and does not and will not lobby Senator McCain.”

-full story here
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/

This story is about to break wide open. All you Lib's who are attacking McCain will be eating your own words in a few weeks. Oh that's right...Obama is a Democrat..."he's doing it for the good of the people" or some other lame excuse!!!!!

Posted by: Joe | February 24, 2008 10:51 AM

Two words for you Trace: REZKO-YIKES

Posted by: Don B. | February 24, 2008 12:06 PM
---------------------------

You two Republic Party weenies crack me up!!!

Obama has already been cleared of any wrong doing BY A REPUBLICAN DoJ, you idiots!

...and with the Keating scandel hanging around McCain's neck, I hope the crazy old man is dumb enough to bring that up.

McCain "Fun Facts":

McCain Loan Could Violate Donor Privacy
http://www.politico.com:80/news/stories/0108/7837.html

McLame's Immigration Insanity
http://www.borderfirereport.net:80/letters-from-readers/mclames-immigration-insanity.html

Video: Liebs says McCain did not support amnesty for illegal aliens
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/01/05/video-liebs-says-mccain-did-not-support-amnesty-for-illegal-aliens

McCain: "We Are Not Going To Build Fences And Barriers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5G3kH1PvvU

Tom DeLay Disses McCain, Calls New Hampshire Win ‘A Blip’
http://youdecide08.foxnews.com:80/2008/01/09/tom-delay-disses-mccain-calls-new-hampshire-win-a-blip/

John McCain and Our Second Amendment
http://www.gunowners.org/pres08/mccain.htm

John McCain's Skeleton Closet
http://www.realchange.org/mccain.htm#keating

The Conservative Case Against McCain
http://thenextprez.blogspot.com/2005/12/conservative-case-against-mccain.html

A Vote For McCain Is A Vote For Amnesty, Open Borders and Never Building A Fence
http://www.rightwingnews.com/mt331/2008/01/a_vote_for_john_mccain_is_a_vo.php

#%&@# You McCain's Unstable Temper Raises More Doubt from Arizona News ( This site will not post actual title. Search Arizona News for John McCain. It's worth the effort to find it. )

Conservative Group Campaigns Against McCain: He's No Ronald Reagan
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Conservative_group_campaigns_again_McCain_Hes_0301.html

Former Senator Rick Santorum sees a lot of problems with John McCain's credentials
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/talkradio/transcripts/Transcript.aspx?ContentGuid=e96c3803-c542-4a57-98bd-68635a744540&comments=true

John McCain's Temper Preceded Vietnam
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/8/30/123006.shtml

John McCain's Record of Economic Issues
http://www.clubforgrowth.org/2007/03/arizona_senator_john_mccains_t.php

McCain Would Vote Against The Bush Tax Cuts All Over Again
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/blog/g/301ccb6c-32b0-4ba7-8330-68d560f67dd8

McCains Stand On Detainees May Pose Risk For 2008 Bid
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/18/AR2006091801353.html

Democrats Contributed Heavily To McCain's Effort in District 11 Election
http://www.azconservative.org/McCain_Discord.htm

The Conservative Case Against Huckabee And McCain
http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/019929f6-5799-479e-a86b-e2e2601330ab

McCain Walks Into Conservative Clothesline
http://www.baltimoregroupblog.com/2007/03/19/mccain-walks-into-conservative-clothes-line/

John McCain Is No Hero
http://www.usvetdsp.com/bengmcan.htm

U.S. Senator John McCain Is No War Hero
http://www.namvets.com/Reading/john_mccain_is_no_war_hero.htm

Flashback: The Real John McCain
http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/43aba933-6972-4a36-a25f-a2973e69e4ee

Wife of POW Navy Pilot, Who Had Husband's Remains Sent Home By North Vietnamese in 1989, Was Lied to by U.S. Officials For Years About His Whereabouts And POW Status
http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles/31-oct-2005.html

Defending America by David Hackworth
http://www.hackworth.com/25jan00.html

IT'S TIME TO GIVE THE U.S. ARMY A GOOD SHAKE
http://www.hackworth.com/19nov01.html

Why Vietnam Vets Split on McCain
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_12_16/ai_61487324

Luck Of The Admiral's Son Not For "Grunts"
http://www.usvetdsp.com/smith_mc.htm

ARIZONA'S JOHN McCAIN: A Fraud, "Rhinestone Hero," and National Security Risk
http://www.geoffmetcalf.com/mccain.html

MSNBC questions McCain's temper; Reporter says McCain vexes Senate colleagues
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/MSNBC_Does_McCains_temper_hurt_presidential_0707.html

Hilary is who she is because of an ingrained misogyny. It's been nice to see her blossom during the campaign, even while sexist Obama and Michelle (is she Phylis Shafly?) trashed he for being 'stiff'--but perhaps she's stiff because she's getting a good thought out within a short period of time! Hail to Obama for pointing out that McCain is dirtier money wise than he or Hilary. The solution--IRV ballots. We'll have them in four years. Then we can have real Democratic and maybe some Greens on the ballots.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/08/09/pacs_and_lobbyists_aided_obamas_rise/

A politician is a politician. If Obama chooses to blast McCain for an "unsourced" story in the NYT, he better work very hard to deflect all the "sourced" stories regarding his dealings with Tony Rezko. A cursory look at McCain's record as head of the Commerce Committee will show (or not) that he did nothing wrong.

A politician is a politician. If Obama chooses to blast McCain for an "unsourced" story in the NYT, he better work very hard to deflect all the "sourced" stories regarding his dealings with Tony Rezko. A cursory look at McCain's record as head of the Commerce Committee will show (or not) that he did nothing wrong.

Posted by: sondra k miller | February 24, 2008 03:52 PM

There's big difference there that you're missing while trying to explain away John McCain/Bush's lobbyist problems by pointing the finger at Obama.

Obama doesn't have a full staff of crooked lobbyists currently working for his campaign like crazy old man McCain does.

John McCain has 59 lobbyists raising money for his campaign, and yet he said "I'm the only one the special interests don't give any money to."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gEROVh8zK4

NEXT!!!

Obama has to try and ridicule one of the most honorable men serving in the Senate, otherwise, he hasn't got a shot at winning the Presidency. It most certainly isn’t because he is more qualified than Senator McCain to be Commander in Chief. Get ready for the Democrats to resort to the worst of Rove style politics at the expense of their own stated principles of fighting fairly. They are more interested in winning at any cost, even if it means belittling the heroic efforts of an honest man like John McCain.

But I faith that the American people can see a real agent of change over one who purports to be one, but has never delivered on that promise. The facts are very clear, Sen. McCain has worked across party lines to pass landmark legislation like McCain/Feingold, as chairman of the Senate Commerce committee (a position that puts you in crosshairs of those attempting to influence congress with the promise of campaign donations) Senator McCain has an exceptional ethics records, and McCain is not unwilling to take a position that might alginate members of his own party when it is the right thing to do (McCain speaks with authority against the use of torture, while Obama sits quietly on the sidelines and refuses to ask for some accountability of Mayor Daley for the torture that occurred by Commander Burge in the Chicago Police Department).

As others have pointed out, anyone who makes a real estate transaction with the wife of a long time friend and patron of their political career should be very careful of casting the first stone. Just so everyone understands what happened:

"In June 2005, Obama bought a 98-year-old Kenwood mansion from a University of Chicago doctor for $1.65 million, using a $1.69 million advance he received from publishers Crown for his book, "The Audacity of Hope." The same day Rezko's wife Rita paid the doctor $625,000 for the empty lot adjoining Obama's property.
Even though at the time Rezko was under federal investigation for influence-peddling in Illinois Governor Blagojevich's administration, Obama did business with him, buying for $104,500 a 10-foot wide strip of Rita Rezko's lot, ostensibly to provide space for a fence. The deal left Mrs. Rezko's lot too small to build upon, thereby lifting the value of Obama's home." (recap is from a NY Post article written by N. Wapscott published on Feb 24, 2008)

None of this may have been illegal, but ethical? I think the voters should decide if the wife of a lifetime political patron under federal investigation purchasing the ajacent parcel of property at the full asking price of over $600,000 while Obama purchased the home at less than $300,000 the asking price and then turning around and purchasing a portion of the empty lot for just over $100,000 and rendering that lot useless because it is now to small to build on - if that isn't a convenient gift, it is certainly the 'old Chicago political way' of yet another Pol benefiting from a series of legal, if unethical, transactions.

Obama is a fraud - plain and simple. The quicker the press and the American people start asking for real demonstrations and actions that led to 'change' - real accomplishments - the better off we all will be. We have nearly 8 years were cronies like the FEMA director destroyed our governments to disastrous effects - is Obama's support of Todd Stroger or his father against those real agents of change really any different? I think not.

Posted by: Chris | February 24, 2008 5:32 PM

McCain, Founding Member of the Keating Five
Back in the old days, defendants in famous trials got numbers -- the Chicago Eight, the Gang of Four, the Dave Clark Five, the Daytona 500. McCain was one of the "Keating Five," congressmen investigated on ethics charges for strenuously helping convicted racketeer Charles Keating after he gave them large campaign contributions and vacation trips.
Charles Keating was convicted of racketeering and fraud in both state and federal court after his Lincoln Savings & Loan collapsed, costing the taxpayers $3.4 billion. His convictions were overturned on technicalities; for example, the federal conviction was overturned because jurors had heard about his state conviction, and his state charges because Judge Lance Ito (yes, that judge) screwed up jury instructions. Neither court cleared him, and he faces new trials in both courts.)

Though he was not convicted of anything, McCain intervened on behalf of Charles Keating after Keating gave McCain at least $112,00 in contributions. In the mid-1980s, McCain made at least 9 trips on Keating's airplanes, and 3 of those were to Keating's luxurious retreat in the Bahamas. McCain's wife and father-in-law also were the largest investors (at $350,000) in a Keating shopping center; the Phoenix New Times called it a "sweetheart deal."

Mafia ties:
In 1995, McCain sent birthday regards, and regrets for not attending, to Joseph "Joe Bananas" Bonano, the head of the New York Bonano crime family, who had retired to Arizona. Another politician to send regrets was Governor Fife Symington, who has since been kicked out of office and convicted of 7 felonies relating to fraud and extortion.

http://www.realchange.org/mccain.htm

Obama has to try and ridicule one of the most honorable men serving in the Senate, otherwise, he hasn't got a shot at winning the Presidency. It most certainly isn’t because he is more qualified than Senator McCain to be Commander in Chief. Get ready for the Democrats to resort to the worst of Rove style politics at the expense of their own stated principles of fighting fairly. They are more interested in winning at any cost, even if it means belittling the heroic efforts of an honest man like John McCain.

Posted by: Chris | February 24, 2008 5:32 PM

Cry me a river Chris. Obama will only point out the facts and I might add, in a way your party can't.

With integrity!!!

a republican decrying democrats because of their filthy rove-style politics. and then he follows up with a rovian smear on obama. now that's funny!

Did he mention the lobbyists working on his own campaign? OR the donations he took from, lobbyists, but lobbyists law partners and wives? Sure, that's not dirty money. Look up hypocrite in the dictionary and you'll see a picture of Obama. At least McCain doesn't lie to the voters and say there are no lobbyists in his campaign like Obama does.

Don't worry reps! If Barack HUSSIEN wins the primary, all the Hillary voters will vote for McCain! The democrats are losers! Can't stop Bush from getting what he wants! So might has well finish what we started and look good.
DUMB DEMs-(HILL+BILL)= all lot of fluff! We can't drink Kool-aid and say its not the time for professionals. Will you let the 401K money be managed by a Kool-aid guy or a professional? With a fat ted kennedy or a LOSER like Kerry?

Divide and RULE!
IF Barrack HUSSIEN wins, the women will vote for McAin! Or suck up to them so the dem soccerr moms will vote for McCAin! I trust John MccAin in a time of war over IRAN lover Barrack HUSSIEN

"a republican decrying democrats because of their filthy rove-style politics. and then he follows up with a rovian smear on obama. now that's funny!

Posted by: trace"

Sorry to bust your bubble, but I am a Democrat - one of those who have not given in to the cult of personality or suspended my own analytical abilities because Oprah Winfrey acted as the Oracle and declared Obama to be "The One". Like many Democrats, I will not be voting for someone like Obama who is clearly unqualified to be President and Commander in Chief of our Armed Forces. I will confess, that as long as we have people like Todd Stroger, Rod Blagoavich, and Barack Obama my affiliation with the Democratic Party becomes more tenuous every day.

Rather than trying to attack the perceived partisanship of a given post, (after all this is a campaign for 'new politics' in which we are not in a red or blue divide) why don't you address the issues that I posted? Were exactly has Obama shown the courage to stand up to base to do the right thing? Was he part of the bi-partisan gang of 14 in the Senate who banded together to avoid the ‘nuclear option’ with judicial nominees? Did he speak out against the Moveon.org crowd who insulted our troops by calling their ground commander a traitor? Were exactly are the ethics reforms in the IL legislator that he passed to make IL and Chicago governments so accountable to the highest ethical standards?

If Senator Obama is going to try and discredit the accomplishments of Senator McCain, he should have some accomplishments to point too in order to demonstrate that he can be as ethical and honorable as has Sen. McCain. Please remind us exactly what they are?

The truth is that Obama is going to be the Democratic Presidential Nominee only because this nation and members of the Democratic Party have a strong disdain toward Senator Clinton. He is not the most qualified person in the Democratic Party, he is not the most ethical person in the Democratic Party, and he is not going to win the presidency because he doesn’t merit the position.

John McCain is a genuine American Hero and has spent over twenty years seek ways to redeem himself for his errors in the Keating Five scandal. He consistently shows his courage and risk his political career because he is more interested in doing the hard right rather than the easy wrong. When Obama can say the same and back it up with an example, I will start listening. Until then, he will be just another fraud in the dirty politics of Chicago.

Obama should have kept quiet on this one!!

Obama = Rezko, Rezko, Rezko!!!!

This story is about to break wide open. All you Lib's who are attacking McCain will be eating your own words in a few weeks. Oh that's right...Obama is a Democrat..."he's doing it for the good of the people" or some other lame excuse!!!!!

Posted by: Joe | February 24, 2008 10:51 AM

McCain = Corrupt Dinosaur!

John McCain is a genuine American Hero and has spent over twenty years seek ways to redeem himself for his errors in the Keating Five scandal. He consistently shows his courage and risk his political career because he is more interested in doing the hard right rather than the easy wrong. When Obama can say the same and back it up with an example, I will start listening. Until then, he will be just another fraud in the dirty politics of Chicago.

Posted by: Chris | February 24, 2008 8:44 PM

That's the thing Crissy,

All the other Senators involved in the Keating scandel had the common sense and the grace to retire or resign, not John McCain/Bush, his hunger for power wouldn't let him.

So what does McCain do? He's starts calling himself a "straight-talker" a PR move that even he admitts to.

McCain is doing a disservice to the military and their familes by trash talking Iran about bombing them and babbling about staying in Iraq for 100 year.
I still remember how the Repubs trashed John Kerry's military service, I guess you could call this KARMA, Chrissy...because McCain's past/current dirty dealings with lobbyists ARE NOT GOING TO GO AWAY!

McCain's "advisors" are not
only "lobbyists".
They ARE longtime inside-the-Beltway Conservative Republican political operatives/dirty tricksters,
borne, bred & educated by
Lee Atwater himself, as well
as his criminal crew-for-hire!!!
Time has passed for McCain media sychophants to be watchdogs & investigators,
not lapdogs & stenographers.

McCain has and is doing a great service to our nation and those who have worn the uniform, and I remember when the Repubs went down to S. Carolina and trashed McCain by calling him 'crazy' and questioning his service after spending over five years in a POW camp. Your dismissive tone and need to try and belittle me by calling me 'Crissy' does nothing to show how Obama has delivered on his own rhetoric or addressed the notable absence of judgment with the purchase of his home with the assistance of his political patron and now federally indicted friend.

I also remember standing up for John Kerry against those attempted to trash him here in Chicago. I was called a 'communist' and my mother was insulted. Those are the same tactics I suspect you are willing to use, rather than addressing how Obama delivered on the promise of change.

John McCain has worked with anyone who is interested in reducing the influence of money in politics by passing landmark legislation like McCain/Feingold. Obama hasn't.

John McCain has stood up and spoken out against the use of torture, risking his political career. Obama can't even ask for accountability of torture that occurred in the police department of Chicago.

John McCain was critical of the failed strategy in Iraq, and advocated for a change in direction in Iraq that committed the resources and leadership necessary for success in Iraq (the same position Kerry and the Dems ran on in 2004).

McCain has demonstrated he is willing to tackle the tough issues and work toward compassionate and reasonable solutions on Immigration. Obama has a long history of voting 'present' or missing important votes in order to avoid taking a tough stand.

The challenges this nation faces ARE NOT GOING TO GO AWAY - and have to be addressed, and the person most qualified to tackle them based on a long history of self-service and shared sacrifice is Senator John McCain.

I am confident that Obama's words (just words) and actions will give him away - calling our fallen warriors sacrifices 'wasted lives' - his dirty dealings with Rezko and a host of Chicago pols - his empty rhetoric that he himself has never lived up too - his assertion that we 'carpet bombed' indiscriminately in Afghanistan - his unwillingness to show pride in his nation - and that they are attempting to trash the service of a decorated hero.

Two wrongs don't make a right Jack Daniels - no matter how you try and make it so. Perhaps if Sen. Obama had shared in the sacrifice to defend this nation and its constitution, you might have room to be so insulting toward the service of McCain – but he was too busy taking drugs and coming to terms with his own identity.

It must true that "if once a lobbyist, always a lobbyist" becomes a typecasting in the world of politics. If McCain hired a person out of a "lobbyist" position to work on his staff the Senator's expectation would be that the former lobbyist would use his or her talents promoting (lobbying) the work of Senator McCain. I would expect that Senator MCain would quickly curtail employment if that former "lobbyist" even marginally continued representing former employers or clients. When will pundits realize that when people change jobs they also change loyalties.

Most of the comments below are laughable. Obama is from Illinois, a state that thrives on corruption and lies. Obama will not bring change; he will bring what all non-fiscal conservatives bring: higher taxes, higher spending, and bigger government, all at the expense of the hard working American taxpayer. His speeches are eloquent ways of how he will steal the hard-earned money that we make. Wake up America hope cannot pay your mortgage, put your kids through college or bring jobs back. We need leadership, fiscally responsible candidates that will reduce the deficit, reduce spending, reform the social security tax.

Just anopther example of Obama the hypocrite. Obama's campaign charmain in both NH and SC are lobbysits. HOW DOES THE PRESS LET HIM GET AWAY WITH THIS. He just keeps on saying whatever he wants with no one calling him out on the obvious hypocracy of his statements. Mike Dorning, Why do you not mention lobbyists working on Obamas campaign? Please can 1 journalist just give me an answer. I have been asking these questons for weeks here at the swamp yet Frank James, Dorning, nor anyone else have given me an answer. I want to understand why instead of just coming to the obvious conclusion that they are Pro-Obama and will do anything to get him elected. Is it laziness, or maybe they have not done the necessary research to go along with ta story. Now I never took 1 journalism class but I could pretty much assure you that if a candidate makes a claim about anohter candidates issues with lobbyists, I would then check on the candidate making the accusations before I pen an article painting McCain in a bad light. So I ask again is it laziness or is it bias?

You ought to be kidding me! Obama blasts McCain (or anybody else for that matter) about lobbyists? Maybe he should try another topic before the whole thing blows up in his face with the upcoming Rezko trial.

hey Chris, nobody believes you're a Democrat so stop pretending. You ask why I don't respond to your arguments? Because your arguments are nonsensical, and I don't have the time to waste. Let all the straw men you've attacked defend themselves!

Obama's presidency may take the same road as others because, after all, he is also a politician. But when he's in office he will be under tremendous pressure to keep it clean because of history, legacy, and all that. That is enough reason to vote for him for president.

Good for Obama. I'm tired of politicians who continue to push the legal boundaries and are way past any ethical boundaries. Corporate lobbying is one of the major problems with our govt. It's supposed to "of the PEOPLE, for the PEOPLE, & by the PEOPLE". Corporations (Enron, etc..)are not people!

hey trace, despite your disbelief, I am a lifelong Democrat. I supported Sen. Biden in this primary, I have campaigned for Kerry in his presidential bid and volunteered on numerous congressional campaigns (all Democrats) and I am increasingly finding my affiliation with the Democratic party tenuous because the current 'leadership' of the Democratic party is more interested in winning petty arguments than living up to the principles of what made the Democratic party so attractive to so many Americans.

As far as my nonsensical arguments, I am simply asking for some examples of accomplishments or a demonstration of Obama standing up for the right things regardless of the personal effects on his political career so I can determine if Obama has the courage to tackle the tough issues he is going to face if he were ever elected President. I will recap some of them again:

"In June 2005, Obama bought a 98-year-old Kenwood mansion from a University of Chicago doctor for $1.65 million, using a $1.69 million advance he received from publishers Crown for his book, "The Audacity of Hope." The same day Rezko's wife Rita paid the doctor $625,000 for the empty lot adjoining Obama's property.
Even though at the time Rezko was under federal investigation for influence-peddling in Illinois Governor Blagojevich's administration, Obama did business with him, buying for $104,500 a 10-foot wide strip of Rita Rezko's lot, ostensibly to provide space for a fence. The deal left Mrs. Rezko's lot too small to build upon, thereby lifting the value of Obama's home." (recap is from a NY Post article written by N. Wapscott published on Feb 24, 2008)

Has Obama ever challenged Mayor Daley, who was the Cook County States Attorney at the time, for turning a blind eye toward the torture that occurred within the Chicago Police Department under Commander Burge? Has he ever called for some accountability or advocated that he testify in Federal court on this case? If he is unwilling to call some accountability with torture occurring within a US city’s police department, why should we be persuaded that he is going to end the practice in the CIA? Senator McCain, who spent over five years as a POW lives everyday with the effects as a victim of torture, and speaks with authority on what shouldn’t even be an issue in our civilized country.

If Obama has endorsed the Stroger and Blagojevich administrations, (at the expense of those advocating for change within the Democratic Party), and ‘old’ political figures like Dorthy Tillman, why should we believe he is an agent of change? Is the cronyism practiced in the City of Chicago, Cook County, or the state of IL really any different than that practiced by the current President in appointing people like ‘Brownie’ at FEMA and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales as the head of the Department of Justice? It seems that both our local and state governments are as incompetent as these federal agencies and none of the taxpayers are being well served due to a lack of leadership.

If words matter, how is saying that our fallen heroes in Iraq or Afghanistan have “wasted their lives” truly honoring the selfless service and sacrifices of our troops? If actions matter and you give anecdotes of troops who are ill equipped in a debate, why would you vote against funding for the equipment these troops need? If those are ‘just words’ – how has Obama lived up to those statements he likes to repeat from such figures as Pres. Kennedy, Roosevelt, and national heroic figures like MLK Jr.?

I have yet to see any rational reason to support the claim that Obama is any different than any other politician or why he merits the presidency.

Lastly, I don’t attack ‘straw men’ or belittle anyone’s character. I try and stick to the issues – and that is why Obama will never get my vote. I am not happy that my party has put me in a position were they have and I am forced to vote for an honorable man whom I have fundamental disagreements on (like the appointment of judges) but I don’t trust Obama based on his track record, and until anyone can explain to me why Obama is “Change We Can Believe In” – I am afraid you are just wasting your time – and setting yourself up for a big let down when ‘The One’ doesn’t live up to all the rhetoric and false hope he has spread in this campaign.

I would love to here the obamabots answer the question as to how they just excuse the fact that LOBBYISTS headed up Obamas campaign in Iowa, NH, and SC. So lets here the spin. Whether McCain uses lobbyists more than Obama I have no idea but Obama is engaging in OBVIOUS HYPOCRACY. Now explain to me how he can get away with saying this but at the same time he has lobbyists running his campign during the primaries in 3 states. Here is some proof of the hypocrite that is obama.

"Contributions made by the various industry sectors tell the real story in a presidential race. And Opensecrets.org shows that Obama is picking up gobs of money put on the table by these special interests—including those involved in health care, which will surely have a lot riding on the outcome of the election and will expect to be heard after the election is over.

Consider the sector called lawyers and law firms. Clearly, lawyers and law firms lobby on behalf of their own interests—like fighting malpractice reform, which could again surface as a thorny issue for the new administration. Clinton and Obama have raised similar amounts from lawyers and law firms—$11.8 and $9.5 million. McCain and Huckabee have taken far less. The health sector has also given to Obama, Clinton, and McCain. In the pharmaceutical and health product industries, contributions to Clinton total $349,000 and $338,000 to Obama. Again, McCain trails in donations at about $98,000, an indication that the sector sees the real action on the Democratic side of the ballot. Health professionals, which include doctors, nurses, and dentists, have given Clinton some $2.3 million and Obama $1.7 million.

"Last August The Boston Globe, in a piece by Scott Helman, took a hard look at Obama’s contributions, noting that “behind Obama’s campaign rhetoric about taking on special interests lies a more complicated truth.” That truth revealed that as a state legislator in Illinois, a U.S. senator, and as a presidential aspirant, Obama had collected hundreds of thousands of dollars from lobbyists and PACs. Helman quoted an Obama campaign spokeswoman saying that after he experienced firsthand the influence of Washington lobbyists, he was taking a different approach to fundraising than he had in the past, and that “his leadership position on this issue is an evolving process.” If Obama’s leadership on campaign financing is indeed evolving, more news outlets should be following the evolution"

Here is even more proof of the hypocrite that is Obama. So I do not ever want to here an Obama supporter making the claim that McCain uses lobbyists because Obama does as well. He even gives the same excuse that McCain does. WHy doesnt the author of this article do a little research and point out the obvious flaws in Obamas statements against McCain. Here you go Obamabots:

Three political aides on Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) payroll were registered lobbyists for dozens of corporations, including Wal-Mart, British Petroleum and Lockheed Martin, while they received payments from his campaign, according to public documents.

The presence of political operatives with long client lists on Obama’s campaign contrasts with his long-held stand of campaigning against the influence of special interests. Obama has even refused to accept contributions from lobbyists or political action committees (PACs).

Jen Psaki, an Obama campaign spokeswoman, said no member of Obama’s staff has lobbied since taking a full-time role with his campaign.

As it turns out, Obama is not alone. His rivals’ campaigns, as well as the campaigns of Republican White House hopefuls, have hired staffers who reported lobbying activity this year.

While many lobbyists are planning to travel to Iowa and New Hampshire after Christmas to stump for their favored candidates, others have taken more committed roles. At least 40 current and former lobbyists have received payments from top-tier presidential campaigns, according to public records that show K Street’s infiltration in the race and offer hints about who may wield influence in the next administration.

Leaving a job temporarily to join a presidential campaign can enhance careers in the influence industry, said veteran lobbyists.

“I can remember my finest hour was taking two months’ leave in 1964 to help the Johnson campaign,” said Tom Quinn, a lobbyist at Venable LLP who temporarily left the Treasury Department to work for former President Lyndon Johnson’s reelection bid. “It puts you on the checklist as having been part of the team. You get to know the players, the people who get to run the government.

“Often the people you meet on the campaign wind up running the government later on,” said Quinn. “That makes a big difference — it gives you a feel of what they can do.”

Teal Baker, who received her first payment from Obama’s campaign on June 13, represented 18 corporations between Jan. 1 and June 30 of this year while working as a lobbyist for Podesta Group, a K Street powerhouse. Clients paid Podesta Group over $2 million during those six months for Baker and her colleagues to represent them, according to documents filed with the Senate Office of Public Records.

Clients such as Oshkosh Truck and Pinkerton Consulting paid more than $700,000 for Emmett Beliveau and his colleagues at Patton Boggs to represent them during the first half of 2007. Beliveau received a $3,050 payment from Obama’s campaign for advance work on Feb. 21, a campaign finance report shows.

Brandon Hurlbut, Obama’s liaison to veterans, union members and senior citizens in New Hampshire, represented clients such as the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies and the Allegheny County Housing Authority from January to June, according to public records. Six clients paid B&D Consulting $380,000 for Hurlbut to lobby their causes.

Until recently, Hurlbut had a voice mail greeting at B&D Consulting informing callers that he was on “a temporary leave of absence” to work for Obama’s campaign.

A receptionist at Podesta Group said Baker was on leave for the next year. Beliveau is no longer listed in the Patton Boggs directory.

Psaki said that Obama’s lobbying and ethics reform plan would limit the influence of lobbyists on his administration if he were elected president.

“His plan would prevent anyone who is a former lobbyist from working on those issues during his first two years in the White House,” said Psaki. “And no one who is a political appointee could ever lobby the White House.”

One member of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s (D-Ill.) campaign staff was a registered lobbyist during the first half of 2007. Rachel Kelly represented the Great American Insurance Company from January to June. The contract paid less than $10,000.

A Clinton spokesman said Kelly stopped lobbying before joining the campaign.

Jonathan Mantz, Clinton’s finance director, was a registered lobbyist for the Podesta Group in 2005.

Two members of former Sen. John Edwards’s (D-N.C.) staff were registered as lobbyists for the first six months of this year. Adam Jentleson lobbied on behalf of the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank headed by John Podesta, the White House chief of staff during the Clinton administration. Matthew Morrison registered as a lobbyist for the American Federation of Teachers in 2007.

Colleen Murray, a spokeswoman for Edwards, said both aides have ceased lobbying.
Employers often keep in touch with former colleagues who depart to work for presidential candidates. And more often than not, they are eager to see their protégés return.

“I talk to them all time,” said Tony Podesta, who as the head of Podesta Group worked with Baker and Mantz. “Either one of them is welcome to return.

“They’re both terrific,” he said. “I understand why Clinton wanted Jonathan and Obama wanted Teal.”

Podesta downplayed the potential benefit to his firm if Clinton or Obama win the presidency and his former colleagues land influential positions.

“If Teal works in the White House, I’ll know someone on staff,” he said. “But it’s not like this would be a special point of access. I’m pleased and proud [the campaigns] recruited someone from here."

Some lobbyists on Republican campaign payrolls have continued to lobby even while advising candidates.

Barbara Comstock, a partner at Corallo Comstock, has represented companies such as the National Association of Broadcasters and Hearst Corporation while on former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney’s (R) campaign payroll.

Comstock’s partner, Mark Corallo, said she has been able to both lobby Congress and work for Romney because she is a consultant to his campaign, not an employee.

He said Comstock has worked for Romney for about a year.

Actually Obama even has more lobbyists working on his campaign then McCain. Obama has 9 where McCain has 5. Here are the 9 lobbyists working on Obamas campaign.

Teal Baker
Emmit Beleveau
Ertharin Cousin
Stephen Geer
Steven Hildebrand
Brandon Hurlbut
Michael Lake
Hans Reimer
Buffy Wicks

So now what say you Obamabots?

Hey Chris, have you ever heard of the phrase "concern troll"?

Let's take a small step back to note that a series of news stories have come out highlighting an apparent disconnect between John McCain's "straight talk" and his actual behavior. Naturally, that prompts lifelong Democrat Chris to post a series of wordy, strident, rovey, smeary posts about how Barack Obama is somehow a false messiah. Funny how that works.

No, I'm not going to engage your "arguments." You have none. fyi, I'm not looking for a messiah, so Obama can't disappoint me in that regard. You, on the other hand, seem to be all caught up in St. McCain's cult of personality. Good luck with that, Mr. Lifelong Democrat.

Where as Obama just surrounds himself with Illinois lobbyists like Rezko.

I am afraid you are just wasting your time – and setting yourself up for a big let down when ‘The One’ doesn’t live up to all the rhetoric and false hope he has spread in this campaign.

Posted by: Chris | February 25, 2008 1:54 PM

I've seen your past comments on here and you're not a Democrat, you're a Wingnut and you see the polls that show crazy John McCain/Bush getting his butt handed to him by Obama and just like the other Wingers you're scared to death.

Nice try, now get lost...and take corrupt Grandpa McCain/Bush with you:
http://lessjobsmorewars.com/

Lastly, I don’t attack ‘straw men’ or belittle anyone’s character. I try and stick to the issues – and that is why Obama will never get my vote. I am not happy that my party has put me in a position were they have and I am forced to vote for an honorable man whom I have fundamental disagreements on (like the appointment of judges) but I don’t trust Obama based on his track record, and until anyone can explain to me why Obama is “Change We Can Believe In” – I am afraid you are just wasting your time – and setting yourself up for a big let down when ‘The One’ doesn’t live up to all the rhetoric and false hope he has spread in this campaign.

Posted by: Chris | February 25, 2008 1:54 PM

I just love it when Republicans come on here and pose as Democrats.

People, the ones who do this (Chris) are called "concern trolls", they are concerned their Party (Republics) is going to get screwed in the general election so they pose as Democrats and cast doubts on their candidates.

Today the Democratic National Committee will file a complaint with the Federal Elections Commission against "the honorable" John McCain. Why? In the words of DNC Chair Howard Dean:

We want John McCain to obey the law with his own name on it.

This afternoon Dean and officials at the DNC held a conference call in which they spelled out why they will file a complaint with the FEC against McCain. The background is that in December and January, McCain was broke and had to tap in to a massive amount of lobbyist money to keep his campaign afloat. Doing so put him in danger of exceeding the spending limits attached to participation in the federal matching funds program, in which an eligible candidate can receive monies voluntarily contributed by taxpayers to match low-donor campaign contributions in exchange for abiding by spending limits.

Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani had opted out of the federal matching funds program. John Edwards and several other candidate had opted in, but since there was insufficient money in the fund, they had to secure a loan against the money they were certified to receive.

McCain publicly declared that he would accept the matching funds (and therefore abide by the spending limits). But since he was broke, he had to go to a bank and secure a loan under dubious conditions. Since he appears to have secured the loan by using his eligibility to accept the federal matching funds, it seems fairly clear that he is committed to the federal matching funds system.

The DNC's complaint will allege the following. Fist, that McCain used his status as a candidate operating under the federal matching fund program to gain access on state ballots without having to spend any money to submit signatures. From the DNC's press release:

The McCain campaign has incorrectly stated that McCain is doing what Dean did when he withdrew from public financing in his presidential bid, but they have the facts wrong. Dean did not use the promise of matching funds as collateral for a loan. Dean withdrew before the FEC determined eligibility for funds, unlike McCain. And he spent millions of dollars to get his name on the ballot after withdrawing, unlike McCain, who had free ballot access in many states because he pledged to accept matching funds.

That is a material gain from pledging to accept the matching funds. Another material gain from pledging to accept the matching funds is the ability to use his eligibility as collateral, which he did to secure his loan.

Finally, by receiving these material benefits from his pledge to enter the matching funds system, he is bound to abide by the spending limits. The matching funds program requires one to spend no more than approximately $57 million dollars for the entire campaign up until he officially becomes the nominee in September. Through January, he had already spent over $46 million.

If you follow the implications, since he entered the federal matching funds program, John McCain is now essentially at the spending limit, and is legally prohibited from spending any more money until September. To spend more money would be to break federal law.

That law, by the way, is sometimes named after its Senate sponsors: McCain-Feingold.

Swampers,

Don't listen to "Vinny", he's a longtime racist who hates Obama because of his skin color and he also has spent significant time on here calling himself other post names, such as:

"MJ"
"Juanito"
"Leo T"
Anonymous"

He's a loser, don't bother responding to him.

John McCain has 59 lobbyists raising money for his campaign, and yet he said "I'm the only one the special interests don't give any money to."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gEROVh8zK4

John E writes: "I've seen your past comments on here and you're not a Democrat, you're a Wingnut and you see the polls that show crazy John McCain/Bush getting his butt handed to him by Obama and just like the other Wingers you're scared to death."

Like the polls that showed Obama getting his butt handed to him by Clinton? Those polls?

I know who and what I am. The merits of the questions I put out there are still unanswered. Trying to define doesn’t address Obama’s lack of ethical judgment when it came time to purchase his home, it doesn’t take away his support of corrupt and inept governments here in IL, and it doesn’t make any of the open doubts millions of Americans have with Obama go away.

DHinMI writes: "I just love it when Republicans come on here and pose as Democrats."

Why would anyone misrepresent what party they belong to on a blog? That makes no sense.

Rather than posting a charge against McCain by the DNC chairman, why don't the advocates of Obama respond with a logical explanation to his seemingly unethical purchase of his home? Attacking the messenger doesn't make the message go away.

You should both question why my post bother you so much? Maybe because their is more truth in them than either would like to admit?

Hey Trace: I wasn't familiar with what a "concern troll" was, but I googled it and now I know. If I falsely represented myself as anything other than a fairly conservative Democrat whose ties to their party are beginning to fray, I apologize. I can try and assure you that I am not trying to 'bait' anyone into a discussion. I am a pretty honest and upfront person, and you can either believe me or not. I truly don't care.

As for the stories attempting to discredit McCain's efforts to reform our corrupted politics, I am willing to have a comparison of the two Senators records. Senator McCain holds regular press conferences and addresses each of the questions posed about his behavior. The Obama campaign refuses to have a press conference to address his alleged unethical behavior and relationship with Tony Rezko (all questions have to be submitted to the campaign in writing, they choose which ones they want to answer, and they have only recently changed their story to disclose that Obama and Rezko toured the property prior to the transactions occurring).

As for the torture issue - I expect 'Progressives' and Democrats to gloss over the significant of torture in the CPD. They live in a glass house. It is one of the reasons I am increasingly seeing myself as an independent.

You can choose not to address Obama’s unethical behavior. It doesn’t make the issue go away.

You can choose not to address Obama’s unethical behavior. It doesn’t make the issue go away.

Posted by: Chris | February 25, 2008 6:12 PM

Actually, we choose not to address a Republican (you) who is acting like a Democrat to try an sway public opinion away from Senator Obama, you coward.

OBAMA 08!!

Suck on it, Chrissy...

Special Interest Money is Nothing More Than Bribery

Members of Congress have managed to create a seemingly lawful system whereby they can legally accept money from lobbyists or other persons who represent special interest groups that are actively involved in trying to influence those same politicians in future votes. The special interest groups that contribute large sums of money to political campaigns want and expect “their politicians” to enact (or help in some way) legislation that favors the group that provided the money. In America today, we are living under a political system that not only allows, but encourages and condones the legalized bribery of members of congress. That is why I believe “America has the best congress that special interest money can buy.”

Compare these two examples:

1. If a known drug dealer gives a police officer in a narcotics enforcement unit a $1,000. “Contribution” for the policeman’s ball and says “I hope you consider looking the other way when I’m selling drugs on the corner.” Whether or not the police officer takes any kind of official action that benefits the drug dealer, if he accepts the money, he commits the crime of bribery, right?

2. If a lobbyist or member of a special interest group gives a member of congress a $1,000. “Contribution” for his campaign and says: I hope you consider our position on any upcoming votes that affect us.” Whether or not the congressmen or Senator takes some kind of official action that benefits that person or organization, if he accepts the money, isn’t that still bribery?

Neither of these public servants should be taking money from people or organizations to influence their decisions they will make during the course of performing their official duties. Shouldn’t both situations be considered illegal conduct by those involved? Well, not if you are a member of congress. Bribery is defined as “a corrupt activity in which a person offers or receives goods, money, services, etc. to sway a person’s opinion, action, or decision.” Merely accepting the goods, money, services, etc, is a crime. It is immaterial whether or not the person receiving the benefit, does anything. In the case of members of congress, however, receiving money is only considered to be bribery if the briber explicitly says to the politician (the one being bribed): "I'm giving you this money as payment for a yes or no vote on the house floor tomorrow."

The reality of political lif