Jay Bookman

By norman ravitch

October 4, 2008 9:34 AM | Link to this

The Republicans will resort to their racist base sooner or later to defeat Obama. Thank God for the economic crisis which will make even fools understand what is going on.

By Felix

October 4, 2008 9:37 AM | Link to this

Well, we know they’ll do anything to win. You’d think they would have learned their lesson with Bush. I agree, it’s too late, especially as erratic as McCain has been lately. What did you think of Palin’s Fox interview? I didn’t watch it all.

By TW

October 4, 2008 9:41 AM | Link to this

Keating, drug use, theft from children’s charity, cheating on crippled wife, wet start, Wasilla Third Wave, more infidelity from the Holy, more hypocritical children out of wedlock, DUI, governmental corruption etc. have been put on alert…

And, oh yeah, ain’t McSame a Bush Republican?

Bring it on.

By LD

October 4, 2008 9:55 AM | Link to this

Well, considering the first thing the Obama team did when Palin was announced as the VP pick was to send a team of 30 lawyers and investigators to dig up dirt on her, I say this is fair game.

It wouldn’t be necessary if the media were willing to look and ask actual hard questions about Obama’s own lack of experience, his background, and his associations with ACORN and Bill Ayers, but since you guys just take his answers at face value, the American voting public aren’t going to be informed unless the McCain campaign starts publicly asking those questions.

Don’t worry, though, all you need to do Jay is throw out the race card to cover for him. I mean, hey, repeat the lie often enough about ‘Republican racism’ and people start to buy it. Just look at your first few comments here.

(Ummm, btw, it was Obama who first started playing the race card. Remember his comments in Missouri about ‘they’ll tell you about how I don’t look like the guys on the dollar bills?’ Gee, to hear you guys tell it, he’s supposed to be above such gutter politics, right? HA!

Vote for change? Sure. Just someone please ask Obama what that change looks like sometime before November, ok?

By RW-(the original)

October 4, 2008 9:56 AM | Link to this

Jay B,

I don’t think the Republicans have much choice since your media brethren are 98.427% in the tank for Obama and are totally incurious about his background. The kind of person he has chosen to surround himself with throughout his life should be shocking to you folks and you are proving how worthless the media in this country has become.

By Whit Payne

October 4, 2008 9:57 AM | Link to this

Politics is a zero sum game. Of course, Obama’s past with Ayers, Revko, Rev. Wright are all news. To not disclose that news would not be keeping with good, sound journalism. Right, Jay? . Can the truth be revealed? After all, the Keating Five news was universally broadcast. Why not details on these relationships?

By Whit Payne

October 4, 2008 9:58 AM | Link to this

Politics is a zero sum game. Of course, Obama’s past with Ayers, Revko, Rev. Wright are all news. To not disclose that news would not be keeping with good, sound journalism. Right, Jay? . Can the truth be revealed? After all, the Keating Five news was universally broadcast. Why not details on these relationships?

By "The Corporal"

October 4, 2008 10:03 AM | Link to this

I only want the voters of this country to truly know who this man is, the truth about some of his friendships, what his true motives and beliefs are and what kind of Supreme Court justices he will appoint and then I can live with the outcome whether our country can or not.

Up until this time, the mainstream press has failed in its ethical duty to do that.

By fearless fosdik

October 4, 2008 10:04 AM | Link to this

A must read on what a CREEP McCain actually is!

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/makebelievemavericktherealjohnmccain

By Mr Snarky

October 4, 2008 10:10 AM | Link to this

I love the smell of desperation on the airwaves. I’m just glad I don’t live in a swing state so I’m not subjected to the barrage of BS.

By Paul

October 4, 2008 10:16 AM | Link to this

You have to wonder, if people are still undecided, what will sway their decision? It obviously isn’t the kind of subjects or tactics that have so far been used.

[[We’ve got to question this guy’s associations. Very soon. There’s no question that we have to change the subject here]]

LOL! Wasn’t that Obama’s strategy from the start, with all the “McBush” associations? I’ve said from the time I heard Obama use that tactic at an early rally - I thought he was playing to the crowd and to take it any further was intellectually dishonest. But he’s stuck with the strategy and McCain’s adopting it. See? Obama’s persuaded someone to change!

When I read your headline I thought it was going to be a foreign policy topic and my mind went back to the debate, to a topic most Obama supporters seem to ignore or to not want to face the consequences of:

From Sen Biden, transcript provided by CNN:

[[ IFILL: Is there a line that should be drawn about when we decide to go in?”’

BIDEN: Absolutely. There is a line that should be drawn… The line that should be drawn is whether we A, first of all have the capacity to do anything about it number one. And number two, certain new lines that have to be drawn internationally. When a country engages in genocide, when a country engaging in harboring terrorists and will do nothing about it, at that point that country in my view and Barack’s view forfeits their right to say you have no right to intervene at all.]]

So under an Obama-Biden administration, if there is ‘genocide’ (however they define it, but ‘genocide’ tugs at the heartstrings) anywhere in the world, we send in our military (and we’ll likely leave them there for years and years and years - witness Bosnia). So much for international cooperation, so much for alliances - consider his statements on Sudan. Second: when ‘terrorists’ (defined how, exactly?) are in a country and are unable, through lack of resources and capability, or unwilling, through domestic political considerations, to confront them, then an Obama-Biden campaign will begin the invasions.

This is exactly the kind of reasoning anti-Bush people went apoplectic over. Now… silence.

I imagine Jay has some thoughts on the dawning age of expanded American military interventionism under an American administration. Anyone else?

By N-GA

October 4, 2008 10:19 AM | Link to this

Whit Payne,

The Keating 5 events were FACTS proven in an investigation. McCain admitted poor judgement.

What this column is about is a Swift-Boat style attack on Obama that slings mud based on little evidence. This is a technique that has been honed to an art form by the GOP, and even used against McCain when he challenged Bush.

What galls me the most is that it is these self-described Christians who use slander, innuendo, and outright lies in an attempt to steal the Office of the President from the American voters.

If you can’t win on the issues, resort to slander. McCain is willing to sacrifice what little integrity he has left to try to win an election.

By "The Corporal"

October 4, 2008 10:21 AM | Link to this

Jay

P.S. Here is some of your new “napalm in the morning” (which by the way I have smelled and you haven’t ……… :o)

“Some of his comments that he has made about the war that I think may — in my world– disqualifies someone from consideration as the next commander in chief.” Gov. Palin

AMEN

By Paul

October 4, 2008 10:22 AM | Link to this

Make that “the dawning age of expanded American interventionism under a Democratic administration.”

By Mr Snarky

October 4, 2008 10:24 AM | Link to this

Nobody is saying that these types of things are irrelevant or can’t be reported, but they’re what a candidate turns to when they don’t have a positive agenda. As far as conservative whining about a liberal media, what is there to say, but the media is more informed about the issues than the average person, so they tend to be more liberal…ie, the facts have a liberal bias. Conservatives tend to operate out of fear of change hence their penchant for nasty fearmongering.

By RW-(the original)

October 4, 2008 10:26 AM | Link to this

The Left has gone stark, raving mad. One manifestation of the Left’s loopiness is the reverence in which The One is held. Such reverence can exist only inside a bubble in which no one snickers. Here are a few current examples. First, from a Paris fashion show, earlier today:

You’ve likely already seen this creepy video of an Obama Youth group. It’s pretty remarkable; can you imagine if there were videos of paramilitary groups—militias, one might call them—supporting a Republican candidate?

I would take issue with whether he’s right that most have seen the Obama is the Alpha and Omega video, but maybe he just means most people that play around in the tubes and even though it isn’t Obama’s fault that things like that crop up it is partially the fault of the media that has built him into this Messiah figure.

By bdatlanta

October 4, 2008 10:29 AM | Link to this

RW, Your concern is about the kind of people Obama surrounds himself with? How about the kind of person he, Obama, is?

Let’s look at Johnny Mac’s personal character here: The guy came home from the war to a wife who was temporarily crippled from a car wreck. Did he console her? Did he do the “in sickness and in health” thing? No, he cheated on her and married Cindy before his divorce was even final.

You Republicans with the moral high ground need to take a long look at your leaders. Guiliani and Newt did the exact same thing to their wives. This is sick-in-the-head bad. They did this to the closest person to them, their loved ones. Unbelievable. These guys should be drug through the streets.

I would’t let Johnny Mac into my home much less sit down and have a beer with the adulterer. should we discuss his graduating last in his class next? How about his talking under pressure of torture.

It’s just unfathomable that Republicans can get Clinton impeached over a sex act but are willing to make a known - indisputably known - adulterer your President.

By Paul

October 4, 2008 10:34 AM | Link to this

I just read page two of the article from which you pulled the quote.”

McCain advisers said the new approach is in part a reaction to Obama, whose rhetoric on the stump and in commercials has also become far harsher and more aggressive.

They noted that Obama has run television commercials for months linking McCain to lobbyists and hinting at a lack of personal ethics — an allegation that particularly rankles McCain, aides said. “

By N-GA

October 4, 2008 10:41 AM | Link to this

Paul,

Perhaps the people who are working for the McCain campaign should be classified as EX-lobbyists.

Better yet, they should list their professions as “Political W*******”, or would that be redundant?

By bdatlanta

October 4, 2008 10:44 AM | Link to this

McCain and “personal ethics” can go in the same sentence because McCain wouldn’t know an ethic if it bit him on the behind.

The whole Keating thing was due to McCain’s inability to see the angle of what he was doing. This is similar to his acknowledging that he doesn’t understand economics at all. McCain didn’t get to where he is because of his brains.

The guy graduated at the bottom of his class at a school he wouldn’t have gotten into if he wasn’t a legacy. Hello??

You got tired of us calling Bush dumb? This guy is questionably dumber than Bush.

By RW-(the original)

October 4, 2008 10:47 AM | Link to this

Here’s a perfect example of why the McCain campaign has no choice. From the New York Tines we get a story headlined “Obama and ’60s Bomber: A Look Into Crossed Paths”

The reality:

How can Scott Shane write with a straight face that “[t]heir paths have crossed sporadically since then”? Obama worked as CEO of the project that Ayers helped found, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, for several years. Ayers served on the board at the same time. In an overlapping period, both men served for a few years on the Woods Fund, which notably granted $75,000 to Yasser Arafat’s associate, Rashid Khalidi, during that time.

Their paths didn’t cross “sporadically”. They worked on two projects together, political projects, for almost a decade in Chicago. That’s hardly “sporadic”; that’s a well-established working relationship, and certainly much more substantial than Obama’s description of Ayers as just another familiar face in the neighborhood.

Your “profession” has become a laughingstock, Jay. Too bad you may have retained just enough influence to swing this one last election that will be the death of this country.

By Paul

October 4, 2008 10:49 AM | Link to this

N-GA

Yeah, that’d be redundant. That whole lobbyist (current or ex) working for the campaign is bad for both - but particularly for McCain, as some of the guys who were involved in this financial mess are top guys in his campaign (I know, before someone else hits the keyboard, that Obama has lobbyist and association problems - I was referring to the type and position of the ex lobbyists).

As I’ve said, if you were really to get rid of the lobbyists or ex lobbyists, there wouldn’t be anyone left to work the campaigns at that level.

What’s really troubling, though, is how ‘lobbying’ - using contacts gained from contacts made during public service, or working for others engaged in public service - has grown into such a lucrative, encompassing profession.

Just another reason for term limits and complete public financing.

By Paul

October 4, 2008 11:00 AM | Link to this

N-GA

20/20 last night was on both candidates and their wives. I will continue to maintain both candidates are men of honor, with a commitment to serving the country and working for what they see as the best interests of the nation.

That doesn’t mean they’re saints, either in associations or some past decisions.

That doesn’t mean they’re not highly aggressive political animals.

But they are both fundamentally decent men, likely far different from many of us.

Obama - heavily in debt, opportunity to make gazillions, instead headed to a much lower-paying job to make a difference at a low level. His wife went with him, curtailing a rapidly-rising, lucrative career.

How many of us would have done the same?

McCain - his wife, a master’s degree in special ed, set up foundations to care for kids. Concentrated on children in impoverished countries with cleft palates. Could have stayed home and done the social money thing, but didn’t. Went to one of Mother Theresa’s orphanages, was handed an infant with disabilities like so many others. Heard a plea from a worker. Took the child home. Got off the flight, McCain asked who the child was and where she was going. Cindy answered, I was hoping to our home. McCain said okay.

Would that have been my reaction at that point in my life? Initially? Or would selfishness have come through?

Just a couple examples may here will blow off with ‘yeah buts’ or ‘what about.’ And I don’t really care. Because I think both, regardless of how they started or the path they took, are now fundamentally decent men. Even though they both play the political game.

By AJC/DNC Management

October 4, 2008 11:02 AM | Link to this

Amazing how the very mention of past associations is a horrible racist attack but a team of hacks crawling through the dumpsters at the Alaska public library system is just part of the normal vetting process, isn’t it?

By RW-(the original)

October 4, 2008 11:06 AM | Link to this

bdatlanta,

You might want to do a little research and read the articles of impeachment against Clinton. You won’t find them to be about a sex act.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And if the MSM were scrutinizing and reporting on Obama’s truly scandalous record with one-tenth the intensity they are investigating the Palin non-scandals, the American public would be irreversibly horrified at the prospect of an Obama presidency.

I’m sensing a disturbing pattern in the ranks of conservative writers that conservative writers typically highlight about liberal bubble dwellers. Wassup with the “one tenth” popping up all over the right side of the blogosphere today?

Other than that DL is spot on though.

By @@

October 4, 2008 11:14 AM | Link to this

As far as I’m concerned, all McCain needs to do is expose the political roots of the bailout. How the dems managed to “Burn Down America’s House”.

If only dem voters had a brain attached to their hearts. Anyhoo……….

on to geopolitics from Stratfor — three separate posts since the server is kicking it back.

Wouldn’t take my video link either.

To be cont’d.

By LD

October 4, 2008 11:18 AM | Link to this

Let’s be clear: McCain is a known commodity, warts and all, so it’s no surprise what’s said about him.

But come on! There are legitimate questions about Barack Obama that have either not been asked or his answers have been played up as truth, with no follow up or investigation. And any time someone dares to delve deeper into his relationships with Ayres, Rezko, ACORN, et al, media types immediately come up with the ‘race’ excuse. Sorry, that doesn’t fly anymore. Obama has been on the scene full time barely 3 years. What do we know about him? Does it really hurt to ask ?

(Actually, to ask questions about Obama in St. Louis will get you prosecuted, so maybe it does hurt : http://www.kmov.com/video/index.html?nvid=285793&shu=1 I’m guessing this escaped your notice, Jay, or maybe you agree with this gestapo tactic. )

Take for instance Brian Roberts at ABC. At last count his ‘investigative team’ has looked at Palin’s record and past 24 times. They have asked questions about Obama’s something like a grand total of zero. He’s running for president, he’s been in the public view maybe a couple of years more than Palin, so how can that be?

Or how about the Spanish-language ad Obama ran in the Southwest claiming Rush Limbaugh made racist statements about Mexicans, then tied John McCain to them. First, McCain doesn’t even like Limbaugh, second, anyone who did any kind of look at the statements would’ve found out the audio was cleverly lifted from a satire Rush did on the Mexican Government’s policies regarding immigrants to their country (which are far harsher than ours) and edited by the Obama campaign to make it look racist, when in fact to hear the whole audio it was describing Mexican government policy word for word. It was bogus….but funny thing, Jay didn’t call that ad out for being bogus. Nope, he just saves his scorn for McCain.

In the tank for Obama. Too bad you can’t see it for what it is: a political septic tank.

By LD

October 4, 2008 11:23 AM | Link to this

BTW when IS someone in the media going to ask Obama about his comment that US Soldiers were air raiding villages in Iraq? Does he get away with that one, too?

Great Commander in Chief credentials there…..

By getalife

October 4, 2008 11:26 AM | Link to this

Might as well, McCain lost his honor.

Obama said that thinking about winning is causing him to lose sleep.

That says it all.

A collapsing country is the next President’s nightmare.

I bet Hillary is thanking God she lost. Our future is lost due to greed and why the Pope mentioned greed is evil.

By N-GA

October 4, 2008 11:26 AM | Link to this

Paul,

I want to agree with you. But in the end you have to judge a man’s character by what he says and does. And I have watched two interviews where McCain vigorously denies any problems with the ad about Obama and sex education for kindergarteners.

This ad conjures up everything that people fear most, yet it entirely misrepresents the legislation, which is entirely about age-appropriate sex education for all grades, not just the lowest grade.

Perhaps you and I just have different views about some things. After all, it was speaker after GOP speaker who sneered at Obama’s “community activist” work.

And I don’t think that writing it all off to playing the political game excuses the behavior…especially when one individual (or their campaign) seems to play much dirtier than the other (IMO).

By Mike

October 4, 2008 11:26 AM | Link to this

Gotta love it when Democrats start complaining about Republicans going negative. Do you even read your own newspaper Jay? Considering the three pronged attack of the entertainment industry ( SNL,etc) The Obama campaign and the overwhelming majority of media(in the tank for the democrats),it’s a miracle that ANY Republican ever gets elected. The McCain camp has to bring up Rezco and the rest since Democrat corruption apparently doesn’t count to you guys.

By sea

October 4, 2008 11:43 AM | Link to this

I voted for H. Clinton 1st. With all of his associations with people of questionable character - Obama just does not pass the “smell test” with me.

A person does not sit in a church for 20 years and listen to their “pastor/mentor” scream “G*d Damn America”!! Twenty Years and Obama didn’t hear this???

Not to mention Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko, ACORN,and other questionable associations that will probably never be seen or heard by a majority of the voters.

Then on top of that, the outright media bias for Obama.

I ain’t buying it.

By Paul

October 4, 2008 11:47 AM | Link to this

N-GA

I read the sex ed bill Obama voted to get out of committee and compared it with the final. On that example, Obama was being disingenuous - the bill he voted for did say education on prevention of STDs and AIDS from grades K-12. While I may or may not agree with it, a lot of K-6 parents may - and for Obama to say he was voting for a bill that was about inappropriate touching is a bit of a problem.

Same with McCain - while something may be technically correct, the impression given is something else entirely. And the language of the McCain ad had, I thought, the aim of implying Obama wanted the schools to teach the birds and the bees to kindergarteners.

All McCain would have had to have said was “look, I’m not saying Obama’s in favor of that, but his vote was for these specific provisions.” All Obama would have had to say was “look, to get it out of committee I voted for it, knowing when it went to resolution the result would be what we have now.”

I don’t know how off our views are - but I do exploring the ideas with you. It’s challenging. On the candidates, I’ll restate. I have policy differences with both. Huge differences. I think the electorate treats them differently based entirely on party - which is why I keep going back to Obama-Biden comments on military intervention or first strike. Not that I disagree with what they say - I’m interested in why some who opposed it with Bush or accuse McCain of the same are fine with it for Obama-Biden.

But I think both candidates want what they see as best for the country (my earlier ‘both have honor’ comment), and for me, that’s the bottom line.

Off to a father in law birthday party.

Thanks -

But neither did. And that’s my point - neither is blameless. Both use implication and skewed nuance.

By getalife

October 4, 2008 11:51 AM | Link to this

Lets check out Sat. morning toons

By RW-(the original)

October 4, 2008 11:53 AM | Link to this

N-GA,

Jay linked to the sex ed legislation once here. You can’t possibly read that legislation and back up the claim you just made about it at 11:26.

By Dawggy Style

October 4, 2008 12:03 PM | Link to this

If someone in the “mainstream” (translated: liberal) media (Jay Bookman … come on down!) would ask Obama some tough questions, and hold him accountable to something other than a flippant, spin-doctored toothy response, perhaps all of us clueless Republicans could be as smart as the Dem-wits! Hillary was amazed (and still p**) at the “soft glove” treatment of Obama throughout the primaries, Biden is on record as saying he’s not ready to be President, and yet all an entire country full of media flunkies can do is poke around the trash bins in Sarah Palin’s hometown! I’ll give this to the ultra-liberal establishment: They have convinced a very large number of Dem-wits that living like a mushroom (“I thrive on manure and love living in the dark”) is the new American Dream!

By getalife

October 4, 2008 12:23 PM | Link to this

For those who watched the debate, this is what Kuchinich was talking about

There were a couple of dems fighting for this 90 year old woman but most were business as usual.

Like the Pope said, greed is evil.

By Slick

October 4, 2008 12:28 PM | Link to this

Jay

If the McCain Campaign stoops any lower in its mud slinging against Obama, it will have to be rated “X” on TV. They have already scraped the bottom with all the half truths, made up slander, and outright lies that they have used in order to scare the electorate and demonize Obama and his wife.

I agree with N-GA and bdatlanta about the need to focus more attention on McCain’s past activities and associates. His personal life shows that he has the morals of an alley cat and careful analysis of his Naval Career show him to be more of a reckless, bully-boy misfit than a hero. He has consistently shown bad judgement in his actions, associates, life choices, morals, and almost every phase of his life story, and voters should know as many details as possible before election day.

He is NOT qualified to be Commander in Chief - and Sarah Palin is DEFINITELY NOT QUALIFIED to be anything but an also ran in a beauty contest twenty years ago!!

By Hank

October 4, 2008 12:52 PM | Link to this

Let’s hope Rezko is singing like a canary to the US prosecuters. Rezko is due to be sentenced October 28th, just in time for the election. LOL

By Felix

October 4, 2008 12:53 PM | Link to this

getalife

October 4, 2008 12:23 PM

Fannie Mae forgave the loan. Better late than never, I guess. Someone surely took advantage of this dear lady.

By AJC/DNC Management

October 4, 2008 1:02 PM | Link to this

RW: He attracts huge crowds of the wildly cheering kult members, he has spoken to the adoring German masses at the feet of a war statue commissioned by none other than Hitler, he has his very own propaganda ministry thee ABCNBCSEEBSNPRURINAL/JIHAD, and now he has the Oblahma Youth?

How freaking weird is this?

Yes we can!

Seig Heil!

By Felix

October 4, 2008 1:09 PM | Link to this

Can he possibly be any worse than what we have?

By AmVet

October 4, 2008 1:10 PM | Link to this

Virtually lost in all of the “give even more money to the crooks” legislation was a GREAT day for all decent, caring Americans.

AND neo-cons too.

That scumbag Orenthal James is likely going to be someone’s tight end in the Big House, until he quits the oxygen habit.

And the nation rejoices that evil has finally been brought to justice…

By getalife

October 4, 2008 1:15 PM | Link to this

Speaking of propaganda, w finally cut a DoD program.

300 million for Iraq propaganda.

States are lining up for socialism. The door is wide open.

obl, chavez, iamanutjob, ill, castro and putin are LOL. Lets hope they do not attack while we are collapsing.

By RW-(the original)

October 4, 2008 1:17 PM | Link to this

Captain Ed weighs in on Jay’s topic of the moment.

Obama has run on his experience as a community organizer. That makes the Ayers connection through the Chicago Annenberg Challenge relevant. Obama has run as a reformer. That makes his support for Richard Daley, the Strogers, Larry Walsh, and the rest of the corrupt Chicago Machine germane. McCain doesn’t need to focus on Jeremiah Wright, but Hillary Clinton brought it up and Obama made it into a major speech earlier this year, so that’s also on the table. McCain should have been talking about all of this since June, but perhaps it makes more sense to wait until everyone is paying attention to raise these issues

Link

What’s funny is that the other day when Hopeandchange was asked what politicians he had called to gain support for the bailout he named a few Democrats. Then when asked if he called any Republicans he said he didn’t hold much sway on that side of the aisle. Didn’t The Dunce just undercut his entire message with that answer?

By gadem

October 4, 2008 1:19 PM | Link to this

BRAVO PAUL @ 11:00, BRAVO!!!!!

By RW-(the original)

October 4, 2008 1:30 PM | Link to this

Maybe this is why Joe takes the train home each day

He’s got to get to that night job.

By @@

October 4, 2008 1:32 PM | Link to this

OBlahMa didn’t give up a lucrative career. His was always a path into lucrative politics.

[Obama’s legal career seen as average Attorneys at his old law firm say he handled few cases

His wife’s career didn’t become lucrative until he, as a senator, earmarked the hospital where she worked.

By RW-(the original)

October 4, 2008 1:44 PM | Link to this

LD,

The air raiding villages and killing civilians comment was about Afghanistan.

Let’s hear it straight from the donkey’s mouth

We’ve gotta get the job done there,and that requires us to have enough troops so that we’re not just air raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous problems there.

By @@

October 4, 2008 1:55 PM | Link to this

And when OBlahMa began his political career in Illinois, his decency was questionable.

Obama Played by Chicago Rules

Thus would Mr. Obama win his state Senate seat, months before a single vote was cast.

According to the Chicago Tribune, Mr. Obama’s petition challengers reported to him nightly on their progress as they disqualified his opponents’ signatures on various technical grounds — all legitimate from the perspective of law. One local newspaper, Chicago Weekend, reported that “[s]ome of the problems include printing registered voters name [sic] instead of writing, a female voter got married after she registered to vote and signed her maiden name, registered voters signed the petitions but don’t live in the 13th district.”

One of the candidates would speculate that his signature-gatherers, working at a per-signature pay rate, may have cheated him by signing many of the petitions themselves, making them easy to disqualify.

In the end, Mr. Obama disqualified all four opponents

In the 2006 election, reformers from both parties attempted to end the corruption in Chicago’s Cook County government. They probably would have succeeded, too, had Mr. Obama taken their side. Liberals and conservatives came together and nearly ousted Cook County Board President John Stroger, the machine boss whom court papers credibly accuse of illegally using the county payroll to maintain his own standing army of political cronies, contributors and campaigners.

When liberals and conservatives worked together to clean up Cook County’s government, they were displaying precisely the postpartisan interest in the common good that Mr. Obama extols today. And Mr. Obama, by working against them, helped keep Chicago politics dirty.

After the primary, when Stroger’s son Todd replaced him on the ballot under controversial circumstances, a good-government Republican named Tony Peraica attracted the same kind of bipartisan support from reformers in the November election. But Mr. Obama endorsed the young heir to the machine, calling him — to the absolute horror of Chicago liberals — a “good, progressive Democrat.”

By mm

October 4, 2008 1:58 PM | Link to this

My you wingnuts are desperate today. I guess the foul stench of defeat will do that to you.

By i wanna rock

October 4, 2008 2:05 PM | Link to this

mm, you are a POS.

you do nothing

you are nothing

you sit there all day playing that that, guitar!

i. i carried an m16. and you. you carrier that electric twanger!

By @@

October 4, 2008 2:13 PM | Link to this

mm is a typical dem dolt ignoring the obvious.

One of OBlahMa’s useful tools who’s more than willing to give his HOPE away, if he ever had any to begin with. It appears doubtful.

By Leigh

October 5, 2008 1:25 AM | Link to this

What about McCain’s judgement, honesty and personal associations, with the likes G. Gordon Liddy??

By CrazyPeeps

October 5, 2008 3:36 PM | Link to this

Questioning the company one keeps is not racist. Its reasonable. Friends hold sway over each other where I come from. The opinions they would share with Obama or anyone else for that matter would have influence.

To say that this is racist is ludacris and a typical democratic scare tactic to basily let republicans know, “if you go down this road we will pull out Al Sharpton, Rev. Wright and Jesse Jackson and we will paint you all with hoods on your head”.

This tactic clearly establishes the democrats as the party to perpetuate the racial divide.

Again if you think it does not matter about the company you keep, or who your friends are, just ask Mike Vick……….

One of his closest friends is the one that through his stupidity led authorities Mike Vick’s house and his eventual downfall. Am I racist for saying that? Hell no. Its fact.

Blind followers of Obama need to open their eyes and see through the smokescreen.