But here’s the problem for me. I had really liked President Carter. I had a lot of respect for him, in fact. I was young and naive when he was in office, but certainly the work he had done AFTER leaving the White House was commendable. For instance, the work he and his entire family did for Habitat for Humanity has helped numerous people, including in my home town. I have experienced firsthand seeing the joy and pride the new homeowner as she looked at her house, and talked about what it meant to her. And the group of university students with whom I was working, all female, becoming more empowered, more sure of themselves, because they were helping to build someone a HOUSE, and the sense of pride and accomplishment that gave them.

The work Carter has done in Africa, helping to eradicate a horrible disease of worms that infiltrate too many areas there, doing horrible damage to the people they infest. Or his work in monitoring elections. Heck, even his recent decision to leave his church of many years because they will not ordain women.

My partner and I have visited the Carter Presidential Library in Atlanta, GA, a beautiful place in a calming and serene environment. I walked through that buildung filled with a sense of awe, seeing what he gave up, and subsequently his wife, when he left his commission as a Naval officer behind to go back to Georgia and help out the family. As I saw photographs marking historic moments, actual papers from events I had read about, or seen on tv. I was in awe as I saw his actual Nobel Peace Prize. And with pride, we have supported the Carter Peace Center for years now with monthly contributions…

(Photo by rachydachy)

But, things have been changed now. It began with some of his statements about Israel. Then President Carter inserted himself into the Primary Campaign, making some unkind remarks about my hero, “>Hillary Clinton. And now this. Being called a racist because I oppose the way by which Obama became President, but even more, because I oppose his policies. When someone calls me a racist, I gotta say (as we do down here in the South, “Them’s fightin’ words.” And so, I have written this letter to send to the Carter Center when my next payment is due:

Dear Carter Center,

Sincerely,
The Rev. Amy

What a sad day, for me personally, but also for this nation, when a former president makes such a grievous, and unfounded, charge against over half of the population. Because we have the audacity to judge the president by his CHARACTER, rather than the color of his skin, as Martin Luther King, Jr., charged us to do, we are called a heinous name. How sad, and how infuriating.

President Carter, as respectfully as I can muster after being called a racist, I would suggest it is time for you to go into retirement, and leave off sharing your political opinions. You are not doing yourself or your legacy any good, to be sure. Even more, you are not doing this nation any good. Rather, you are fanning flames that divide us, not unite us, all to provide cover for a man who, had he been properly vetted in the first place, and had the DNC followed its own rules, would never have gotten this far. Speaking for me only, I am judging Obama on the merits, not the color of his skin. I suggest you do likewise.

No, I am talking about political connections that can get you into the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana. Like if you are related to Tony Rezko, for example (if you want more information about Rezko, just do a search at NQ – you’ll get plenty of posts on him and his connections to Obama). Oh, I am not making this up. It has been a big scandal in IL. Haven’t heard about this? Huh – there’s a surprise!! Ahem. Seriously, though, Board of Trustee members of the flagship university have been resigning like rats fleeing a sinking ship over this issue, including the Chairman of the Board of Trustees, Niranjan Shah. Shah resigned earlier this month. Considering this story broke in MAY, it makes me wonder what took so long…

And about Tony Rezko’s relative, the Chicago Tribune reported:

In one case, a relative of Antoin “Tony” Rezko, the now-convicted influence peddler for former Gov. Rod Blagojevich, got admitted after U. of I. President B. Joseph White wrote an e-mail stating that the governor “has expressed his support, and would like to see admitted” Rezko’s relative and another applicant.

White’s message to the university chancellor was passed on to admissions officials on the same day they entered a rejection decision for the Rezko relative. “He’s actually pretty low,” replied an admissions officer, referring to the applicant’s ACT score and other credentials. “Let me know when the denial letter can go out.”

Instead, the relative was admitted.

Since 2005, about 800 undergraduate students have landed on the clout list for the Urbana-Champaign campus. It’s unknown how many would qualify for entry on their own, but their acceptance rate is higher than average. For the 2008-09 school year, for example, about 77 percent were accepted, compared with 69 percent of all applicants.

Wow. It seems that maybe “Chicago-style” politics are actually “Illinois-style” politics. Especially considering what this means in terms of academics, and what the University President had to say about all of this:

That’s in spite of the fact that patronage candidates, as a group, had lower average ACT scores and class ranks than all admitted students, records show.

In 2008, for example, freshmen on average ranked in the 88th percentile in their high school class, while clouted students ranked in the 76th percentile.

High school counselors and admissions experts said letting clout affect admissions compromises the integrity of the university.

“Whether it’s [a Rezko relative] or any other kid who takes a spot, he typically takes a spot of someone who is more qualified. That’s the part that gets my blood boiling,” said Jim Conroy, a New Trier Township High School college counselor. “This is not a private institution. This is yours and mine. Our flagship state university should not be part of any political shenanigans.”

President White said it’s not unusual for selective universities to receive input on applicants from interested parties, and it’s important to have a system to track the requests. The additional information can help the admissions office make a more informed decision, he said – though the university discourages applicants from sending letters of recommendations, saying on its Web site that “sending unsolicited materials can be distracting.”

He declined to discuss specific cases, including the Rezko relative, but said: “I would never support admission of a student over better-qualified students simply because of connections and pressure.”

But the Tribune review of about 1,800 pages of documents shows politically appointed trustees and lawmakers routinely behave as armchair admissions officers advocating on behalf of relatives and neighbors – even housekeepers’ kids and families with whom they share Hawaiian vacations. They declare their candidates “no brainers” for admission and suggest that if they are not accepted, the admissions system may need revamping.

Um, well, yes – I would say that’s a Newsflash from the Department of DUH on the whole revamping thing.

Here’s what the investigation found: The investigation found:

–University officials recognized that certain students were underqualified – but admitted them anyway.

–Admissions officers complained in vain as their recommendations were overruled.

–Trustees pushed for preferred students, some of whom were friends, neighbors and relatives.

–Lawmakers delivered admission requests to U. of I. lobbyists, whose jobs depend on pleasing the lawmakers.

–University officials delayed admissions notifications to weak candidates until the end of the school year to minimize the fallout at top feeder high schools.

For example, this spring an applicant described as having “terrible credentials” by the undergraduate admissions office was denied admittance. She sought help from Trustee Frances Carroll, who encouraged her to appeal the denial – an option not mentioned in rejection letters or any university literature. Carroll forwarded the appeal to University Chancellor Richard Herman and sought his help. The applicant was admitted.

Then, to avoid drawing attention at the applicant’s high school, where her acceptance could raise eyebrows, documents show the university planned to wait until the end of the school year to notify the applicant.

Carroll said the Lincoln Park High School senior, whom she didn’t know, had a 3.2 grade-point average, participated in many extra-curricular activities and deserved a spot at U. of I. Carroll said she likes to help disadvantaged students who may not understand the system.

Patronage has become such an entrenched part of the admissions process that there’s even a name for the applicants with heavy-hitting sponsors: “Category I.”

While some trustees and lawmakers said they didn’t realize there was a separate category for their requests, the records showed they needed only to forward a name and a few vital statistics to have the student placed in it.

And many did so without reservation.

Doesn’t this all sound eerily familiar? Sure does to me…

And that is why I took particular delight in Andy Borowitz’s most recent piece, “Obama Quits While Ahead; Prez Resigns After Hundred Days: “It’s All Downhill From Here.” Oh, if only:

In a move that stunned both political allies and foes alike, President Barack Obama resigned today after serving 100 days in office, telling the White House press corps, “It’s all downhill from here.”

The reporters seemed stunned by the President’s decision in light of the fawning media coverage he received during his first 100 days, but the hyperbolic nature of that reportage, ironically, may have been the prime motivator behind Mr. Obama’s shocking move.

“Let’s face it, I’m not going to get better coverage than I have to date,” he said. “The only guy with a higher approval rating is that dude who landed the plane on the Hudson – or maybe that other dude who escaped from those pirates.”

Click HERE to read the rest – it is pretty funny, especially to see who has higher poll numbers than Obama!

Sigh. I guess it is easy for him to have slightly better than half approval ratings when liberals and progressives ignore: expanded faith-based initiatives, a program we detested under Bush; keeping No Child Left Behind intact, a program we have all widely decried, especially teachers; and Obama’s EXPANSION of warrantless wire-tapping on American citizens. For added irony, here is a video from Keith Olbermann, of all people, on this very thing:

Then there is the attempt to nationalize our banks, firing the CEO of a private company, and the list goes on and on. These are just off the top of my head. I am sure there are more – feel free to add them!

The point is, someone who was inexperienced and unqualified was elected president as the result of the best marketing ploy I have ever seen. His connections to: Tony Rezko; Jeremiah Wright; Bill Ayers; Khalid Rashidi; Kwame Kilpatrick; Louis Farrakhan; and James Meeks, to mention a few, all ignored. Also ignored was his massive contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as was his his dearth of a record, both as an IL state senator and a US senator (or how he got to either one of those positions – getting the qualified people kicked off with the very thinnest of reasons). His sexist behavior, and his homophobic associates, all ignored by the MSM and his followers, people who ordinarily would never give quarter to such a person (and about which I have written extensively here. To find those posts, and other related articles by fellow No Quarter writers on those issues, and Obama’s associates, feel free to do a Search at No Quarter.).

Oh, what might have been. Below are a few very good videos on Hillary Clinton, the one who received the most votes in a Primary EVER, despite being outspent at every turn, and having the MSM expose its Clinton Derangement Syndrome at every turn. Still, STILL, she received the most votes of anyone EVER. That says something, both about her, and about the DNC’s choice to pick Obama over her, for all of their concocted reasons and unethical machinations to make it so. In recognition, then, of Obama’s 100 Days in the White House, I hope these will bring a smile to your face (though they also brought tears to my eyes):

Breaking News via WaPo: Stimulus Bill Clears Procedural Hurdle in Senate : “Senate votes to move forward on a compromise version of the bill crafted last week to attract a handful of GOP votes. Even if the Senate approves the measure in a subsequent vote, it has to be reconciled with a bill passed earlier by the House.” (Yeah, Nancy is really good at reconciling.)

SEE ALSO, via Bloomberg: “U.S. Taxpayers Risk $9.7 Trillion on Bailout Programs (Update1)”: ” The stimulus package the U.S. Congress is completing would raise the government’s commitment to solving the financial crisis to $9.7 trillion, enough to pay off more than 90 percent of the nation’s home mortgages.”

(This makes my head hurt.)

What country is that you’re president of, Barack? “An America”?

Thanks to a smart, but little-noticed article done by NPR, we know that that is NOT true. The only oversight of money given to states will occur when it is TOO LATE. As the NPR article below notes:

The bill does make it possible for lawmakers and the public to track the money — but only after it’s spent.

A hell of a lot of good that will do! Why? Because, even though Obama brags that his bill doesn’t have “a single earmark in it,” that’s precisely the problem. YES! Earmarks can be, and often are, a GOOD thing, because they pre-determine HOW the money will be spent with members of Congress conferring with their state’s local leaders for which projects are most needed.

I don’t know about you and your situation, but I trust my Congressman — a true public servant with extensive experience and a great position on the all-important Appropriations Committee — to do the right thing when he seeks an “earmark” for our area. And I trust my Senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell.

I’ve never heard a word of complaint — ever — by anyone who lives in this area about the projects that bring this area jobs, money, and opportunities, as well as the kinds of projects that yield long-term benefits to all citizens.

All three (my congressman and the two senators) go over the area’s major needs with our county commissioners, elected city officials and local leaders, and also look longterm at which projects will yield the “most bang for the buck.” Right now, through their earmarks, they’re replacing four dangerous bridges, building a new transit center that greatly improves the look and tourist attractions of the downtown area, and building a vocational training center. ALL PORK IS NOT BAD. Because if it’s done right, it helps the communities that need it the most.

OF NOTE in the article below: “NPR quotes Rep. David Obey: “House Appropriations Chairman on Stimulus Waste: ‘So What’… ”

From NPR:

When congressional leaders began to assemble the mammoth economic stimulus bill, top Democrats and the Obama administration decided that there would be no earmarks: no “special projects,” no pork-barrel spending. In so doing, they gave up some control over how the money is spent, leaving the decision to public servants around the country.

“Someone has to decide how money gets spent. It’s either going to be Congress or the executive branch or states or municipalities,” says Fred Wertheimer of the congressional watchdog group Democracy 21.

Lawmakers had good reasons for stripping earmarks from the bill, Wertheimer says, because “they are simply going to become huge targets for attacking the credibility of the package, and they may very well end up as abusive earmarks.” [BUT IS THAT TARGETING THE RIGHT PLACE FOR OUR ANGER???]

It was a wise political decision, he says. But pulling earmarks out of the bill changes the balance of power in the government. If members of Congress aren’t writing into the bill how the money will be spent, then someone else must make those decisions — or, in this case, a lot of people.

“Because there is so much money here, and in so many different forms, there is no single pathway for the money to go out to states and localities,” says Sarah Binder of the Brookings Institution.

‘This Is An Emergency’

When this bill passes, a Niagara Falls of money will flow out of Washington and into the accounts of state highway commissioners, governors and legislatures, local school boards, county executives — even mayors, Binder says.

“It raises a whole host of questions about how efficiently money can be spent, how effectively it will be spent, how quickly money can be spent, just because there’s no set process here for determining how money will get out the door to create jobs or, as the president said, to save jobs,” she says.

U.S. Rep. David Obey (D-WI), the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, helped write the bill and says he doesn’t like being asked about earmarks.

“We simply made a decision, which took about three seconds, not to have earmarks in the bill,” he says. “And with all due respect, that’s the least important question facing us on putting together this package.”

Leaving out the earmarks does mean Congress will have less control over how the money is spent. But, Obey says, “So what? This is an emergency. We’ve got to simply find a way to get this done as fast as possible and as well as possible, and that’s what we’re doing.”

That doesn’t mean Congress will be responsible if the money is spent badly, he says.

“The person who spends the money badly will be responsible. We are simply trying to build as many protections in as possible,” Obey says. “We have more oversight built into this package than any package in the history of man. If money is spent badly, we want to know about it so we can hold accountable the people who made that choice. And guess what? Regardless of what we do, there will be some stupid decisions made.”

How To Avoid Disappointment?

As it stands now, says David Walker, a former U.S. comptroller general, the bill appears to have no mechanism for directing spending. It’s left up to those state and local officials, who may or may not have the ideas or the means to spend it appropriately. And that will lead to “a series of disappointments that it’s too late to do anything about,” Walker says.

The bill does make it possible for lawmakers and the public to track the money — but only after it’s spent. And that, he says, will lead to bad surprises.

Take, for example, the giant bank bailout known as TARP. That spending has gone all wrong, Walker says. Though the inspector general and the Government Accountability Office are keeping track of the billions spent there, “they’re basically reporting on what didn’t happen,” he says.

“Well, it’s a little bit late,” he says. “And so the question is, what are you going to do on a prospective basis? I mean, you can’t change history. What are you going to do on a prospective basis to minimize the possibility of being disappointed again?”

ALSO:

I was browsing through CNN’s videos and, lo and behold, ran across this video. This is fascinating: Men are experiencing 7.6% unemployment, but women are hit by 6.2% unemployment.

But I wonder about those stats. Far more women tend to need to work part-time jobs, and I bet the loss of those jobs isn’t reflected in these stats.

What say you?

The other night I dreamt of Barack Obama. He was taking a shower right when I needed to get into the bathroom to shave my legs, and then he was being yelled at by my husband, Max, for smoking in the house. It was not clear whether Max was feeling protective of the president’s health or jealous because of the cigarette.

The other day a friend of mine confided that in the weeks leading up to the election, the Obamas’ apparent joy as a couple had made her just miserable. Their marriage looked so much happier than hers. Their life seemed so perfect. “I was at a place where I was tempted daily to throttle my husband,” she said. “This coincided with Michelle saying the most beautiful things about Barack. Each time I heard her speak about him I got tears in my eyes — because I felt so far away from that kind of bliss in my own life and perhaps even more, because I was so moved by her expressions of devotion to him. And unlike previous presidential couples, they are our age, have children the same age and (just imagine the stress of daily life on the campaign) by all accounts should have been fighting even more than we were.” … [emphases mine]

DAMN! I forgot to warn you to grab a bucket. Hope you made it to a barf bag in time! But wait. There’s more, and it’s even WORSE. Like this much worse: “Many women — not too surprisingly — were dreaming about sex with the president.” …

[...]

Many women — not too surprisingly — were dreaming about sex with the president. In these dreams, the women replaced Michelle with greater or lesser guilt or, in the case of a 62-year-old woman in North Florida, whose dream was reported to me by her daughter, found a fully above-board solution: “Michelle had divorced Barack because he had become ‘too much of a star.’ He then married my mother, who was oh so proud to be the first lady,” the daughter wrote me.

There was some daydreaming too, much of it a collective fantasy about the still-hot Obama marriage. “Barack and Michelle Obama look like they have sex. They look like they like having sex,” a Los Angeles woman wrote to me, summing up the comments of many. “Often. With each other. These days when the sexless marriage is such a big celebrity in America (and when first couples are icons of rigid propriety), that’s one interesting mental drama.”

[...]

One woman wrote that when she couldn’t get to sleep at night, she “lay in bed and thought about the Obama girls in their rooms at the White House. I thought about Marian Robinson up on the third floor. And about Barack and Michelle, a couple who clearly have a ‘thing’ for each other, spooning together in bed. It helped me relax.”

I understood perfectly where these cozy dreams of easy familiarity came from. It was that sense so many people share of having a very immediate connection to Barack Obama, whether they’re black or biracial, or children of single parents or self-made strivers; or they’re lawyers or community organizers or Ivy League graduates or smokers or basketball players or Blackberry users or parents or married or Democrats. A lot of people share the fantasy that having the Obamas over for “dinner and a game of Scrabble,” as one daydreamer put it to me, is something that really could just about happen. …

And these poor people have “Obama anxiety” and WISH they had lived HIS life, and given themselves SO unselfishly to the betterment of mankind! Why hadn’t THEY been community organizers like he? Why, why, why, why, why????? Why hadn’t they sacrificed like he did?

Why didn’t they make sordid deals on pensions to benefit their crooked cronies like Tony Rezko? Why hadn’t their wives used their position on the historic preservation board to find and grab a mansion and then used Rezko’s money to enable them to buy it, no matter that they knew that Rezko was already being investigated and followed by the Feds everywhere?

Why hadn’t they tipped off their rich buddies like Cullen and Allison Davis so they could rip off millions and millions from taxpayers and let Mssrs. Davis do NOTHING about the appalling conditions in the former public housing, and allow the gentrification of such properties, even though the original intent was to preserve low-income housing?

Why hadn’t they given a stirring speech to terrified workers at the Maytag plant in Illinois, promising those workers their jobs would be saved and taking their hard-earned money as campaign contributions, and then going to visit the patriarch of the billionaire Crown family, with controlling stock in Maytag, and never once mentioning to patriarch Lester Crown the plight of those workers, while sucking up all the campaign contributions he could from Lester Crown as well as every member of the Crown family and all of their extremely wealthy friends and allies? (Oh yes, all those jobs went to Mexico, but the Crowns said that Obama never asked them about saving those jobs, according to Chicago newspapers.)

Watch this infuriated union leader instead of indulging your sex fantasies, you boobs:

– From “Machinists Union Tells It Like It Is” (about Obama)

Why, oh why?

Oops. Did I just ruin the sex fantasy for you? I’m so sorry. Not.

A teaspoon of knowledge about who this man REALLY is would sober these people up plenty fast, and they’d no longer be plagued by their insanely goofy obsessions with him and his supposed fantastic sex life. Good god almighty. I just shake my head.

That stimulus package should include counseling and psychiatric help for all of these still-delusional Obamabots living in their unreal Obamatopia.

:::::

For those stout enough to take it, the full “article” is here: “Sometimes a President Is Just a President.”

There have been reforms in the state, most notably a new ethics law designed to limit the impact of money in politics. It was approved only after Obama, a former state senator, called his one-time mentor, Senate President Emil Jones, and urged its passage.

His “one-time mentor”? Are you freakin’ KIDDING me??? How about the Kingmaker who put Obama’s name on legislation on which he had not worked?? Oh, wait, that’s just too close to the truth of Obama’s lack of experience/qualifications. No way can the AP get that close…

Ahem. But of course, the ONLY reason The One made the decision to begin his political career in Chicago, apparently, was to clean up Illinois politics. Hahahahaha! Yeah, and that’s why he endorsed Blagojevich – TWICE. And worked on his campaign. But why quibble over past history, right? RIGHT??

That does seem to be the MO around anything related to BO. It is really amazing to me. In my opinion, though, the only way someone can deny Obama is a Chicago-style politician is flat our ignorance, or flat our denial of reality. Take your pick. There is NO way from the stories that have come out about Obama, his relationships to Blagojevich, Rezko, Wright, Meeks, Ayers, et al, that he is above typical Chicago politics. The Rezko thing ALONE is indicative of his involvement. And there is no way that Blagojevich JUST became corrupt as of Nov. 5th when Obama, with the help of ANOTHER corrupt Chicago political institution, ACORN (there have been so many stories on ACORN, and their actions this year, it is hard to single out just one, but here’s a YouTube video, and here’s another. There are many more videos on this subject. If you want more article information, please feel free to use the”Search” function at the upper right hand corner of this page.), helped him become PEBO.

Yes, I know the MSM has been a HUGE help in both regards – ignorance and denial. But not ALL reputable sources were completely in the tank for The One. The New Yorker, for instance, had some impressive pieces, particularly this one,The Political Scene: “Making It: How Chicago shaped Obama. The article title alone is indicative of the effect of Chicago-style politics on Obama. The author, Ryan Lizza, published this article in July 21, 2008, so like I said, the information was definitely available…

Many of us have heard of Alice Palmer, one of the first people (of whom we are aware) thrown under the bus by a power-hungry Obama. There was another woman, too, Toni Preckwinkle, who had a whole lot to say about the young Mr. Obama on his ascension into Chicago politics:

One day in 1995, Barack Obama went to see his alderman, an influential politician named Toni Preckwinkle, on Chicago’s South Side, where politics had been upended by scandal. Mel Reynolds, a local congressman, was facing charges of sexual assault of a sixteen-year-old campaign volunteer. (He eventually resigned his seat.) The looming vacancy set off a fury of ambition and hustle; several politicians, including a state senator named Alice Palmer, an education expert of modest political skills, prepared to enter the congressional race. Palmer represented Hyde Park—Obama’s neighborhood, a racially integrated, liberal sanctuary—and, if she ran for Congress, she would need a replacement in Springfield, the state capital. Obama at the time was a thirty-three-year-old lawyer, university lecturer, and aspiring office-seeker, and the Palmer seat was what he had in mind when he visited Alderman Preckwinkle.

“Barack came to me and said, ‘If Alice decides she wants to run, I want to run for her State Senate seat,’ ” Preckwinkle told me. We were in her district office, above a bank on a street of check-cashing shops and vacant lots north of Hyde Park. Preckwinkle soon became an Obama loyalist, and she stuck with him in a State Senate campaign that strained or ruptured many friendships but was ultimately successful. Four years later, in 2000, she backed Obama in a doomed congressional campaign against a local icon, the former Black Panther Bobby Rush. And in 2004 Preckwinkle supported Obama during his improbable, successful run for the United States Senate. So it was startling to learn that Toni Preckwinkle had become disenchanted with Barack Obama.

Well, I’ll be damned – Obama DIDN’T win all of his races! Amazing how we have RARELY (if ever) heard about his “doomed” race. Or that some people who know him, really know him, no longer are delighting in his glow:

Preckwinkle is a tall, commanding woman with a clipped gray Afro. She has represented her slice of the South Side for seventeen years and expresses no interest in higher office. On Chicago’s City Council, she is often a dissenter against the wishes of Mayor Richard M. Daley. For anyone trying to understand Obama’s breathtakingly rapid political ascent, Preckwinkle is an indispensable witness—a close observer, friend, and confidante during a period of Obama’s life to which he rarely calls attention.

Although many of Obama’s recent supporters have been surprised by signs of political opportunism, Preckwinkle wasn’t. “I think he was very strategic in his choice of friends and mentors,” she told me. “I spent ten years of my adult life working to be alderman. I finally got elected. This is a job I love. And I’m perfectly happy with it. I’m not sure that’s the way that he approached his public life—that he was going to try for a job and stay there for one period of time. In retrospect, I think he saw the positions he held as stepping stones to other things and therefore approached his public life differently than other people might have.”

Well, again, if anyone could see the trajectory of Obama’s career as anything other thank opportunistic “stone-stepping,” it is only because they did not WANT to see that Obama was a driven POLITICIAN.

But here is my point: Chicago politics. This is a major foundation the MSM and Obama worshipers/supporters refuse to acknowledge – because it does not fit the narrative they have created:

On issue after issue, Preckwinkle presented Obama as someone who thrived in the world of Chicago politics. She suggested that Obama joined Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ for political reasons. “It’s a church that would provide you with lots of social connections and prominent parishioners,” she said. “It’s a good place for a politician to be a member.” Preckwinkle was unsparing on the subject of the Chicago real-estate developer Antoin (Tony) Rezko, a friend of Obama’s and one of his top fund-raisers, who was recently convicted of fraud, bribery, and money laundering: “Who you take money from is a reflection of your knowledge at the time and your principles.” As we talked, it became increasingly clear that loyalty was the issue that drove Preckwinkle’s current view of her onetime protégé. “I don’t think you should forget who your friends are,” she said.

Others told me that Preckwinkle’s grievances against Obama included specific complaints, such as his refusal to endorse a former aide and longtime friend, Will Burns, in a State Senate primary—a contest that Burns won anyway. There was also a more general belief that, after Obama won the 2004 United States Senate primary, he ignored his South Side base. Preckwinkle said, “My view is you have to bring your constituency along with you. Granted, you have to make some tough decisions. Granted, sometimes you have to make decisions that people won’t understand or like. But it’s your obligation to explain yourself and try to do your supporters the courtesy of treating them with respect.” Ivory Mitchell, who for twenty years has been the chairman of the local ward organization in Obama’s neighborhood—considered the most important Democratic organization on the South Side—was one of Obama’s earliest backers. Today, he says, “All the work we did to help him get where he finally ended up, he didn’t seem too appreciative.” A year ago, Mitchell became a delegate for Hillary Clinton.

What?? Obama not appreciative? Yeah – no kidding. He has made it abundantly clear that he will step on whoever whenever it is politically – I said, POLITICALLY – expedient for him to do so. And still:

The same month Mitchell endorsed Clinton, the Obama campaign reached out to Preckwinkle, and eventually she signed on as an Obama delegate. I asked her if what she considered slights or betrayals were simply the necessary accommodations and maneuvering of a politician making a lightning transition from Hyde Park legislator to Presidential nominee. “Can you get where he is and maintain your personal integrity?” she said. “Is that the question?” She stared at me and grimaced. “I’m going to pass on that…”

Can’t say as I blame her. What does it say when someone who DOES actually know him has “to pass” on answering a question regarding Obama’s integrity? Or when the governor of his home state refers to him as a “mo***r f***er”?? These are the people who KNOW him, after all, not just who worship him from afar.

And then there is this (emphasis mine):

Chicago is not Obama’s home town, but it’s where he chose to forge his identity. Several weeks ago, he moved many of the Democratic National Committee’s operations from Washington to Chicago, making the city the unofficial capital of the Democratic Party; his campaign headquarters are in an office building in the Loop, Chicago’s downtown business district. But Chicago, with its reputation as a center of vicious and corrupt politics, may also be the place that Obama needs to leave behind.

Exactly. Chicago, with its long, long, LONG history of corrupt politics, is the city in which Obama decided to forge his political identity. One other interesting note on Obama and Chicago politics:

…David Axelrod, who has been Obama’s chief strategist since 2002 and is the foremost political consultant in Chicago, was a witness to all of it, first as a political reporter for the Chicago Tribune and later as the chief consultant to two mayors: Harold Washington, Chicago’s first black mayor and a hero of the Independents, and the current Mayor Daley, whose last name still carries negative connotations in the precincts of Hyde Park…

Uh huh. David Axelrod has shown himself to be a part of Chicago-style politics in the way he has run Obama’s campaign, that’s for sure. And no doubt, he will continue to use Chicago-style politics in the White House, too. Why change horses in mid-stream, right?

Oh, wait – that’s the wrong talking point. Ahem. Yes, Obama is trying to distance himself from Chicago politics NOW. Now that so many of its players’ wrong-doings are in the headlines, but those of us who have been keeping score know the real deal. Obama is inextricably bound to Chicago politics, and Chicago STYLE politics, as we saw this year with Hillary Clinton, Sarah Palin, and John McCain. Basically, anyone who had the “audacity to get in Obama’s way experienced Chicago politics up close and personal, and it was not pretty.

There is much, much more to the New Yorker article, and I hope you will click HERE to finish reading it (it’s long, which is why I am not reprinting it all here). In it you will read about Obama’s contentious relationship with another member of the IL Senate, Rickey Hendon; his relationship with Rezko, Ayers, and Dorhn; how his community organizing REALLY went (hint: not as well as he likes to claim NOW), and much more. I will leave you with this passage:

Part of Obama’s political success is that he has been able to exploit relationships with important yet ethically dubious figures in Illinois while still maintaining his independence. In some ways, this is an Illinois tradition. When the liberal reformer Adlai Stevenson ran for governor, in 1948, one Democratic boss reportedly noted that he would “perfume the ticket.” The earnest Lincoln scholar Paul Simon stood out in the Senate for his moral rectitude and his commitment to good government even as his state wallowed in scandal. “The political bosses knew they had to have what they used to call in business a loss leader—the showcasing,” Don Rose, the Chicago political consultant, said. “The car that you sold for under its value for advertising purposes. While you had at the top of your ticket a shining star, under that it was like turning over a rock.”

Obama has said little about the scandals in his home state. Besides the Rezko and Blagojevich cases, there have been indictments and convictions against the Daley administration concerning hiring and contracting practices. Getting close to the sullied political leadership in Illinois was probably an unavoidable cost of winning the U.S. Senate seat. Emil Jones told me that another of the lessons Obama learned after his 2000 loss was the importance of political sponsorship.

You can say that again…

Barack Obama on Thursday stated the following:

“I have never spoken to the governor on this subject. I am confident that no representatives of mine would have any part of any deals related to this seat. I think the materials released by the U.S. attorney reflect that fact,” Obama said at a Chicago news conference. “I’ve asked my team to gather the facts of any contacts with the governor’s office about this vacancy so that we can share them with you over the next few days.”

But on Friday we learned the following:

Emanuel, who has long been close to both Blagojevich and Obama, has refused to respond to questions about any involvement he may have had with the Blagojevich camp over the Senate pick. A spokeswoman for Emanuel also declined to comment Friday.

One source confirmed that communications between Emanuel and the Blagojevich administration were captured on court-approved wiretaps.

Another source said that contact between the Obama camp and the governor’s administration regarding the Senate seat began the Saturday before the Nov. 4 election, when Emanuel made a call to the cell phone of Harris. The conversation took place around the same time press reports surfaced about Emanuel being approached about taking the high-level White House post should Obama win.

Emanuel delivered a list of candidates who would be “acceptable” to Obama, the source said. On the list were Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett, Illinois Veterans Affairs director Tammy Duckworth, state Comptroller Dan Hynes and U.S. Rep. Jan Schakowsky of Chicago, the source said. All are Democrats.

Where do we begin with Obama’s statement on Thursday?

“I am confident that no representatives of mine would have any part of any deals related to this seat.”

I am confident you phrased this statement in the manner you did, for you knew Emanuel was in contact with Blagojevich through his Chief of Staff and through other advisors and operatives. I am also confident that Emanuel is avoiding reporters, for Emanuel knows his voice is recorded on wiretaps gathered by Fitzgerald and his investigators. It is time for Emanuel to resign and to vacate his House seat. And by the way, is not former Daley operative Valerie Jarrett Co-Chair of your Transition Team? Why was the Co-Chair of your Transition Team in contact with Tom Balanoff, the SEIU Representative, who according to page 69 of the criminal complaint filed by Special Agent of the FBI David Cain “stated that he would find out if Senate Candidate 1 [Valerie Jarrett] wanted SEIU Official to keep pushing her for Senator with ROD BLAGOJEVICH.” Maybe it is time you answer questions about Valerie Jarrett’s contact with Blagojevich and his operatives.

“I have never spoken to the governor on this subject.”

You claim you did not speak to the Governor, but Emanuel submitted a letter with a list of candidates you preferred to Blagojevich. In other words, you communicated with the Governor about the open Senate seat. Moreover, news reports you and your operatives have attempted to remove from the Internet reveal you met with the Governor the week following the Presidential election. You met with him, and you sent him letters. This website contains two screen shots and a press release from Blagojevich’s office documenting that meeting. I recommend you read them and explain their existence to the media during your next press conference. Thank you for your prompt and anticipated cooperation.

“I think the materials released by the U.S. attorney reflect that fact.”

Perhaps you need to think again, for the criminal complaint filed by Special Agent of the FBI David Cain reveals that a line of communication existed between your team and that of Blagojevich. We also know that members of your team, including Emanuel, were engaged in conversation with members of Blagojevich’s team about the open Senate seat and the possibility of positions for Blagojevich since November 4, 2008. Maybe you need to read and reread the criminal complaint until its full import and significance is understood. And besides, no one cares what you “think;” we care about what is known.

“I’ve asked my team to gather the facts of any contacts with the governor’s office about this vacancy so that we can share them with you over the next few days.”

Ask your staff again. Obviously they are incapable of compiling information, for it is Sunday, and no documents have been made available to the public. Do you have any intention of sharing any and all communications between your staff and that of Rod Blagojevich? And while your seemingly inept, incompetent and corrupt staff compiles these records for the perusal of the traditional media and writers online, I recommend you ask them to create a dossier on your dealings with Rezko. This staff, after all, is housed in the Kluczynksi Federal Building on Dearborn Street in Chicago. Access to records from your days as a state Senator of an inner city Chicago state Senate district should not be difficult for a group of overpaid operatives in your Transition offices to obtain. I imagine they are not very bright, but if they refrain from engaging in drunken gang rape simulations with your speechwriter Jon Favreau, the lazy and inept lot will probably have the energy and focus to locate and compile these documents in a timely manner.

=========================

One paragraph, one lie, two equivocations and one false promise: how and why does anyone take Barack Obama seriously?

UPDATE:

Oh, he’s had watermelons (Rezko, Ayers) and apple boxes (Wright, Auchi, Kilpatrick) thrown at his house of cards, too, but the MSM has been fast to rebuild it. Just like they are now in scrubbing news sites of stories following the election about his meeting with Blagojevich regarding his Senate seat. No, I am not kidding you. News sites that just yesterday had the story now have a recant that they didn’t mean it. I am not making this crap up. Just look HERE (h/t to AmericanGirlinItaly for this link). Which country is this again, when we have news sources scrubbing their own sites of news that might cast aspersions on Obama by TELLING THE TRUTH when he is lying – from public view?? Wow. I think it is safe to say when that happens, we no longer have a Fourth Estate, but a government-run propaganda arm. I didn’t think that was supposed to happen in a democracy.

Oh, right – we no longer have a democracy after this year, which is how Obama even got to be the Democratic nominee. If we did, he never would have BEEN the Democratic nominee because his lying (which we are seeing daily on the whole Blagojevich thing), cheating, stealing, and nefarious associates would have brought him down LONG ago. As well they should have. And it WOULD have, had this indeed been a democracy in which the people’s voices, and VOTES, mattered. But, hey – why quibble now – that’s what the Obots say! After all, Obama is the President-Elect now, so we should all band together and sing his praises! Um, no, not me. Because democracy actually matters to me. And how someone got where they are matters to me.

Anyhoo, I don’t know that the PEBO can actually scrub the FBI files, and that may be the watermelon and apple box to his House of Cards. One can only hope. He has gotten by with too many lies, too many deceptions, too much duplicity by the colluding MSM as it is. If it takes a federal agency to expose Obama for who he is, more power to them. Their record of the two-hour conference call with Blagojevich and his buddies discussing the whole Obama replacement – with “the various Washington advisers” should make for some interesting reading, I would think…

And he can’t scrub the governor’s site, either, which has a little press release about discussing the whole Senate seat thing. Oopsie daisy!! Ahem. Do you think that Gov. Blagojevich is going to keep any secrets now that Obama, who WORKED FOR HIS ELECTION AND RE-ELECTION, is now calling for Blagojevich’s resignation? Uh, yeah, no. Should be an interesting few days.

This is an Open Thread. What’s on your mind?

Listen to the video in its entirety because Matthews describes further how VERY near he was to where that bomb went off. And Ayers (of course, this was not discussed today) is a free man solely because his attorneys managed to prove the FBI improperly conducted wiretaps. (I have MUCH MORE TO SAY about this below, and ask you to read along and then share YOUR reactions and add your own knowledge and your own impressions of what occurred, shamefully, on MSNBC.)

I can only imagine what Concerned Mother would have to say about this travesty.

It is unconscionable to me that we and the MSM constantly RAGE about O.J. Simpson, who murdered two people, but not reject Barack Obama, a presidential candidate, now president-elect, who has associated freely and over a long time with a man who could have killed dozens and dozens of people.

On his remarkable radio show a few weeks ago, Nocturnal Warrior made a brilliant point about PEBO’s selection of numerous former Clinton White House and cabinet members. Warrior said that PEBO has to select such people because he has almost no FRIENDS or LONGTIME ASSOCIATES to appoint to any serious jobs in his administration. This is a situation that has NEVER occurred in the history of the presidency of the United States. Heretofore, every U.S. president has had a rich collection of friends, associates, and allies from whom he could select many qualified for high-ranking administration positions. But not Barack Obama. You faithful readers of No Quarter know of many of Obama’s real longtime associates: Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko, Father Michael Pfleger, William Ayers, Allison and Cullen Davis, Penny Pritzker, Bernardine Dohrn, and on and on, only a very, very few of them suited for any respectable position at any level in an administration. (I’ve clicked several Categories to provide you with a list.) And now, this week, we learn more about other Obama longtime associates like Rod Bagojevich and his wife.

William Ayers’ Crimes, and Additional Perspective History

The SOLE reason no one died is because Ayers et al. were piss-poor bomb makers. What is the sentence range these days for an attempt to commit murder? And don’t forget all the other bombs that nearly killed many others. Including the judge, his wife, and his children — while they slept — simply because that judge was doing his job: Handling the trial of a Black Panther. I’m not generally in favor of the death penalty, but Ayers’ and the Weather Underground’s attempts, repeatedly, to kill as many people as possible in the Capitol, the Pentagon, police stations, and a judge’s home are the works of people so dangerous that those people should never be freed, and may be eligible to be charged with a capital offense.

Ayers has famously said, “Free as a bird, guilty as hell, ain’t America great.” (From Larry Johnson’s must-read article, “A Statement by a Retired FBI Agent Re William Ayers.”)

Dear readers, please understand this: All that, to Matthews, is just some history. It has some import to Matthews, given that he might have been blown up himself, but apparently not much since the conversation flows easily and reasonably amicably, and Matthews, at the end of the interview, gladly flogs Ayers’ book. THEN, after this interview, Matthews has his panel on. Matthews asks Joan Walsh, Salon’s editor, why Ayers — who appeared today to be “confessional” in his tone — didn’t do that during the campaign. Ms. Walsh LAUGHS with a SMIRK on her face, and says, “I think he wanted to stay out of it entirely, and not dignify what the McCain campaign and others were doing.”

Thank you, Ms. Walsh. We now know who the real criminals are. Shame on you, John McCain. Shame on you, Sarah Palin.

Ms. Walsh, please share your opinions with John Murtagh. Well, of course. That’s unfair. You don’t know who John Murtagh is.

Uppity Woman can tell you, in her story, “When This Man Was 9 Years Old, Ayers Bombed His Home.”

If I may, I will contrast the actions of William Ayers and the rest of the sociopathic members of the Weather Underground to the actions of a man who — unless you’re my age and you closely followed anti-war activities during the Vietnam War — you’ve probably NEVER heard of, and will not hear of in the MSM.

After all, he didn’t make bombs. He didn’t befriend a future president and excite the easily excitable rightwing. He simply did the hard work of truly changing history and he paid the price that true, albeit boring, heroes do, in anonymity.

His name is David Harris.

He was the resident counselor in the boys’ dormitory across the street from my girls’ dorm. Many of us sat at his feet as he modestly told us his stories about traveling to the South in summers past to try to help black people get the right to vote. He also shared with us the music he’d learned about in the South — the blues. He told us about Muddy Waters and more. We were entranced. With him, with his stories and the very REAL danger he was in during those summers when white racists wanted to kill him and every white college kid who dared to fight for blacks’ right to vote.

He ran for student body president and I worked on his campaign. He ran on the sole condition that, if elected, he would not serve. He won in a landslide. And did not serve.

Then his draft number came up. (My memory is vague these days, but I believe he tried all the normal routes available back then, such as conscientious objector status, and so on. All of those routes failed.)

So he went to prison. Leavenworth. About seven years ago, I did a search on him, curious what his life had been like. I discovered that he had written a book about his time in Leavenworth, along with his then-wife Joan Baez. I bought the book, and read it. It was a heart-wrenching account. I had no idea that being an inmate in Leavenworth was such a horrific, maddening, insane experience.

It is a simple story, really.

He refused to fight for a war he did not believe was right.

The U.S. government tried him and sentenced him to prison.

He served roughly three years, as I recall.

You may disagree with his decision, but he decided to take the punishment like a man.

He had a father who, as I remember it, was an attorney in Fresno, California. His father surely had some means, but not enough to prevent his son from going to prison.

Bill Ayers had a father who was Chairman of Commonwealth Edison and a mover/shaker in Chicago politics, the arts and education. His father had the means to hire a cadre of attorneys who successfully prevented his son from spending a single day in prison.

David Harris did not build bombs.

He tried to help blacks in the South get to vote, at great risk to his own life.

He helped educate and watched over younger students attending the university, which was often a tedious task, listening to those 18-year-olds’ angst and fear and uncertainty and their various problems with and anxieties about their classes.

He helped the students with the difficult reading for the required freshman class, The History of Western Civilization, because he had read all of those works, including all of Plato, Socrates, and more, and he could — and did — explain those works to those anxious students. He spoke with them patiently and kindly and always very softly.

He was a hulk of a man with broad thick shoulders and a large angular head and a blond mustache but he was, as they say, a gentle giant.

He did not teach the younger students to build bombs or burn down buildings.

He taught the students about giving black people the right to vote and about the blues and about philosophy and about literature and about political thinking and about peaceful protest and about Martin Luther King and Gandhi.

He marched and sang folk songs with his wife, who bore their son.

What a dull man.

Doubtless, Chris Matthews will never invite David Harris for a feature interview.

If only he’d built bombs and then buddied up with a future president, he’d be a sought-after guest.

At least he has an entry in Wikipedia.

:::::::::::

Via Google News results:

Matthews to Ayers: ‘I Agitate My Way, You Agitate Your Way‘ – NewsBusters

Chris Matthews invited on Bill Ayers on Wednesday night’s “Hardball,” and actually confronted him about his bombing of Capitol Hill during his days as a member of the ’60s terrorist group Weather Underground, as the former Capitol Hill police officer emotionally observed: “I was a Capitol policeman at the time, so I was one of the guys that could have been killed obviously at the time you put that, your guys put that bomb in there. So I have a little personal interest. It wasn’t just vandalism. To me it was life-threatening to the guys I worked with. And there were some pretty good guys working there.”

However Matthews, who paradoxically may not even be alive to conduct this interview today if the Weather Underground’s bombs were more devastating, devoted most of the interview tossing softballs Ayers’ way, as the two often agreed with each other on Barack Obama and Iraq policy as the “Hardball” host pointed out they only really differed on how to spread their points of view: “Well, Mr. Ayers, with all due respect, you agitate your way, I agitate my way.

Matthews, who back in October dismissed Sarah Palin’s mention of Ayers, as “the politics of distraction,” began the interview by setting up Ayers to play down any association he had with Obama: …

READ ALL: Matthews to Ayers: ‘I Agitate My Way, You Agitate Your Way‘ — NewsBusters

AND READ MORE of NoQuarter’s treasure trove of materials on the bombings conducted by William Ayers.

There are new findings out from the Civic Literacy Report, and they are not good. In fact, they are disturbing. This is a follow-up survey by one done to test civic knowledge of college students conducted over two years. The best result – the BEST result – was 54.2% on basic civics and self-governance. How do I say this? Oh, here it is – that’s PATHETIC. So, the American Civic Literacy Organization decided to survey adults, and elected officials. Check out some of these findings based on 33 questions asked:

The results reveal that Americans are alarmingly uninformed about our Constitution, the basic functions of our government, the key texts of our national history, and economic principles.

* Less than half can name all three branches of the government.
* Only 21% know that the phrase “government of the people, by the people, for the people” comes from Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address.
* Although Congress has voted twice in the last eight years to approve foreign wars, only 53% know that the power to declare war belongs to Congress. Almost 40% incorrectly believe it belongs to the president.
* Only 55% know that Congress shares authority over U.S. foreign policy with the president. Almost a quarter incorrectly believe Congress shares this power with the United Nations.
* Only 27% know the Bill of Rights expressly prohibits establishing an official religion for the United States.
* Less than one in five know that the phrase “a wall of separation” between church and state comes from a letter by Thomas Jefferson. Almost half incorrectly believe it can be found in the Constitution.

Americans from all age groups, income brackets, and political ideologies fail the test of civic literacy.

* Americans age 25 to 34 score an average of 46% on the exam; Americans age 65 and over score 46%.
* Americans earning an annual income between $30,000 and $50,000 score an average of 46%; Americans earning over $100,000 score 55%.
* Liberals score an average of 49%; conservatives score 48%.
* Americans who go to church once a week score an average of 48%; Americans who never go to church score 50%.

I know – holy crap, right? This sure does explain a lot to me, though, about how/why certain people do not see glaring violations of the Constitution even when it is shoved in their faces. They just do not know.

Wanna guess who it is in part responsible for the “dumbing down of America”? Did you guess the television? Then you would be right:

In order to help isolate the impact a college degree has on civic literacy, ISI examined additional factors that might add to or subtract from an individual’s civic knowledge. The survey results were put through a regression analysis to determine whether various behaviors in a respondent’s life had a unique, statistically significant impact on his or her civic knowledge.

The multiple-regression analysis indicated that a person’s test score drops in proportion to the time he or she spends using certain types of passive electronic media. Talking on the phone, watching owned or rented movies, and even monitoring TV news broadcasts and documentaries diminishes a respondent’s civic literacy.

Actively seeking knowledge through print media and high-quality conversations has the opposite effect. Reading about history and current events in books, magazines, and newspapers—and talking about these subjects with family and friends—increases a respondent’s civic literacy.

In fact, an American who lacks a college degree but has initiative and desire—and who does not spend too much time watching TV and talking on the phone—can acquire more civic knowledge than a couch potato with a college degree.

So there’s at least some hope if people can tear themselves away from CNN and MSNBC and pick up a newspaper and discuss it, they might actually learn something about this country.

Okay, as promised, wait, just WAIT until you see how our elected officials, those who swear to uphold the Constitution fared in basic civics. I’d put down that mug (or glass) if I were you:

The elected officeholders come from the ranks of Democrats (40%), Republicans (31%), Independents (21%), and those who say they belong to no party or indicate no affiliation (8%). None were asked to specify what office they held, so the proportion in which they held local, state, or federal positions is unknown.

Not all officeholders do poorly, of course. Some elected officials rank among the highest scorers. But the failure rate on the test among those who have won public office is higher (74%) than among those who have not (71%). Officeholders scored lower on all sub-themes of the test: political history, cultural institutions, foreign relations, and market economy.

In each of the following areas, for example, officeholders do more poorly than non-officeholders:

* Seventy-nine percent of those who have been elected to government office do not know the Bill of Rights expressly prohibits establishing an official religion for the U.S.
* Thirty percent do not know that “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” are the inalienable rights referred to in the Declaration of Independence.
* Twenty-seven percent cannot name even one right or freedom guaranteed by the First Amendment.
* Forty-three percent do not know what the Electoral College does. One in five thinks it either “trains those aspiring for higher political office” or “was established to supervise the first televised presidential debates.”
* Fifty-four percent do not know the Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war. Thirty-nine percent think that power belongs to the president, and 10% think it belongs to the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
* Only 32% can properly define the free enterprise system, and only 41% can identify business profit as “revenue minus expenses.”

On some questions, Americans who have held elected office do better than Americans who have not. They are a little more likely, for example, to recognize the language of the Gettysburg Address (23% to 21%) and to know that the question of whether slavery should be allowed to expand into new territories was the main issue in the Lincoln–Douglas debates (25% to 20%).

Officeholders and non-officeholders find it equally difficult to identify the three branches of government. Only 49% of each group can name the legislative, executive, and judicial.

Well, that sure explains a lot, doesn’t it? No wonder we find ourselves screaming at the tv watching our lawmakers say the stupidest things that CLEARLY bear no relation to the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. But for ANYONE in this country – ANYONE – to not know we have three separate branches of government is – wow – staggering. How can any American NOT KNOW THAT???? Clearly, they did not see this enough while growing up:

So, will people be upset of Patrick Fitzgerald doesn’t stay on in his current position? For less than half of the nation who don’t even know the three branches of government, I’d say the percentage of people who wouldn’t even know anything had changed would be at least A GAZILLION percent. Sad. Really, really sad. This is exactly how we end up with people like Obama as the President Elect. People know so little about the government in general, how in the WORLD can we expect them to understand something like caucus fraud?? Wow. Just freakin’ wow. Go check out the site and see some of the other findings. I bet you’ll be be blown away, too. And I bet Thomas Jefferson is rolling over in his grave.

Please read the Criminal Complaint filed by David W. Cain, Special Agent of the FBI. Details of the conversations Blagojevich had with his operatives about Barack Obama and the possibility Barack Obama would strike several deals with Blagojevich regarding the open Senate seat are discussed, and yes, quotations are provided.

I enjoy this gem from pages 63-64, where a telephone conversation between Blagojevich, Advisor B, a political consultant in Washington, DC, another Washington, DC, political consultant and John Haris, the Governor’s General Counsel, is discussed:

ROD BLAGOJEVICH said that the consultants (Advisor B and another consultant are believed to be on the call at that time) are telling him that he has to “suck it up” for two years and do nothing and give this “motherfucker [the President-elect] his senator. Fuck him. For nothing? Fuck him.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH states that he will put “[Senate Candidate 4]” in the Senate “before I just give fucking [Senate Candidate 1] a fucking Senate seat and I don’t get anything.” (Senate Candidate 4 is a Deputy Governor of the State of Illinois). ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that he needs to find a way to take the “financial stress” off of his family and that his wife is as qualified or more qualified than another specifically named individual to sit on corporate boards. According to ROD BLAGOJEVICH, “the immediate challenge [is] how do we take some of the financial pressure off of our family.” Later in the phone call, ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that absent getting something back, ROD BLAGOJEVICH will not pick Senate Candidate 1. HARRIS re-stated ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s thoughts that they should ask the President-elect for something for ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s financial security as well as maintain his political viability. HARRIS said they could work out a three-way deal with SEIU and the President-elect where SEIU could help the President-elect with ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s appointment of Senate Candidate 1 to the vacant Senate seat, ROD BLAGOJEVICH would obtain a position as the National Director of the Change to Win campaign, and SEIU would get something favorable from the President-elect in the future.

Senate Candidate 1 is Valerie Jarrett, an Obama advisor who also served as Daley’s Chief of Staff. Jarrett is very close to the Obamas. Senate Candidate 4 is either Dean Martinez, Bob Greenlee or Louanner Peters, all of whom are Deputy Governors of Illinois.

The “specifically named individual” is Michelle Obama, who was appointed to the Board of TreeHouse Foods, a WAL-MART vendor, on June 25, 2005, even though she did not have experience in the private sector previous to the appointment. Here are the benefits the Obama family received as a result of Michelle Obama’s stint with the WAL-MART vendor:

According to the couple’s tax returns, Mrs Obama earned $51,200 (£25,700) for her work as a non-executive director on Treehouse’s board last year, on top of the $271,618 salary she was paid as a vice-president of the University of Chicago Hospitals.

She also received 7,500 Treehouse stock options, worth a further $72,375, as she did the previous year, when she banked a $45,000 salary from the company.

Michelle Obama is the “specifically named individual” who was able to sit on corporate boards, although she lacks the experience of Blagojevich’s wife. And notice how Michelle Obama’s position with the WAL-MART vendor helped alleviate the “financial stress” of the Obama family at a time when they were purchasing a mansion from Rezko they could not afford.

Why is this relevant?

Blagojevich, according to the FBI complaint, thought Barack Obama could appoint his wife to corporate boards if he were to appoint Valerie Jarrett to the open Senate seat vacated by Obama. I quote pages 54-55 of the criminal complaint filed by Special Agent of the FBI David Cain:

By law, after the President-elect’s resignation of his position as a U.S. Senator, which was effective on November 16, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH has sole authority to appoint his replacement for the two years remaining of the President-elect’s Senate term. See 10 ILCS 5/25-8. During the course of this investigation, agents have intercepted a series of communications regarding the efforts of ROD BLAGOJEVICH, JOHN HARRIS, and others to misuse this power to obtain personal gain, including financial gain, for ROD BLAGOJEVICH and his family. In particular, ROD BLAGOJEVICH has been intercepted conspiring to trade the senate seat for particular positions that the President-elect has the power to appoint (e.g. the Secretary of Health and Human Services). ROD BLAGOJEVICH has also been intercepted conspiring to sell the Senate seat in exchange for his wife’s placement on paid corporate boards or ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s placement at a private foundation in a significant position with a substantial salary. ROD BLAGOJEVICH has also been intercepted conspiring to sell the Senate seat in exchange for millions of dollars in funding for a non-profit organization that he would start and that would employ him at a substantial salary after he left the governorship.

Blagojevich, in other words, assumed Obama would appoint his wife to a Board for the political favor of selecting Valerie Jarrett for the Senate seat. Blagojevich is not a stupid man. Indeed, he only assumed Obama would participate in this “pay to play” scheme, for he knows Obama is acutely aware how the game is played in Illinois and in Chicago. This explains why Blagojevich mentions Michelle Obama and her lack of qualifications to serve on the Board of TreeHouse Foods when he discusses how Obama could appoint Mrs. Blagojevich to a Board for the political favor of appointing Jarrett to the US Senate seat. Michelle, after all, was appointed to sit on the Board of TreeHouse foods AFTER Obama was elected to the US Senate. Moreover, Michelle Obama’s salary at The University of Chicago nearly TRIPLED after her husband gained the power to submit earmark requests on her employer’s behalf. Just appoint the spouse to a Board and increase his or her salary if you need a political favor from an Illinois politician. That is how the “play to pay” game is played.

Blagojevich understands this, and he knows Obama understands this. Why else does FBI Agent Cain report the following discussion that occurred on Nov 8, 2008?

On November 8, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked with JOHN HARRIS about the Senate seat. During the conversation, ROD BLAGOJEVICH and HARRIS discussed whether it would be possible to obtain a financial benefit for ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s wife in relation to the Senate seat. Specifically, ROD BLAGOJEVICH referred to his wife’s Series 7 license and asked “is there a play here, with these guys, with her” to work for a firm in Washington or New York at a significantly better salary than she is making now. Also, ROD BLAGOJEVICH wanted to know whether SEIU could do something to get his wife a position at Change to Win until ROD BLAGOJEVICH could take a position at Change to Win.

Michelle Obama, Blagojevich implies, received an appointment to a Board for which she was not qualified as a result of a “pay to play” scheme. What about his wife? After all, Obama ally Valerie Jarrett wants the Senate seat. What about Blagojevich’s wife? What about Blagojevich’s “financial stress?”

Blagojevich and his advisers only thought of this as a possibility, for they know Obama has already played the game. Again, these are smart men who know the rules of the game. Why else would they think Obama would participate in a “pay to play” scheme? Michelle was paid for someone to play, they thought. What about Mrs. Blagojevich? Besides, Mrs. Blagojevich has a Series 7 license. All Michelle has is a license to practice law that was revoked as a result of a court order in 1993.

Blagojevich thought Obama would “pay to play,” as the Obamas have been engaged in “pay to play” schemes in the past. That is what Blagojevich thought, and that is why the Obamas are yet again mentioned in a complaint filed in a Court of law.

Memeorandum’s stories on today’s shocking news

Yes, Emily Yoffe, the writer, treats us to this informative study about emotions, and how Obama used them to bring in the masses. Now, many of us already knew it was rhetoric over substance, but here she lays it out for us in her Own way:

For researchers of emotions, creating them in the lab can be a problem. Dacher Keltner, a professor of psychology at the University of California-Berkeley, studies the emotions of uplift, and he has tried everything from showing subjects vistas of the Grand Canyon to reading them poetry—with little success. But just this week one of his postdocs came in with a great idea: Hook up the subjects, play Barack Obama’s victory speech, and record as their autonomic nervous systems go into a swoon.

In his forthcoming book, Born To Be Good (which is not a biography of Obama*), Keltner writes that he believes when we experience transcendence, it stimulates our vagus nerve, causing “a feeling of spreading, liquid warmth in the chest and a lump in the throat.” For the 66 million Americans who voted for Obama, that experience was shared on Election Day, producing a collective case of an emotion that has only recently gotten research attention. It’s called “elevation.”

Elevation has always existed but has just moved out of the realm of philosophy and religion and been recognized as a distinct emotional state and a subject for psychological study. Psychology has long focused on what goes wrong, but in the past decade there has been an explosion of interest in “positive psychology”—what makes us feel good and why. University of Virginia moral psychologist Jonathan Haidt, who coined the term elevation, writes, “Powerful moments of elevation sometimes seem to push a mental ‘reset button,’ wiping out feelings of cynicism and replacing them with feelings of hope, love, and optimism, and a sense of moral inspiration.”

* Oh, isn’t she witty?? And way to keep the bias out of this “scientific” piece.

Ah – so Obama has learned how to hit the reset button so that normally thinking human beings will be transported into La-la land. Everyone has now donned their rose colored glasses, and let all the bad reality just slip away. Oh, see how much happier they are than those of us still stuck in the real world!

This is just the beginning, though. Seems this idea has been around for some time:

Haidt quotes first-century Greek philosopher Longinus on great oratory: “The effect of elevated language upon an audience is not persuasion but transport.” Such feeling was once a part of our public discourse. After hearing Abraham Lincoln’s second inaugural address, former slave Frederick Douglass said it was a “sacred effort.” But uplifting rhetoric came to sound anachronistic, except as practiced by the occasional master like Martin Luther King Jr. or Ronald Reagan. And now Obama.

We come to elevation, Haidt writes, through observing others—their strength of character, virtue, or “moral beauty.” Elevation evokes in us “a desire to become a better person, or to lead a better life.” The 58 million McCain voters might say that the virtue and moral beauty displayed by Obama at his rallies was an airy promise of future virtue and moral beauty. And that the soaring feeling his voters had of having made the world a better place consisted of the act of placing their index fingers on a touch screen next to the words Barack Obama. They might be on to something. Haidt’s research shows that elevation is good at provoking a desire to make a difference but not so good at motivating real action. But he says the elevation effect is powerful nonetheless. “It does appear to change people cognitively; it opens hearts and minds to new possibilities. This will be crucial for Obama.”

Wait, say what? First we have “moral beauty,” character and virtue being exhibited by Obama in his speeches (or so it seems to his followers), written by the Bozo on the left:

Then we have an acknowledgment that people who voted for McCain are pretty much right that the extent of this “elevation” is pushing a button, concluding with the benefits to OBAMA of the mind control (well, what the hell else is it when it wipes the slate clean, making normally rational people start believing in a hope-y change-y rainbow unicorn??)? Wow – that is some massive movement, all within one paragraph: character not demonstrated but framed in “words, just words” which many did not buy into but good for Obama those who threw away their analytical, rational selves. Check.

There is so much about Obama in this regard, though:

Keltner believes certain people are “vagal superstars”—in the lab he has measured people who have high vagus nerve activity. “They respond to stress with calmness and resilience, they build networks, break up conflicts, they’re more cooperative, they handle bereavement better.” He says being around these people makes other people feel good. “I would guarantee Barack Obama is off the charts. Just bring him to my lab.”

I’m sorry, sir, but you seem to be caught up in the Rainbow Unicorn of Hope yourself. Obama has actually demonstrated he is NOT calm, but rather testy (examples here, here and here), quick to anger, and a bully. You are buying into the MSM definitions of him, not the REALITY of him. Just like when they termed George Bush’s arrogant smugness as “charm.” Despite the attempts by the MSM to paint Obama as the new Buddha, he has shown in debates and unscripted interactions who he really is. Maybe you shouldn’t be watching MSNBC while you do your “research.” Just a suggestion.

I barely know what to say about this next part, so I will just leave it to you:

It was while looking through the letters of Thomas Jefferson that Haidt first found a description of elevation. Jefferson wrote of the physical sensation that comes from witnessing goodness in others: It is to “dilate [the] breast and elevate [the] sentiments … and privately covenant to copy the fair example.” Haidt took this description as a mandate. Since it’s tricky to study the vagus nerve, he and a psychology student conceived of a way to look at it indirectly. The vagus nerve works with oxytocin, the hormone of connection. Since oxytocin is released during breast-feeding, he and the student brought in 42 lactating women and had them watch either an inspiring clip from The Oprah Winfrey Show about a gang member saved from a life of violence by a teacher or an amusing bit from a Jerry Seinfeld routine.

About half the Oprah-watching mothers either leaked milk into nursing pads or nursed their babies following the viewing; none of the Seinfeld watchers felt enough breast dilation to wet a pad, and fewer than 15 percent of them nursed. You could say elevation is Oprah’s opiate of the masses, so it’s fitting that she early on gave Obama her imprimatur. And that for his victory speech was up front in Grant Park, elevation’s moist embodiment, feeling so at one with humankind that she used a stranger as a handkerchief.

Thank heavens Haidt is such a dedicated scientist. Ahem. How else would we know why Oprah was so moved to use someone she didn’t know as her handkerchief?

Are we PAYING for this research, by the way? You know, with our tax dollars?? Just wondering.

Back to the research:

The researchers say elevation is part of a family of self-transcending emotions. Some others are awe, that sense of the vastness of the universe and smallness of self that is often invoked by nature; another is admiration, that goose-bump-making thrill that comes from seeing exceptional skill in action. Keltner says we most powerfully experience these in groups—no wonder people spontaneously ran into the street on election night, hugging strangers. “We had to evolve these emotions to devote ourselves into social collectives,” he says.

When you start thinking about mass movements, all those upturned, glowing faces of true believers—be they the followers of Jim Jones or Adolf Hitler—you don’t always get a warm feeling about mankind. Instead, knowing where some of these “social collectives” end up, the sensation is a cold chill. Haidt acknowledges that in “calling the group to greatness,” elevation can be used for murderous ends. He says: “Anything that takes us out of ourselves and makes us feel we are listening to something larger is part of morality. It’s about pressing the buttons that turn off ‘I’ and turn on ‘we.’ “

Thank heavens someone finally said it. I mean, besides those of us in the reality-based world. It is important for a scientist to be able to step outside him/herself. And with Obama, what we have is massive turning back the clock on women’s rights, race relations, transparency of our “elected” officials (a PEBO who doesn’t have to submit ANY paperwork for the greatest job in the world, but demands that and much, much more from his subordinates. I’d sure like to see this Haidt guy do some research on that. Or anyone in the freakin’ MSM.).

Your patience with this article is about to be rewarded:

Even at its most benign, elevation can seem ridiculous to outsiders. Think of how Obama’s opponents love to mock his effect on people. During the campaign, if your chest was contracting while all about you chests were dilating, you may be a Republican. If you were unmoved by Obama, watching your fellow citizen get all tingly, even fall into a faint (too much vagus stimulation, and you’re going down), was maddening. “Other people’s reverence seems unctuous and sanctimonious,” says Keltner.

Obama himself seemed aware of the dangers that too much elevation might pop his candidacy like a helium balloon hitting a power line. Conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer described Obama’s canny strategy to make his rhetoric more pedestrian for the final months of the campaign.

Or, one might still have one’s WITS about one, thus not being taken in by this charlatan, this snake oil salesman. But of course, anyone who was not moved to tears or into a faint by this lying, conniving, arrogant, bullying, race-baiting, misogynistic, homophobic unqualified first term senator was just because someone was a “Republican.” Newsflash: those of us who actually prefer qualified, intelligent, candidates who compose their own policy positions rather than steal them from others, and come up with their own words to use, not plagiarizing others, may simply be mature. I’m just sayin’. Despite the MSM’s characterizations of Hillary Clinton’s speeches, I attended two of them, and I am here to tell you she is moving, compelling, funny as hell, and brilliant. But not once did I feel faint. Nor did I ever feel faint when Obama was speaking, even as I watched his 2004 speech which seemed sufficient experience for those “elevated” people who swooned over his “borrowed” words. But that’s just me. And millions others. Whatever.

Oh, but you knew it wasn’t going to stop there. There had to be a way for the author to turn this back to Obama worship:

While there is very little lab work on the elevating emotions, there is quite a bit on its counterpart, disgust. University of Pennsylvania psychologist Paul Rozin has been a leading theorist in the uses of disgust. He says it started as a survival strategy: Early humans needed to figure out when food was spoiled by contact with bacteria or parasites. From there disgust expanded to the social realm—people became repelled by the idea of contact with the defiled or by behaviors that seemed to belong to lower people. “Disgust is probably the most powerful emotion that separates your group from other groups,” says Keltner.

Haidt says disgust is the bottom floor of a vertical continuum of emotion; hit the up button, and you arrive at elevation. This could be why so many Obama supporters complained of being sickened and nauseated by the Republican campaign. Seeing a McCain ad or Palin video clip actually felt like being plunged from their Obama-lofted heights.

Disgust carries with it the notion of contamination, which helps to explain the Republicans’ obsession with Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko, and Jeremiah Wright and their frustration that more voters didn’t have a visceral reaction that Obama had unforgivably sullied himself by association with these men. But this time, elevation won. And expect that on Inauguration Day, even if the weather’s frigid, millions will be warmed by that liquid feeling in their chests. (Emily Yoffe is the author of What the Dog Did: Tales From a Formerly Reluctant Dog Owner. You can send your Human Guinea Pig suggestions or comments to emilyyoffe@hotmail.com)

Oh, yes – it was the REPUBLICANS’ problem that they, and all others not in the tank for Obama, were concerned about a CONFIRMED DOMESTIC TERRORIST, a convicted felon, and a racist in whose church Obama sat for over TWENTY years. And of course, it had nothing to do with the MSM downplaying those connections, even dismissing them )like Obama’s speechwriter groping a cut-out of the incoming Secretary of State of the United States), because those inconvenient people/facts did not fit their preconceived narrative of who Obama is. It wasn’t so much Republicans who wanted to highlight the nefarious associations of the PEBO, but AMERICANS who care about the sanctity of the Constitution, who care about with whom the PEBO chooses to associate himself. Unrepentant domestic terrorists, convicted felons (don’t forget Kwame Kilpatrick!), and anti-American racist ministers are not the kinds of people with whom a potential president should surround himself. In my humble opinion, of course.

In conclusion, what this “research” highlights is that Obama followers really did drink the Kool Aide. Vindication for those of us who did not, and managed to keep ourselves in emotional balance. Now we can say, “Told you so!” But, they’ll probably be too busy polishing their rose-colored glasses and looking for the rainbow unicorn to notice…

If you are surprised by this appointment consideration, please know that I am not. And if you don’t know who Penny Pritzker is, you can count on me to refresh your memory.

Penny was Barack Obama’s national campaign finance chair and now she would like to become Secretary of Commerce. Well I suppose we should all be grateful that she hasn’t been tapped as Secretary of Treasury, considering she owes the Federal Government nearly a half billion dollars in restitution for her seized Superior Bank in Illinois.

Yes, my friends, Penny Pritzker, the Mother of subprime lenders, former owner of the seized Superior Bank is on Barack Obama’s short list for Secretary of Commerce.

I am sure all those customers she screwed are thrilled. In fact one of them had quite a bit to say about Barack Obama and his relationship with Prizker right here on this radio show after ole Penny’s bank went under and left her with a large part of her life’s savings flushed down the proverbial drain. (Note: If Play doesn’t work, click on MP3 Stream link, you don’t want to miss this woman’s story)

I can assure you this woman wasn’t psychic when she expressed concern that Pritzker would become a member of an Obama cabinet. She just happened to understand the concept of “Show me who your friends are and I will tell you what you are“.

You might say that Penny was a Pioneer of sorts. After all, her Superior Bank folded like a plastic door in a cheap banquet room years before the rest of the dominoes fell.

You might even say that the Superior Bank was a boilerplate for what’s happening today on Wall Street. She avoided the rush, so to speak. Her bank failed in 2001. I discussed this here on April 4, 2008. So did plenty of other bloggers, including RBO. Of course, all of this was dutifully ignored by those bastions of integrity, MSNBC and CNN.

For those of you who need a refresher course, here are some clips from that non-fiction story:

The Pritzkers are one of the nation’s wealthiest families and heirs to the fortune created by the Hyatt hotels. Yes, Penny is a billionaire. So basically, Penny could squash me like a bug right now for writing this.

Among their other endeavors, the Pritzkers were the owners of Superior Bank in Hinsdale, Illinois when it was seized.

Yes, I did say seized.

Penny Pritzker, Barack Obama’s great Chicago (of course!) friend was a pioneer you might say! She was a failed subprime lender who set the tone all the way back to 2001. She did it before it was even in style.

Here’s a little press release from the Office of Thrift Supervision back in 2001:

OTS Closes Superior Bank FSB; Hinsdale, Ill. Thrift is Insolvent

WASHINGTON – The Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) closed Superior Bank FSB, Hinsdale, Ill., today and appointed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) as receiver.

The FDIC transferred the insured deposits and substantially all the assets of Superior Bank into a newly chartered, full-service mutual savings bank, known as Superior Federal, FSB, which will open for business on Monday morning. All depositors of Superior Bank automatically become depositors of Superior Federal, and will have immediate access to their insured funds. All 18 of Superior Bank’s Chicago metropolitan area offices will open for business Monday and will continue to offer full banking services, including online banking. Superior Bank’s loan production and servicing operations will also continue to operate normally.

OTS used its authority under the FDIC Improvement Act of 1991 to close Superior Bank when it found that the bank remained critically undercapitalized — that its tangible equity capital was less than two percent of its total assets. The bank failed to implement a capital restoration plan that it submitted to OTS on May 24 this year.

Superior Bank suffered as a result of its former high-risk business strategy, which was focused on the generation of significant volumes of subprime mortgage and automobile loans for securitization and sale in the secondary market. OTS found that the bank also suffered from poor lending practices, improper record keeping and accounting, and ineffective board and management supervision.

Superior became critically undercapitalized largely due to incorrect accounting treatment and aggressive assumptions for valuing residual assets. The bank also experienced significant losses during 2000 from its automobile lending program.

OTS has determined that Superior Bank is insolvent, having incurred losses that have depleted all or substantially all of its capital. OTS also determined that Superior Bank was no longer able to transact business in a safe and sound manner.

OTS notified the bank of its serious concerns in July 2000.

The bank was purchased by two families in 1988 — the Pritzker family of Chicago, owner of Hyatt Hotels and other interests, and the Dworman family of New York, with interests in real estate and financial services activities — and was operated through a complex network of holding companies.

In light of these findings, OTS determined that closure and the appointment of FDIC as receiver were necessary to protect the interests of the bank’s insured depositors.

As of March 31, 2001, the failed bank had total assets of $1.9 billion and total deposits of $1.5 billion. FDIC insures depositors’ accounts up to the statutory limit of $100,000.

Superior is the only bank that OTS has closed in 2001, and only the fourth OTS-regulated institution closed in the past five years.

The FDIC has established a toll free telephone number for customers of Superior. That number is 1-800-331-6306, and will be available until midnight tonight and then from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. daily thereafter.

At the time of this seizure, it was determined that Penny Pritzker and her family owed $460,000,000 to the Federal Government. Yes, that’s right folks. Nearly a half a billion dollars. Gee, i wonder if that’s all paid back yet, don’t you?

Back in September, 2008, I discussed Penny and her siezed subprime lending institution yet again and so did RBO. I felt she deserved another go-around considering she certainly appeared to be a prime forerunner of today’s Wall Street Meltdown–and this didn’t seem to bother Barack Obama one bit:

You see, while Barack Obama is faking outrage over all the bankruptcies and bailouts, he doesn’t mention that a number of his top ten contributors are from Wall Street, including Goldman Sachs, Lehman and the JP Morgan Chase. He also fails to mention that one of the first subprime lenders to stick it to borrowers and have her bank seized is a woman named Penny Pritzker, who just happens to be Barack Obama’s campaign Finance Chair (as confirmed on April 3, 2008) and a potential Secretary of the Treasury in an Obama administration.

Power and Control blogger has this to say:

This is a long and complicated story about how Obama backers were behind the mortgage industry meltdown. It hast to start some where, so lets start with a well known Chicago name Penny Pritzker. It starts with a bank failure.

And now, Penny is being considered as Secretary of Commerce. Kind of makes you feel all warm and fuzzy, doesn’t it? Don’t you always have a warm feeling when you meet one of Barack Obama’s close friends?

But don’t worry. Penny is going to fix herself and her friends us up really well. After all, look how well she has looked out for the little people in the past.

I guess the main stream media didn’t think this Petty little Penny Pritzker Problem (say that three times fast) was important enough to look into back when some of us was being sooooooooo trivial about it.

Change You Simply Cannot Believe.

Additional links on this bilking of innocent people:
NY Times, December, 2001
FDIC Failed Bank Information – Superior Bank
OTS Closes Superior Bank FSB; Hinsdale, Ill. Thrift is Insolvent
OTS Announces Resolution of Charges Against Auditor of Closed Superior Bank FSB

Additional Uppity Coverage of this marvelous “choice” for Secretary of Commerce:

Barack Obama’s Finance Chairwoman and the Seized Superior Bank (April 4, 2008)

Obama’s Finance Chair – Failed Bank Owner Penny Pritzker and Wall Street Today (September 14, 2008

RBO: Penny Pritzker’s Problem (September 16, 2008)

We’re spending BILLIONS of taxpayer dollars to bailout corrupt Wall Street insiders who have committed dozens of crimes their pet politicians refuse to even investigate! Our standard of living is visibly declining for the poor and middle class. And these kinds of things are happening all across the country in every aspect of American life!

Now I’m not going to blame all of this on the Jackasses masquerading as the Democratic party right now. It was in fact Republicans who started it! It was the party of *cough* “morals” *cough* that launched a witch hunt against Bill Clinton, and spent millions to set him up for getting a blow job. Now before anyone argues that point, think about this. Why did Monica decide to save a semen stained dress for months without washing it?!? That’s just EWWWW!!!

And remember who her next door neighbor was, the one who bought her place after she had to leave Washington DC. For those who don’t remember…that would be Bob Dole. And that witch hunt was led by Newt Gingrich, who was having an extra marital affair at the exact same time he was claiming Bill Clinton was unfit to serve in any capacity in the Government because he had one. Talk about your hypocrisy.

All of this has a root in the complete and utter failure of the MSM to do it’s job! They want the ratings now, to hell with the truth. It was their incompetence that led to 8 years of Bush as they praised him non-stop before the 2000 election, and took every opportunity to insult and tear down Al Gore. They did it again in 2004 when they kept running stories about Vietnam vets claiming all sorts of lies about Kerry. They knew they were lies, they knew when the courts ordered the ads pulled because they were lies. But they never reported on that aspect of it! And now they bring us Obama…with the VAST majority of them being so blatantly in the tank for him, even foreign press have commented on it when they themselves preferred him without any vetting. One has to look no further than the simple fact, that the masses in America have no clue who Aiham Alsammarae is.

Alsammarae is a name that should have been reported on every news channel in the world. He is wanted by Iraq and Interpol! Yet running around free as a bird in Chicago. He was convicted of stealing $650 million of US taxpayers money from Iraq reconstruction funds! Yet he was allowed to first make a donation to Obama, that was only returned after it was noticed by others. Then he put up his house as collateral to allow his and Barack’s dear friend Rezko to make bail….WTF?!? How were all of his US holdings NOT seized the second he was indicted for embezzling Iraqi reconstruction funds? Let alone allowing him to put them up for bail money for another now convicted criminal friend of Obama’s! Isn’t that the first thing the DOJ is supposed to do in such cases?

I could go on and on…but I think you get the gist. I am one Pissed Off Vet!

“Ms. Jarrett’s role will be threefold, as is her title: White House Senior Advisor and Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Relations and Public Liaison.

A longstanding member of Barack Obama’s tiny core of top advisers, she will continue providing him with counsel on a wide-ranging set of issues, she said Friday evening. Second, she will serve as the White House’s point person for business with state and local officials. Additionally, she will supervise the Office of Public Liaison, a relatively quiet office which she hopes to turn into a more active channel for government-citizen collaboration.” (Read all. Italics mine.)

When you’ve done as much opposition research on Obama as has this blog, it is amazing what can be found right HERE about a woman about whom most American are saying, “Who’s she?” — at the very same moment that all of you veteran NoQuarter readers are saying, “Oh yeah. Her. It figures.”

Here, in chronological order, are snippets from many of our stories that refer to Valerie Jarrett. Even with our handy administrative-section search engine, this took a while, but it’s worth it:

(1) From the great investigative story by City Nell, a true must-read, “How to Buy a Mansion You Can’t Afford,” February 4, 2008 (edited brilliantly by Truthteller) — which, besides pointing out Jarrett’s significant role in the trajectory of Michelle’s career path, also explains how Michelle Obama became aware of the availability of the historic mansion:

… In 1996, she left the Public Allies to help create a student volunteer program at The University of Chicago. By the time of this interview, she was the Executive Director of Community Affairs for The University of Chicago Hospitals. This is how Michelle portrays her change of career:

She was devastated when her father died from MS complications. “That’s when I started analyzing my life, sitting in a firm,” she recalls, adding that in that same year she also lost one of her best friends from college to cancer. She soon left the firm to pursue a much lower-paying path in the public sector.

The fact is Michelle was actively recruited for City Hall by a close friend, Valerie Jarrett, who was Mayor Daley’s Deputy Chief of Staff at that time. Valerie later became the Finance Chair of Obama’s 2004 US Senate campaign and then First Treasurer of Barack’s political action committee, Hopefund.

It helps to have friends at City Hall. Among other positions, Michelle was appointed twice to sit on the board of the Commission of Chicago Landmarks for two consecutive terms. Michelle maintained this board seat from 1998 to March 2005, although normally a member only serves one 4 year term. …

(2) From NoQuarter’s story (formerly known as nasuS), “Obama’s 2006 Earmarks & the Crown Family,” March 13, 2008 (aided, as always, by Truthteller’s considerable knowledge of all things Chicago and by Andy, a reader who’s sent me great tips for a long time):

Lynn Sweet, a Chicago Sun-Times columnist, has more on Michelle Obama and Obama’s other earmarks:

Obama sought money for the University of Chicago Hospitals. Wife Michelle works for the University of Chicago Hospitals, appointed in spring 2005 as vice president for community and external affairs at the University of Chicago Hospitals. She is now on leave from the job to campaign for her husband. Top campaign adviser and friend Valerie Jarrett is the Chair of the University of Chicago Medical Center Board and also Chair of the Executive Committee of that board. She has also been named Vice-Chair of the University’s Board of Trustees. Obama taught at the U. of Chicago law school and the Obama’s two daughters attend school there. [bold mine]

Here’s an FYI digression: My March 13th story begins with the significance of the Crown family’s money to Obama’s rise — Larry Johnson has correctly tagged the billionaire Crown and Pritzker families as of the highest influence to both Barack Obama and his aide-de-camp Rahm Emanuel — and a cautionary tale for those KoolAid dipsomaniacs:

Do you remember the Crown family? Do you remember the Crown patriarch who sits on the board of Maytag? Do you recall that Barack Obama, as a U.S. Senate candidate, met with Maytag workers, asked for their donations and promised them he’d help save their jobs, and that he then went to the Crown family and took their large donations, but never said a word to Crown about saving the jobs of the Maytag workers? …

(3) From Larry Johnson’s story, “Let’s Help Barack Fight the ‘Smears’,” June 12, 2008, which answered his critics taunting him about the “whitey tape”:

Now, are you ready for the shocker? Look at the next paragraph of [Time magazine reporter Karen Tumulty's] piece:

When the Obama campaign got wind of the rumor in April, Michelle’s close friend and adviser Valerie Jarrett asked Michelle if there could be anything to it; the candidate’s wife dismissed it out of hand.

I did not hear about the tape until MAY. REPEAT. I DID NOT HEAR ABOUT THE TAPE UNTIL MAY. Yet, the Obama campaign knew about the tape in April. Got it? And I am the one responsible for the so called rumor? …

(4) From Un coup de des’s story, “Boston Globe Exposé, Part I: Introducing Cecil Butler, Obama’s West Side Slumlord Patron,” June 27, 2008, a stunning and sickening story of how Obama abetted his greedy friends in making millions from taxpayers by privatizing public housing and letting it go to ruin or driving out the poor. You will see that Valerie Jarrett had a DIRECT ROLE and MADE MILLIONS from taxpayers’ monies while making the inhabitants of public housing criminally miserable. If you’ve never read this story, you simply must do so. If only the MSM had picked up this courageous investigative report by the Boston Globe and given it the “play” it deserved, Barack Obama would likely not be president-elect. That is how devastating this story is.

It is stomach-churning that Valerie Garrett had ANY role in this cruel, corrupt, and calamitously consumptive plundering of public monies.

First, a brief introduction from the No Quarter story is in order:

This is the first of a series of articles to be written on a lengthy exposé published in the Boston Globe entitled “Grim Proving Ground for Obama’s Housing Policy.” The 27 JUN 2008 investigative report is required reading for all No Quarter users. …

Now, here is first of the bizarre, baffling and bold sections that describe some of Valerie Jarrett’s plundering and political moves:

Campaign finance records show that six prominent developers – including Jarrett, Davis, and Rezko – collectively contributed more than $175,000 to Obama’s campaigns over the last decade and raised hundreds of thousands more from other donors. Rezko alone raised at least $200,000, by Obama’s own accounting.

One of those contributors, Cecil Butler, controlled Lawndale Restoration, the largest subsidized complex in Chicago, which was seized by the government in 2006 after city inspectors found more than 1,800 code violations.

Similar to Rezko, Cecil Butler is a developer who profited from the privatization of low income, public housing in Chicago during the 1990s.   Butler is also not coincidentally a major supporter of Barack Obama whose low income tenements were ultimately seized by the government for multiple building code violations.

The Boston Globe provides a description and a brief history of Butler’s Lawndale Restoration.

[...]

And yet more:

Who helped Cecil Butler secure government funds for Woodlawn Restoration?  Barack Obama, of course: the same Barack Obama who wrote letters on behalf of Rezko’s slum properties the same year residents of Rezko’s tenements were complaining of lack of heat and sanitation services.   For the Executive Vice President of Habitat Co., the company who helped Butler manage his deteriorating warren of slums, was Valerie Jarrett, another Obama contributor who develops low income housing and serves as a top advisor to the Obama for President campaign.  The Boston Globe explains how Obama exploited his position as state Senator to assist Jarrett and Cecil Butler.  I quote:

Obama translated that belief into legislative action as a state senator. In 2001, Obama and a Republican colleague, William Peterson, sponsored a successful bill that increased state subsidies for private developers. The law let developers designated by the state raise up to $26 million a year by selling tax credits to Illinois residents. For each $1 in credits purchased, the buyer was allowed to decrease his taxable income by 50 cents. …

This No Quarter story ends thusly:

 A disturbing pattern emerges, and it can be summarized as follows:

• Obama secured funds for developers who desired to earn profits off of low income housing during the privitization scheme of the Chicago Housing Authority that occurred during Barack Obama’s tenure as a state Senator.  Those developers include Tony Rezko, Valerie Jarrett and Cecil Butler.
• These public-private partnerships failed, leaving many in squalor.
• Barack Obama remained silent, but he accepted contributions from Rezko, Jarrett, Butler and others.
• Rezko is not an isolated case.  Obama also colluded with the likes of Cecil Butler, whose negligence inspired African-American residents of the Lawndale neighborhood on the West Side to organize support for radical Republican Alan Keyes during Obama’s 2004 Senate bid.
• Obama’s desire to privatize public housing has resulted in a series of failed projects that have left the indigent in squalor.
• But Obama accepted the political contributions of these unscrupulous developers nonetheless.

Flineo created a video entitled “Obama’s Forgotten People,” and I publish it again, as there is a new group of low income housing residents on the West Side of Chicago Obama we can add to the group on the South Side Obama abandoned in order to climb the political and social ladder.

[...]

Nothing, in my opinion, is more deplorable than a career politician who exploited African-Americans in low income housing for political and personal gain.  And Obama did it again and again in inner city Chicago.  Now he has manipulated African-Americans across the country to view his candidacy as the empowerment of the very people Obama ignored in order to line the pockets of his slumlord friends and contributors.  Progressives and ostensible Democrats may forget, but those of us who are concerned with social justice will continue to serve as the true muckrakers this election cycle. 

 The edifices reproduced in this essay are buildings managed by Cecil Butler.  The restoration project that followed in the wake of Cecil Butler’s mismanagement of Lawndale Restoration is described in this document.

There are so many more stories to share with you, but I’m weary at the moment. You can find so many more by simply searching our site.

These stories about the public housing always tear me up. Let’s end with Flineo’s great video: