2008

Daily Dolt: Illinois Review

Entertainingly Silly 

Earth to Ted, Caroline, Patrick and others who are marketing Sen. Barack Obama as the new JFK.  Kennedy family, get over yourselves.  If you really think Sen. Barack Obama is the new JFK, then maybe you didn’t know the record of the real JFK from 1947 to 1963. Let’s review the bidding.

If you live in Illinois and voted for JFK or Nixon in the 1960 election, I am sorry to be the one to do the math but even if that was your first vote you have at least passed your 68th birthday and are on your way to the “gettin up there” stage of life. So what? So that’s a very long time to hold on to a myth that was never real to start with and expect that it will impress people whose only knowledge of JFK comes from fawning historians and aging journalists.

During 1962, Jack Kennedy was alive and well. Everyone called him Jack.  No one ever called him “John Fitzgerald” in that mournful patter until after he was murdered by a communist in 1963.  If you still doubt that and are an honest person, read Gerald Posner’s book, Case Closed, and set aside your doubts for all time.

Yes, the Kennedy family doesn’t know anything about the history of their own family.  But Illinois Review will correct that for them.  And throw in a Assassination Conspiracy theory to boot.

Hillaryis44 Comedy

And this isn’t a scattershot at Clinton supporters in general or Hillary Clinton–many are fine people and I’ll be a big one is she is the nominee. Hillaryis44 seems to be not understanding how counterproductive their current strategy is:

Hillary Clinton Versus The Kooks

James Carville and Paul Begala are out at CNN. Carville and Begala are Hillary supporters. Hillary supporters on Big Media broadcasts will not be tolerated.

Carville and Begala have been targeted for a long time by the denizens of Kookville and other assorted Hillary Hating Naderites and PINOs. The Kooks whined that Carville and Begala did not disclose their love of Hillary and their support of Hillary. Fine. We love and are all for full disclosure. Point taken. CNN however has now gotten rid of the Hillary supporting duo. Disclosure is not the issue now, CNN has simply removed them.

A while back, the New York Times devoted its busy pages to push the unrelenting attack against those naughty boys – C & B. The New York Times even quoted the Head Kook:

“Would it kill CNN to disclose that James Carville is a partisan Clinton supporter when talking about the presidential race?” wrote Daily Kos. “Would it kill James Carville to disclose that he is a partisan Clinton supporter when on the air talking about the presidential race? Apparently so.”

Of course the Head Kook himself has been hired by Newsweek magazine to represent Democrats. Problem is, the Head Kook is not a Democrat. Newsweek hired a dyed in the wool Republican to represent Republican views on its pages – Karl Rove. Democrats get the Head Kook. The Head Kook loves attacking Democrats while pretending to support Democrats. But the Head Kook is a self-interested “libertarian” or somesuch. And — the Head Kook has endorsed Obama. Does the Head Kook disclose that? The Head Kook has trashed Hillary (recall the great “waitress tips” witch hunt) on his orange sulfur, waste enhancement plant, which we lovingly and accurately call DailyKooks.

Newsweek should follow the CNN model and remove the Head Kook as a Democratic spokesman.. Newsweek should get a real Democrat to represent real Democrats.

Criticizing Markos is fair game just as anyone is and Newsweek can decide how they choose to deal with such issues in the primary, but this is pretty lame.  In fact, really lame.

Big Endorsement on the Way

Sweet says there is a big Obama endorsement planned for tomorrow

Sweet: Obama wins South Carolina. His way. Big endorsement coming Sunday?

COLUMBIA, S.C.–Barack Obama clinchedt he South Carolina Democratic primary on Saturday after a race with a nasty tone where former President Bill Clinton’s aggresive push for his wife became an issue.

In a state where race played a roll, and with a hefty black electorate, exit polls showed that Obama snared a whooping 81 per cent of the African-American vote and the white splitting between the three rivals.

Obama delivers a victory speech at 9 p.m. eastern, and I hear that Obama will talk about how his victories in Iowa and South Carolina–states with vastly different popullations–show that his “movement” politics are taking hold.

And that big endorsement I hear is coming….the two biggest out there are Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass) and former Vice President Al Gore.

Rich on the Black Vote from 11 months Ago

 February 27, 2007

Next, you “experts” assume that just because viable, credible black candidates end up winning overwhelming majorities of black votes that polls currently showing Hillary Clinton leading Obama among African Americans are somehow important.

Wrong again.

In Illinois, at least, large numbers of black voters tend to take their time making up their minds. In political parlance, they ‘’break late.’’

Ten months before the March 2004 U.S. Senate primary (about where we are now before the Iowa caucuses), Obama’s own polls showed him winning just 34 percent of the black vote. About a month before the primary, African-American voters began ‘’breaking’’ in large numbers to his candidacy. As they began focusing on the campaign, black voters saw he was viable, liked his message and a significant percentage finally realized he was African American. He ended up winning just about all their votes.

This same pattern has been repeated time and time again during the past 25 years here. Harold Washington didn’t start off his campaign with the majority of black support against a white female with a huge war chest and the powers of patronage and incumbency, but he certainly ended that way.

Like Byrne, Hillary Clinton is almost universally known and has a strong record of backing issues important to many Democratic African-American voters. Obama is far less known. It’s perfectly natural that, right now, many black voters are siding with Clinton. But, if Obama’s candidacy remains viable through early next year, I’d bet that the vast majority of African-American voters will end up with him.

To recap, because I know you’re all very busy: Black leadership endorsements of white candidates over black opponents are not necessarily important because they don’t automatically translate into black votes; and black voters take their time deciding whether to vote for a fellow African American, but if that candidate looks like a potential winner, they usually end up voting for him or her.

I hope this helps.

And me from November 20th 

Iowa and New Hampshire have no significant black population (outside of Waterloo).  South Carolina is the first state with significant black population that holds a primary and it isn’t  until January 26th meaning it’ll be towards the end of December that  you start to get a sense of what the black population will be doing–and that might carry over until the first week of January given the holidays

Pollster showed the first lead for Obama around January 7th.  And black votes kept breaking so the result is hardly surprising.

Rezko Primer II: Political Donations

The best tally of political donations from Rezko, Rezko companies (Illinois allows corporate donations), and Rezko allies was done by the Sun-Times which tallied the donations and determined there were a total of $168,000 to Obama from Rezko and his associates. Scroll down to the pdf on the left side of the story to see the details.

As of January 20th, Obama had divsested himself of $84,350 of those donations with the latest divested including:

From that money, $10,000 was donated to Obama’s successful run for the Senate in the name of Glenview entrepreneur Joseph Aramanda, the story said.

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

*$10,500 from Michel Malek, a neurologist and former investor in Rezko Enterprises.

*$2,000 from Fortunee Massuda, a founder of a chain of foot and ankle clinics and a former investor in Rezko Enterprises.

*$3,000 from Imad Almanaseer, a real estate and fast-food impresario and former member of LARC Realty, a Rezko business.

Obama hasn’t given all money related to Rezko back apparently arguing some of it was independent of Rezko–a statement that is probably true given some of the donors knew him independently of Rezko. However, it stands in contrast to Clinton’s decision to divest every dollar tied to Norman Hsu in December. Other’s who had donations returned include Rezko’s companies and direct contributions and donations from:

Michael Winter, who gave $3,000 to Obama’s Senate campaign in June 2003, and Myron Cherry, who gave $500 to Obama in July 2004, have been publicly identified as Individuals “G” and “H,” respectively, in one case against Rezko.

Sun Times June 25, 2007

Cherry is a Clinton supporter, but obviously not tied to her with a connection through Rezko. Cherry has also cooperated with the investigation and is one of the few people to publicly discuss his involvment.

Given there is only about $80,000 left with any tie to Rezko, it would probably be politically smart to donate that amount.


Wrong Messenger

Sending out the guy who created the school uniforms and V-Chip strategy to argue that Bill Clinton fundamentally changed the direction of the country is just a little bit absurd:

“President Clinton put this country on a fundamentally different path. He changed the fiscal nature of this country, he changed the international relations of this country…He left the country on a totally different trajectory where people felt they were prepared for the 21st century.”

The Rezko Primer

—Updated 3/19/08

Since Rezko has become an issue in the Presidential race, I am creating a sort of primer for the relationship between Obama and Rezko over the years. It will only touch on the issues with Rezko and his indictments as related to Obama as I don’t have nearly the time it would take to show Rezko’s involvement with Blagojevich and others.

I. Early Connections–Job Offer

II. Donations to Campaigns

III. Legal work on projects Rezko was involved

IV. Letters of Support for projects Rezko was involved

V. Intern-son of Rezko ally/Obama donor

VI. House Purchase

VII. Land Strip Purchase from Rezko

VIII. Landscaping and Property Maintenance Arrangement

IX: Lot History and Loose Ends

Chicago Tribune on the 3/14/08 Interview on Rezko:

Full Transcript

Audio

Kass

Story

Editorial

Obama fleshed out his relationship with Rezko — including the disclosure that Rezko raised as much as $250,000 for the first three offices Obama sought. But Obama’s explanation was less a font of new data or an act of contrition than the addition of nuance and motive to a long-mysterious relationship.

We fully expect the Clinton campaign, given its current desperation, to do whatever it must in order to keep the Rezko tin can tied to Obama’s bumper.

When we endorsed Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination Jan. 27, we said we had formed our opinions of him during 12 years of scrutiny. We concluded that the professional judgment and personal decency with which he has managed himself and his ambition distinguish him.

Nothing Obama said in our editorial board room Friday diminishes that verdict.

***

We said in that same editorial that Obama had been too self-exculpatory in explaining away his ties to Tony Rezko. And we’ve been saying since Nov. 3, 2006 — shortly after the Tribune broke the story of Obama’s house purchase — that Obama needed to fully explain his Rezko connection. He also needed to realize how susceptible he had been to someone who wanted a piece of him — and how his skill at recognizing that covetousness needed to rise to the same stature as his popular appeal.

Friday’s session evidently fulfills both obligations. Might we all be surprised by some future disclosure? Obama’s critics have waited 16 months for some new and cataclysmic Rezko moment to implicate and doom Obama. It hasn’t happened.

Obama said Friday that voters who don’t know what to make of his Rezko connection should, in the wake of his discussion with the Tribune, “see somebody who is not engaged in any wrongdoing … and who they can trust.” Yes, he said, he comes from Chicago. But he has risen in this corrupt Illinois environment without getting entangled in it.

Obama tries to live by “high ethical standards,” he said. Although “that doesn’t excuse the mistake I made here.”

Obama should have had Friday’s discussion 16 months ago. Asked why he didn’t, he spoke of learning, uncomfortably, what it’s like to live in a fishbowl. That made him perhaps too eager to protect personal information — too eager to “control the narrative.”

Less protection, less control, would have meant less hassle for his campaign. That said, Barack Obama now has spoken about his ties to Tony Rezko in uncommon detail. That’s a standard for candor by which other presidential candidates facing serious inquiries now can be judged.

Chicago Sun-Times on the 3/14/08 Interview on Rezko:

Full Transcript

Audio

Story

Mark Brown

Mary Mitchell

Carol Marin

Lynn Sweet

The best synopsis of the Obama Rezko relationship was done by the Trib on January 23rd:

Both men declined to comment on their once-close friendship. Obama has been accused of no wrongdoing involving Rezko and has insisted that he never used his office to benefit Rezko.

Thus far, there is little in the public record to suggest otherwise, and the few exceptions that have come to light appear minor. On Capitol Hill, Obama once gave a summer internship to the son of a Rezko business associate on Rezko’s recommendation. Earlier, as a state senator, Obama was one of several South Side political and community leaders who wrote state and city officials urging approval of public funding for a senior housing project involving Rezko.

But when Rezko pushed for passage in Springfield of a major gambling measure, Obama vocally opposed it.

Obama publicly apologized for his 2005 property deal with Rezko, calling it “boneheaded” because Rezko was widely reported to be under grand jury investigation at the time. And Obama has given to charities $85,000 in Rezko-linked campaign contributions, including $40,035 last weekend following a published report suggesting that Rezko funneled a $10,000 donation to Obama through a business associate. Aides to Obama say the senator had no knowledge of any such scheme.

Rezko is tied to nearly every major politician in Illinois over the last couple decades going back to Jim Edgar under whom he received his first state contract. Rezko’s reputation as a slumlord largely got started after Obama was not practicing law full time and was largely dealt with by the City of Chicago and not state government entities.

It’s fair to say Obama used poor judgment in buying the strip of land from Rezko, but of the many ties to Rezko in Illinois, a two key things stand out:

  1. Obama did no favors such as providing money from a Member Initiative to Rezko
  2. Obama did not receive any personal benefits from Rezko

The dumbest thing about the relationship from Obama’s standpoint is that one of the most squeaky clean pols in Illinois didn’t think before buying a 10 foot strip of land for above assessed value from a guy about to be indicted. In Illinois that’s amazing, in the Presidential race, it’s the best personal record of any of the candidates.

Lipinski’s Friends and Family Plan Continues

Raised: 158581.00

Spent: 98987.82

On Hand: 377675.22

Not bad on hand numbers, but still anemic fundraising for an incumbent. Mostly PACs and machine types–not terribly surprising
However, the fun is in Daddy Lipinski’s ‘charity’, the All American Eagles which continues to pay Lipinski Chief of Staff Jerry Hurckes for consulting work:

Hurckes, Jerry
7036 W. 96th Street
Oak Lawn, IL 60453
$500.00
6/26/2007
Expenditure
Bill Lipinski’s All-American Eagle
Political Consultant
Bill Lipinski’s All American Eagle
Hurckes, Jerry
7036 W. 96th Street
Oak Lawn, IL 60453
Expenditure Bill Lipinski’s All-American Eagle political consultant
Bill Lipinski’s All American Eagle
Hurckes, Jerry
7030 W. 96t St.
Oak Lawn, IL 60453
$536.05
8/24/2007
Expenditure
Friends for Molaro
parade flags
Friends for Molaro
Hurckes, Jerry
7036 W. 96th Street
Oak Lawn, IL 60453
$500.00
9/26/2007
Expenditure
Bill Lipinski’s All-American Eagle
consulting
Bill Lipinski’s All American Eagle
Hurckes, Jerry
7036 W. 96th Street
Oak Lawn, IL 60453
$1,000.00
11/9/2007
Expenditure
Bill Lipinski’s All-American Eagle
consulting
Bill Lipinski’s All American Eagle
Hurckes, Jerry
7036 W. 96th Street
Oak Lawn, IL 60453
$500.00
12/11/2007
Expenditure
Bill Lipinski’s All-American Eagle
consulting
Bill Lipinski’s All American Eagle
Hurckes, Jerry
7036 W. 96th Street
Oak Lawn, IL 60453
$500.00
12/11/2007
Expenditure
Bill Lipinski’s All-American Eagle
Holiday Gift
>Bill Lipinski’s

$3000 in consulting fees and a $500 ‘holiday gift’

Of course the Pera campaign got something wrong in calling Hurckes a $100,000 per year federal employee. He made more than that:

Jerome R Hurckes, Congressional Staffer – Salary Data

Lipinski, Rep. Daniel (Democrat-Illinois-3rd) 07/01/07 09/30/07 Chief of Staff $26,499.99
Lipinski, Rep. Daniel (Democrat-Illinois-3rd) 01/03/07 03/31/07 Chief of Staff $24,944.44
Lipinski, Rep. Daniel (Democrat-Illinois-3rd) 10/01/06 12/31/06 Chief of Staff $32,099.99
Lipinski, Rep. Daniel (Democrat-Illinois-3rd) 01/01/07 01/02/07 Chief of Staff $735.56
Lipinski, Rep. Daniel (Democrat-Illinois-3rd) 04/01/07 06/30/07 Chief of Staff $26,499.99

Most interesting and most predictable however is the All American Eagles donation to Mike Madigan:

Friends of Michael Madigan 6500 S. Pulaski Road
Chicago, IL 60629
$5,000.00
9/26/2007
Transfer Out
Bill Lipinski’s All-American Eagle

Make no mistake about it, the machine wants to keep Lipinski in that seat until they have a candidate to replace him.

To see how inbred the political organization is check out these posts
Donate now: