Ha! We knew it.
The seeds for the deal were planted in 2004, when Obama got a big-money book contract after winning his Senate seat. With the book cash, he bought a swanky Illinois mansion in June 2005 for $1.65 million. On the same day that Obama closed on the home, Rezko paid $625,000 for the adjacent vacant lot.
Six months later, Obama expanded the size of his yard by buying a strip of Rezko’s land for only $105,000.
Obama insists the transaction was aboveboard, but he has been contrite about the appearance of impropriety.
“It was a mistake to have been engaged with him [Rezko] at all in this or any other personal business dealing that would allow him, or anyone else, to believe that he had done me a favor,” Obama said in a statement distributed to Chicago reporters.
“For that reason, I consider this a mistake on my part, and I regret it.”
Two questions: 1) Why is is that radical Leftist politicians with Marx-perfect voting records always buy multi-million dollar mansions? You’d think they’d be against appearing to be–for lack of a better phrase–capitalist insects, wouldn’t you? You’d think any Leftist worth his salt would live in a shack and wear a hair shirt; and 2) What would Hillary do? Does more information on the Obama faux-pas come tumbling out onto the public stage soon while it is fresh in peoples’ minds or does Hillary gather this card in her diamond-like claw and wait for a better moment to play it? Decisions, decisions….
And I sense a theme here: pre-emptive apologizing. This reflects poorly on his ethics, otherwise Obama wouldn’t be apologizing for it right now in hopes of deflecting future criticism of it. He may get away with this tactic once or twice, but can he get away with it indefinitely? We’ll see.
Update:
Perhaps not exactly a Marxist, but awfully fucking close:
When speaking out against various tax cuts, Obama has likened the “Ownership Societyâ€Ââ€â€which entails such things as personalized Social Security accounts, health savings accounts and school choiceâ€â€to “social Darwinism.†In a November 2005 speech to the National Women’s Law Center, he said: “The idea here is to give everyone one big refund on their governmentâ€â€divvy it up into some tax breaks, hand them out, and encourage everyone to use their share to go buy their own health care, their own retirement plan, their own unemployment insurance, education, and so forth.â€Â
“In Washington, they call this the Ownership Society,†Obama explained. “But in our past there has been another term for itâ€â€social Darwinism, every man and woman for him or herself.â€Â
So let me get this straight: while living it up yourself on the public dime, you’re going to take it from me and re-distribute it because you think you have a higher morality?
Fuck you.
Yup, which is why it’s better to know deeds than to listen to stump speeches and the MSM reporting of same.
Much more important to me as a voter is this:
<blockquote>The liberal lobbying group Americans for Democratic Action gives Obama a 100 percent voting rating – 5 points to the left of Sen. Ted Kennedy, who gets a 95 percent grade.
Obama backed a withdrawal of troops from Iraq, supported international funding for groups that provide abortion, and opposed reauthorization of the Patriot Act.
And a Congressional Quarterly review found Obama has a near-perfect partisan voting record, casting his lot with the Democratic Party line 97 percent of the time – higher than Clinton and dead even with Sen. John Kerry (Mass.).
Liberal is as liberal does…
The buzz about the real deal here is that Obama got the house for $300,000 less than it was worth. Rezko bought the lot next door for more than the lot was worth. The owner of the house & property (same owner) got the amount that he wanted for the house, but not all from Obama – part of it came from Rezko’s purchase of the property next door.
It looks like favor-seeking from Obama on Rezko’s part. Or, favor-selling to Rezko on Obama’ part. And the feds currently have Rezko in a vise.. so who knows what he will say once squeezed. Rezko is an influence buyer– he bough the Gov. in IL.. looks like he was trying to buy Obama too.
Bad bad move by Barack.. getting into bed with the bad old Illinois corruption mongers…
Would that be the
of the “gee I don’t know how my thousand dollar investment in the futures market grew into $100,000” or the
of the 8 plus million dollar book advance prior to becoming Senator from NY?
Why are all these people not in prison for accepting bribes? There should be a cell open next to Cunningham’s. That one may be reserved for the newly re-elected Representative from LA. Lest anyone accuse me of being overly partisan, Hastert’s land dealings don’t exactly smell fresh either.
Related to bad lawmakers and land deals, bad law regarding eminent domain providing instrument of blackmail.
Yeah, MarkD, it’s like that: the Hillary with the three magic beans that turned into spending 8 years in the White House instead of 25-30 with 5 off for good behavior in the Big House. That one.
Culture of corruptionist!
Anybody catch the opening to Monday Night Football last night?
Yes.
Like I said, Barack is just a regular, football-lovin’ fella! And did you know he’s Black?
How can you NOT vote for him. Racist.
CHECKMATE, BITCHES!
He’s so…I don’t know…articulate.
Three things:
One:
This is why politicians don’t apologize. Because partisans use it as a sign of weakness. The world was a better place when people apologized.
Two:
The notion, ahem, that any American politician is a Marxist is a joke. Barrack knows how to cash a check as much Cheney does or Newt Gingrinch did or any of our politicians back to the days of the Revolution. Nationally elected leaders, outside of Sam Rayburn, aren’t poor to start with and they certainly don’t stay that way. Obama will continue to cash those checks, just like Hillary, or Mitt Romney or anyone else who throws his/her hat into the ring.
third:
When JHoward mentioned Jeffersonian, I thought he meant family structure…you know, the widower knocking up the slaves. A second look, and a stifling of giggles, revealed he meant government structure. Don’t get me wrong. I like Tommy. More of a Hamilton man myself, but TJ was a brillant man.
Articulatist!
Plus his lovely wife Michelle got a new position at the University of Chicago Hospitals with triple the salary, plus a seat on a local Chicago business’s board, all right after the election. That’s why their income was 1.67 million dollars for 2005. All based on merit, I’m positive of it!!!!!!
<a href=”http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/72374,CST-NWS-obama26.article” target=”_link”>
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/72374,CST-NWS-obama26.article
Neo-Stink
1) Politicians could learn from from Obama what a real apology is. (Are you listening John Cary?) However, the problem was not the apology, it was the questions raised due to the land deal. Bottom line; no more non-apology apologies, the “if anyone was offended” routine. The Senator gets an A for his mea culpa.
2) Marxist or not it is becoming more and more common for rich liberals to buy their way into politics (see John Corzine and others.) Admittedly a guy like Obama could earn a bazillion dollars in a real world law firm so I don’t begrudge him anything. Just keep it on the up and up. I’m more concerned with bribes received and freezers full of cash.
3) Wow, neo, taking a little shot at Thomas Jefferson! You really are feeling your oats today. Try not to step on the cat when you strut around your domicile. (Hamilton was just a little to Federal for me, ya know?)
Lay off of B.H. Obama… I mean, just look at his awe inspiring legislative accomplishments in the US Senate….uh, in the IL Senate?… er, let me get back to you.
The notion that any American congressperson is a Marxist may be a joke. The notion that s/he is influenced by Marxist-Leninism—which is the critical undercurrent of much of the humanities and social sciences—uh,not so much.
And let’s not parse. The update quotes Obama clearly and with confidence asserting that without government “guidance,” individuals would stand no chance against other individuals. Why? Because some will be more successful than others.
He calls this “social darwinism” and, presumably, would seek to “correct” that by “evening the playing field.” Which of course means redistribution of wealth, set asides for select minority groups, an expansive welfare state, and increased reliance on centralized policy, etc.
Or socialism.
Sorry, neoconsstink. But if it quacks like a Manifesto…
If someone else helps you buy your home and property, you are not part of the repugnant ownership society.
Jeff, accusing someone of believing in a social safety net with being a Marxist is a bit like accusing you of beimg Hannity-esque Republican.
Personal savings accounts not enough of a social safety net? The gov’t saves the money for you. You can pick a variety of safe investments that do better than 2% a year. Yet you’re still afraid you still would fuck it up without Barack ,making the choices for you? Shit. Why don’t you ask him to wipe your ass for too? You might get a cramp.
neostink… A rose by any other name… or haven’t you gotten to that in English lit yet…
…Why not just stipulate the averge Lefty just never wants to stop sucking the teat. When you start right off the bat, thinking its cool to steal from another man’s livelyhood, and worse, do it through the instruments of government, your mind is already fucked. They seem to hate self-reliance, as well as self-responsibility, both of which they think is an evil agenda of the far right religious nuts to deny them their right to help themselves to other peoples labors.
Where they think they get this “right” is a real mystery, since most of them don’t believe in a fucking thing. Wonderful life view, that. If this country had been awash in Idiotic NeoLiberals when we were setteling it, they’d either all be scalped, or whoever was left would still be eating rabbits raw, and wandering around in the wilderness doing peyote. What human refuse. Must be what makes them hate everything with a modicum of principle.
The good news is that pro-choice gaurentees they are self-exterminating.
I have been looking to outsource that task for years. Do you think he would be interested in the position? It’s part time but I have been raising my fiber intake so ther is oppertunity for advancement.
Lay off of B.H. Obama… I mean, just look at his awe inspiring legislative accomplishments in the US Senate….uh, in the IL Senate?… er, let me get back to you.
Dispite anything else he has been hand picked by the Chicago/Cook County political machine. With all the corrupt conotations that implies. No politician in Illinois gets anywhere without the endorsement of city hall and the cook county board.
Safety net???
I am all for a helping hand, but your so called “safety net” is nothing more than enslavement of the soul.
I keep forgetting that most of the Socialists were born too late to have any conception of what America used to be. Yeah, yeah. America sucked when responsibility rested on the individual’s shoulders, and shame was something more than an outdated ideal. “We need to take care of the stupid, because we are so smart”.
The government imposed death of shame was the death knell of our society.
I mean, take a look at yourself. You have no shame, much to your own detriment. “Feelings, nothing more than feelings..” Remember that song? You should, because apparently, it is your mantra.
Jeebus. I remember when being stupid was a mark of shame. Not anymore. Just watch your local news. People with a 500 word vocabulary are featured all the time, as if somehow, those 500 words amounted to profundity. There really is a human state known as “stupid”. The problem is that the “feeling” socialists think that morons should rule. Fuck the facts, how do you feel?
B.H. Obama? Perfect. A socialist (Marxist?) freshman, who with two years of obscurity in Congress, is being touted as a presidential candidate? Now that is some scary shit.
Sorry, but I think that this country is fucked.
It would be nice if you and your socialist friends would somhow wake up to the most important thing that you all deny.
It’s called “human nature”, and no matter how much pot you smoke, it will not change.
Doh…
– LD… Maybe we’ve “evolved” in our sloth to the point where we need a ”Declaration of Dependence”….
Wow…I stumbled into a den of Obama-bashing.
I’m going to guess few of you have actually read “The Audacity of Hope”, where Obama addresses the “Ownership Society” observation in much greater detail.
He lauds the accomplishments of FDR and appreciates the need for a social safety-net. The establishment of the labor laws in that era laid the foundation for 60 years of growth, so it couldn’t have been all bad.
Obama is not against personal responsibility. However, in his view was because of things like the existence of Social Security that entrpreneurs and innovators were able to assume risk and develop technologies and industries where America took (and held) the lead. He views the FDR paradigm as “We’re all in this together”, whereas the Ownership Society view is “Good luck, you’re on your own.”
Obama thinks the US was built into a great country under the first approach, and today finds itself suffering a wealth-divide that enables the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer. This stratification, if continued, will ultimately lead to revolution, because the government has renegged on its responsibility to provide a mainstream path to lift oneself out of poverty (unfair trade deals, deteriorating school systems, a minimum-wage with the same buying power it had in 1955, etc.). He’s not looking for handouts, expanded welfare or entitlement programs—he views those as creating a culture of dependence which hurt more than help. But a government that works with the best interest of all the people in mind—not just the wealthy.
He sees the tax system as unjust between the classes, where dividends and capital gains—the primary revenue source of the wealthy—are taxed at 15%, while a single person earning $40k is taxed at double that rate. His book is full of common-sense (although sometimes overly-simplistic) views that taken together weave a compelling argument.
Obama goes beyond personal savings account. He views government-sponsored 401-k’s as one way out, or employers simply allowing employees to be eligible for the maximum contribution from day one as another. He extends several other interesting ideas as well.
Anyway, I’ll bookmark the site and look forward to dropping back in. I think I can learn a lot here.
Incidentally…
With respect to the land deal did you know Obama paid above the appraised value for the strip of land he bought to increase his sideyard?
And then apologized for even the appearance of impropriety, not because of the any ethical problem with the deal, but simply because of the shady character of the guy he bought it from.
Where’s the scandal here?