Do you think the charges against Gov. Blagojevich will hurt President-elect Obama's administration?

Did you have any knowledge of it?  What do you want him to say?  Do not compare him to Bill Clinton in any fashion.  How would you have answered the question if you didn't have any knowledge of it.  Get real.

How can we not compare him to Clinton with almost half of his cabinet being from the Clinton administration. Is that change????

While history has much to teach us, we shouldn't live there. Obama was elected by a large margin of the electorate. Let him get out there and do the job he was elected for, and then judge him based on his OWN merits, not anyone else's.

President-elect Obama didn't promise to change the way that President's fill out their cabinet positions and administration, he promised to change government policies the way that people want us to do. Get out of Iraq and stop meddling and invading defenseless countries, stop spending money we don't have, do something real about health care, really regulate Wall Street and strengthen the economy -- that's what he promised to do and what he promised to change. People like you are going to find something to complain about true or not about anything that is not in your limited view. Everyone he picks either is an "insider" because they have been in politics, or they have no experience because they have not been in politics long enough. No matter how much you hate him (for whatever reason) he is the Pres elect, and you will have to come to terms with that.

Daughter your constant repeating things that have shown to be blatant lies and falsehoods do not help your case. You hate him we get that, but enough with the BS.

w w w

DRW I am sure we all can make up plenty of interesting pieces of fiction just like you can. However, this is not the forum for such things. If you want to start a blog of lies, then please do so somewhere else. I believe you mentioned fee speech earlier. Yes you are entitled to it, but there also is a responsibility to speak TRUTH not hearsay and slander. I will not deny you the right to say and believe what you wish, I only state that you only ridicule yourself by abusing that right here with your falsehoods.

Daughter, your racism is blatant and disgusting.

The report is crystal clear on the fact that Obama was not involved with the Gov in this.  Until there is evidence to the contrary, and I doubt there will be, you are tilting at windmills

Hi Barbara,   I don't think I would call it racism, about Muslims burning Christians in Kenya.  TR & SDGemini said that it was fiction.  THOSE WERE THE REPORTS.  Look at the video's for youself.  Isn't a picture worth a thousand words??? 

Here is Obama & Biden coming off the plane in Kenya in 2006.  Your tax dollars at work.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6evvv

Odinga burned villages in Kenya after loosing election that Obama help campagined.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=vg_Ur-2c

Odinga & Sherra Law / Obama supports Muslims

www.youtube.com/watch?v=yd-m1w7 

Right.  You Tube is full of the god's honest truthfulness.  I don't think so honey.

DaughterRevWar:   You got major issues and I hope you deal with them real soon.  Your scary!

I agree, if there was wrongdoing on Obama's part, Fitzgerald will uncover it.  He has a good reputation for doing just that.

However, I think even after all the investigation is over and nothing ties Obama with any of this, the neocons will still be unsatisfied and unconvinced.

The media needs to stop siding with the GOP!

Now that is funny!

The media needs to stop siding with the GOP!

get real!!! i have NEVER seen ANY media side with the GOP, in fact had not been for the media Obama would not even BE president!

The media needs to stop siding with the GOP!

I giggled a little bit when I read this as I reflected back on the hot steamy love affair media outlets have been having with Obama for the past year, If I was Michelle I would be furious!

And further more, it's headline news because this is the second governor in a row from Illinois to be arrested on federal charges. Just google former Gov. George Ryan, who by the way, is a REPUBLICAN and currently serving a 6 year prison sentence. Oh, and way to un necessarily play the race card. Kudos to you for taking two steps backwards in the progress our country has made in regards to Civil Rights.

I always laugh when people say there is a liberal bias and PE Obama had it easy. My GOP friends always point out how much Palin got grilled compared to PE Obama. I inevitably have to point out that PE Obama was in the limelight for almost 2 years as he campaigned. Palin was on the scene for what? 7 weeks? It's funny how that seems to be forgotten. I also have read articles by authors who seem to have a very conservative and right wing opinion. No I do not mean just from Fox news. The fact that this question is on a 'Liberal' news site, discredits the 'Liberal' media bias.

I am not saying there is no bias in reporting. However, I believe people cling to the excuse of a bias in order to justify themselves and their opinions. People need to stop believing everything they read and collect information from more than a single source.

I have seen many articles that are right wing and conservative. The K-552834 is not wrong in his comment. It is only humorous because people want to believe there is only a liberal bias. It's more funny to me how the articles of reason and thought are always thought to be leftist and the hate speech rightist (though you have both types of writing by both types of writers).

Also to TR-421173 Thank You for your earlier comment regarding the Change PE Obama spoke of. He never promised to hire no-experience new comers to the white house. He promised a change in the direction the country was going under the last 8 years under President Bush. I had to remind my GOP friends that unlike President Bush, PE Obama is not going to be led by his cabinet and VP. PE Obama is the President and if his cabinet does not work towards HIS goals, then he has the power and I believe the will to change those in his cabinet who undermine those goals.

i have NEVER seen ANY media side with the GOP. So you have never heard of FOX (Faux) "News"? I find that hard to believe, or do you parrot that they are the only "Fair & Balanced" "News" out there?

The reason the GOP claims all media outlets are liberal biased is because the only outlet that bought the right wing Conservative kool-aid was FOX. If any media outlet didn't agree 100% with the hate and racist rhetoric FOX was spewing forth they were liberally biased.

Get a clue the reason that every other msm outlet disagreed with Fox is because FOX was the outlet that was biases. But rather than reach a logical conclusion regarding this the Far Right conservatives claim that ALL the OTHER msm outlets are liberal biased.

If you truly use your critical thinking skills and analyze that argument you will determine it is virtually impossible to not be more liberal than FOX.

SD- That is the point we are making.. Ya Palin got alot of news coverage but it was all NEGATIVE. As opposed to when Obama was reported on, You could almost see the glow coming off the media's faces.

I am just thinking here, if Rahm Emanuel did blew the whistle, wouldnt it just be the wise thing to do to just stay out of the fray. The PE really doesnt have the time to daudle on the corruption scandal right now.  I think they have a very good Prosecuter who will ask the questions that need to asked of the people who need to answer. I trust Patrick Fitzgerald to handle this case. I am confident that PE Obama is not stupid enough to be involved with this crook. We will see.  As a matter of fact to come out of Chicago with just Rezco and Wright is pretty amazing, I have allways said Obama is a Chicago politician, That makes him savy to me, smart enough to get around all these crooks and get something done.  So I say GO Patrick Fitzgerald

Blago didn't get the answer he wanted from BO, that's right. But why was he so mad at BO? The only answer can be that for the most time all those years Blago had ALWAYS gotten the answer he wanted from BO. Otherwise he would've just said: 'Okay, the President-Almost-Elect is a man of integrity. No use contacting him in this fashion.' But no, he was mad as hell, because BO was letting him down, an old buddy from Illinois, BO was breaking the habit!

Stay out of the way... yes.   Lie about conversations... no.  

I hope Patrick Fitzgerald handles this properly, and I truly do hope the PE Obama's true character is shown to the people (good or bad) .  He is, after all, going to be leading our great nation, and we all need to know for sure that we can trust him.

The Govener from Ill. was only trying to get some of those perks that the Obama's did.  When Obama became a Senator, Michelle got on that Hospital board.  Her salary doubled. 

Be careful- if you are going to tar a complete group because of one person, that can happen to whatever group YOU identify with. Be responsible in your comments.

Jrak, thank you for your words of wisdom.  Joe Bob, be careful be very careful

Sorry Joe-Bob     I have to admitt to voting for Bush in 2000, thats a lot worse than voting for Obama,  as of today you have nothing to complain about where Obama is concerned.  Now about Bush, wait till th truth comes out about him and his play mate Dickie Cheney     You know, if I had to I would admitt to being an idiot for voting for Obama,   Thats what I had to do in 2003 after voting for Bush, so its not like its never happened to me. And Joe-Bob , you need to let Patrick Fitzgerald take care of the corruption scandal, you dont seem to know anything about it, maybe you should just leave it to the professionals.

Poor Joe-Bob, his neocons are out and all he can do is whine on a message board and tell us we're stupid.   Grow up and face the truth.  Your boy Bush (as white and Christian as he may be, which I suspect is why you love him judging by your various comments here) destroyed his country.

 If you want to hate Obama, fine. that is your prerogative. But stop making accusations and grasping at straws. You have no proof of anything you say against him

Not to disagree that Chicago politics can be rather muddy but what is with this equation of Daley and Blagojevich? To read these comments you'd think they were BFFs rather than what I'd thought was general knowledge, at least in Illinois: that Daley, like most Illinois politicians, hated Blagojevich long before this story broke.

" Didn't see any of this whiny-baby sore loser behavior from the Dems when W won either election." Are you kidding me? Have we forgotten about the Great Vote Recount of 2000? Either way, we're all sore losers when it comes to politics, it's an issue of pride. Since we're allowed the right to express our opinoins and vote, we're also allowed to whine when we dont necessarily get our way. They are BOTH constitutional rights.  :)

Taping didn't begin until late in October.  Who knows what transpired before then?

The right to whine... I love it!

Wrong I was a sorer baby loser in 2004 when Bush won his second election, I could not believe that this country would elect such a uneducated, ignorant screw up ever. We really didnt know the first time around but we did the second, I was a loser cry baby.

BAG FAN  What about AL GORE & the hanging chads????  Jeeze!!!  That went on forever.  The stock market went down as an effect.  Al Gore....what a joke & his wife on prozac.  What a first lady she'd make.  Ha Ha Ha   

Lily51 from what the feds say, they have been taping and investigating this guy for at least 3 years. They said that at yesterday's news conference. They also said that PE Obama is not involved in this mess in any way. Think what you want, but please get your facts straight before spreading nasty, untrue, rumors.

Lily51 from what the feds say, they have been taping and investigating this guy for at least 3 years. They said that at yesterday's news conference. They also said that PE Obama is not involved in this mess in any way. Think what you want, but please get your facts straight before spreading nasty, untrue, rumors.

Lily51 from what the feds say, they have been taping and investigating this guy for at least 3 years. They said that at yesterday's news conference

Allthewaylive- Investigating Blago for three years? Yes. Taping him for three years? No.

About eight weeks ago, before we had the bug installed and before we had the wiretap up,

This is a quote taken from The NY Times website article published December 9, 2008. The article is a Transcript of the Justice Department Briefing on the Blagojevich Investigation. See the first response from Mr.Fitzgerald. Perhaps you should consider checking your facts?

Let me take a wild guess at this one, "the people of IL voted him in".  Sounds crazy doesn't it?

Who a man associates with does help to define his character. His association with Pastor Jeremiah Wright (for the past 20 years), and his co-worker Bill Ayers concerns me.

To Patrick in Houston: Do you feel responsible for every person you've ever been associated with? Obama spoke quite eloquently and openly regarding Wright.  And BTW, Wm Ayers was not Obama's "co-worker". Fact-check.

You truly have the right to be concerned, yet I also know and understand that you and I do not agree with everything that our Christian Leaders may believe in.  I have friends that have different beliefs than I do, but they are my friends.  P.E. Obama and Blagojevich have never been mentioned as friends.  They have worked together true enough, and God knows that I do not have the same beliefs as most of the people that I have to work with.  Be careful about using guilt by association.  Someone may be checking into you associates.

Okay, I concede that "co-workers" was a stretch, but both PE Obama and Ayers were members of the board of an anti-poverty group, the Woods Fund of Chicago, between 1999 and 2002. In addition, Ayers contributed $200 to Obama's re-election fund to the Illinois State Senate in April 2001.  Ayers and PE Obama did work together for nearly 4 years, and apparently Ayers like what he saw enough to donate to his State Senate campaign. 

I do not claim that all of my associates are saints that have never done anything bad.  I have a childhood friend who is now in prison for life.  I'm I guilty of what they did?  No.  Would I accept donations from them?... absolutely not.  I'm I going to associate with them after what they did?...  absolutely not.  I'm I running for a political office?... absolutely not.

PE Obama's association with Ayers is years after his attacks, and to date Ayers has offered no apology for his actions.

Patrick, Houston TX   Good morning to you.  It's a cold one here today. 

Every fail intuition gave way above the allowed amount they could for Obama's campaign.

Obama got his schooling paid for by Dr. Kahlid Al Monsour.  One of Who's Who of Saudi Arabia.  He preaches in the Muslim Mosques, that the Christians  Missionaries caused all the slavery.  When in fact; the Muslims captured 30 - 40 million Africans.  I believe Michelle is out to get the white Christians. 

Read Obama's books.  Michelle hate America.  They used to go on dates to burn the flag.

Look at Obama's upbringing in Indonesia.  Went to Pakistan when he was 20.

And I still think he was born in Kenya.   

A cold day it is...  I think the Texans brought back some of that weather from Greenbay!

Beware, beware, SBM as president, whooooooooo, look out, look out

DaughterRevWar, you are living in the "Rev War" and the "Civil War". Come on up here with the rest of us into the current century and face the real world. Mr. Obama IS THE PRESIDENT....he got the MOST votes because most of us were sick of the SCOTUS elected president that remains in office.

Oh and I don't suppose that you could present "some" sort of sources for the "take away our guns, shut down the AM freq and the so-called Security Task Force" claim. I especially would love to see the "They used to go out on dates to burn the flag" one.

Claims without sources are just more garbage to ignore.

Shewolf    Sure!!!  Be happy to.

4/27/04  "I am consistantly on the record as opposing conceled carry permits."

In the state of Illinoise Obama, "Procecuted people who used a gun for self defense.."  "Ill. S. SB 2165.  Mar. 25, 2004.

Banned guns for home protection.  SB 2165 Mar. 25, 2004

Read Obama's books or go on youtube.  There you can read it for yourself, or you can hear it for yourself, because it is on audio books.  He says"  Michelle hates American.  She hates it more than I do.  We used to go on dates to burn the flag.  But, I am willing to lay my hatred aside to be president."

The other two: shut down the AM & the Security Task Force was after the election.  Stay tuned for that out come.   

Banned guns from for home protection. 9/9/ 1996.    

I read both his books and that is not in either of them. Unless you are prepared to give me a page #. BTW, flag burning is not against the law. I don't like it either, but I do like freedom of speech.

I agree with his position on guns and am a hunter and have been for many years. My husband and I both collect guns, but see no need for the licensing for the purchase of an AK-47. That is unless you are maybe hunting elephants or men. FYI: (Illinois Senate, SB 2165, March 25, 2004, vote 20 and May 25, 2004, vote 3.) FACT: Barack Obama supports gun owner licensing and gun registration. ... **I add as I have seen written before about wire tapping....if you are innocent then what do you have to fear????

All of your sources are more than 4 years old, but I guess that is that the best you can do.

shewolf   These laws are still in effect in Chicago.  Chicago is the murder capital of the united states.  I do not have a problem with people going to a licensed Federal Firearms Dealer & doing all the background checks.

But,you said: "registration"   That is what Hitler did???   Then he knew what Jews, had guns.  What's wrong with owning an Ak-47 or any other machine gun???  As long as your NOT a criminal.  No problem.!  Isralies & Iranians own them.  WHY shouldn't we???

You want our terriorst enemies to think that there is a gun in every house. 

Of course I will catch a lot of flack for saying this, but as a bitter Republican and a REAL American citizen I feel it's my duty to. :) Regardless of the fact that I do think Obama's citizenship should be further investigated, I’m willing to let it slide to focus on the bigger picture. All the liberal media outlets preached about for months were Sarah Palin's "inexperience" and her "not being ready to lead". Lack of political experience? Why did no one ever mention the fact that Obama has only served in the senate for a grand total of 46 months, and 21 of those months were spent campaigning for the office of president? (And we wont even bring into discussion how many votes he has missed.) Talk about a bias! Anyway, as I stated earlier.. There is no need to investigate the citizenship matter any further. He did win fair and square, and I'll try not to be a sore loser and accept this. I'm not too worried about the 2012 election though. 2 years from now the republicans will regain control of the house and senate, and Obama will be pointless. Until then, Obama will fail miserably in office because of inexperience. He has built up false hopes for Americans everywhere, speaking of ending the war immediately, and fixing the economy as a top priority. Why then has every person he has appointed in his cabinet, people who will help make critical decisions, been pro-war? He won’t be able to please the Left because of this, and Lord knows he will never please the right because of obvious political differences. And why has he refused to meet with economic strategist to start working on a plan to fix this economy? Claiming our country has 'one president at a time' do you want to know why? Because he is scared, in extremely over his head and suddenly realizing "hey, I didn't sign up for this!" So, in my opinion, 4 years from now instead of hearing roaring chants of 'yes we can', I think it will be more along the lines of "No we didn't!"

"Since the Republicans kept quiet about these issues in most part during the campaign, maybe out of respect for his political brilliance, so did the media."

- Excellent by the way.

Classy, where have you been the last couple of years.

In Soutnern Illinois, ashamed to call such a corrupt state my home :)

CC, I agree with you on the experience issue, but we must not forget that Obama is a brilliant man, he's highly intelligent, which is why I think that he can be a good President, and that there's a chance of re-election in 2012. But that's also exactly the reason, why the Constitutional issue is so important to me—and please mind that I'm not talking about the preposterous birth-certificate-not-born-in-Hawaii-claims, but about the fact that Obama was a subject of the British crown at birth, and therefore would probably not be eligible. The question is simple: How can the status of a natural born citizen of the US be "governed by British acts of law" (quote from Obama's own website)? I too don't think the matter will be solved by the SCOTUS, although I do think it must be investigated. Obama will be elected in December, he will inaugurate in January, and it will be a fait accompli. But what does it mean—having a President, who might be ineligible? And now, on top of all that, his and his wife's and his friends' and allies' history of corruption starts to surface. It just makes me sick.

I agree, he is an intelligent man, but Hitler's IQ has been estimated in the whereabouts of 140-145... I kid, I am not comapring him to Hitler. Everyone take a deep breath. What I find the most disturbing about the citizenship issue is that BO taught constitutional law, is a lawyer, and a politician. If he had something to cover up or fudge a little, the man has the connections to do so.

To classy- would you consider therefore that someone who has studied to do a particular job- say, constitutional law as a prelude to a political career- should be barred form doing that job? Should those who study toxicology be barred from medical practice beacuse their knowledge of toxins might give them knowledge of how to use or  conceal toxins?

Jrak2- Valid question, much appreciated. My answer, of course, is No. To quote Schoolhouse Rock, 'Knowledge is Power'. My concern is for those who would abuse that power. And as I stated, if he DID have something to cover up, I feel he has the KNOWLEDGE to do. But, to do so, would be an abuse of power.

He's not covering up his British citizenship status at birth. It's right there on his website. He's not a liar. He's intelligent enough to know that following Chester Arthur's example would not be such a good idea. I think it's simply his Constitutional philosophy. He (like persons close to him) has stated many times that he favors a much more liberal interpretation of the Constitution, and he has declared himself a "natural born citzen" on many election documents. I genuinely believe that he thinks of himself as "natural born", and many liberal commentators and supporters purport the same. But that doesn't mean that it's actuall TRUE! That's why the SCOTUS must allow the case, although it's clear that the odds are slim. If the SCOTUS thinks that being a "native born citizen" equals "natural born citizen", then fine. Then it's the law. If they don't rule anything in this matter, the serious doubts will prevail, and it will open future Presidencies for people born on US soil, no matter who their parents are.

PS: You DID compare him to Hitler. But that comparison has a lot of flaws, apart from the really obvious ones like Hitler being responsible for the deaths of millions of people. People forget that Hitler was an eligible candidate for chancellor, because he was a naturalized German. And people forget that it was a legal act for Hindenburg and the legislature to initiate the Enabling Act of 1933, which made Hitler a dictator of the Republic, by merging legislature and the executive branch. And under this legal context, it was also a valid act of Hitler to merge the offices of Chancellor and President. The dire consequences are commonly known. But let's not put the cart before the horse, because Hitler's rise to power was not unconstitutional.

Dr.- I do want to make it clear I said if he DID have something to cover up. I have read his website and agree, he is not a liar, at least in this case.  And as for the 'comparassion' to Hitler, perhaps compare was a poor word choice. The only comparison or likeness I had hoped to insinuate between the two was that they both have high IQ's, and that being intelligent shouldn't automatically qualify a person for a position of power. Having intelligence is one thing, how you chose to use it is a completely different issue. Apologies for confusion.

One of the consequences of Obama's liberal take on the Constitution would be to abolish the Electoral College, which he stated during the Senatorial election in a debate with Keyes. If one knows the historical reason for the Electoral College, it's clear what his plans are.

Originally it was the legislature that would elect the President, and also would be able to appoint the candidates. That was the Framers' original idea. At that time there was no citizenship clause connected to the Presidential Qualifications, because the President's citizenship requirements would have been determined by the qualifications for other public offices, e.g. Senators, and we all know that you can become a Senator, even if you're not a "natural born citizen". Being naturalized is enough. The Framers saw and feared the possible influence of foreign allegiances present in the legislature (which is still the same today), which might extend onto the election of the President, and even the President himself. That's why they created the Electoral College, and that's why all of a sudden there needed to be a citizenship clause in the Presidential Qualifications, because the legislature was now out of the game.

Now, when listening to Obama, who stated that he wants to abolish the Electoral College, this would render the "natural born citizen"-clause irrelevant again. (In any case, it would be a good argument to abolish this clause too, together with the Electoral College.) This is obviously one of Obama's flanks for changing Presidential eligibility, so that anyone who's a naturalized or born US citizen (whether by statute or under the 14th Amendment) can become President, even if both of his parents are, let's say, resident aliens, i.e. not naturalized. Transfering the election back onto the legislature would be one of the pillars of this Constitutional change.

CC >> fair enough. :)

Would you agree with this constitutional change?

To be honest, I'm a liberal environmentalist left wing nut, and I'm all for allowing also naturalized US citizens to become US President, as it is the case in other countries, e.g. Germany. Therefore I would support Obama on this change of the Constitution. Then (naturally) there would be no need for an Electoral College anymore. (In Germany, too, the chancellor is elected by the legislature.)

But—that doesn't change the high probability that Obama himself is not eligible for Presidency. I have a feeling that the Washington supporters of a liberal interpretations of the Constitution will use "President Obama" as either (a) a precedent for future elections and maybe a Constitutional Amendment, or (b) if Obama is removed from office due to ineligibility, as a necessary pawn to be sacrificed for future generations of Presidents, who are naturalized US citizens or dual citizens or citizens by statute. Because—if the beloved Messiah Barack is sacrificed, there will be a huge movement in the country to change Presidential Qualifications, because nobody would want this to happen again: barring the savior of the Union from office. (Pardon my irony here.)

Haha irony is pardoned. I don't feel I need to express my opinoin to you as my name should give it away. But as a self proclamied

liberal environmentalist left wing nut

( I wanted to make it clear I was not calling you this :) )  I MUST ask how you feel about Obama's current cabinet selections. I feel they are quite centerist and could in no way shape or form possibly please the left of left wingers?

Oh my God, you two are so funny.  This just amazes me that two people who think they are so intelligent are just "out there".  Thank God we have freedom of speech so we can know what people are really thinking.  So when we need to lock up the nut cases we know who you are!

That's correct, they are centrist appointments—basically the Clinton machine, so Obama can remain aloof as the President Messiah. But what's interesting is that a lot of the more leftist Obama people have voiced their frustration and sometimes anger over being ignored, which tells me that they expected to be included in the administration more prominently. This reaction might have two reasons:

(a) Obama is the conservative centrist Democrat everybody says he is, which leads me to the assumption that he simply used the left wingers (and even some crooks!) to gain power;

(b) Obama is a left wing liberal, but wants to start centrist, in order to establish a feeling of security, and then later maybe turn to the left slowly, step by step.

I don't know the answer. We'll have to wait and see. :)

Adams122, do you have anything substantial and relevant to add?

Dr- I'm going to choose option B.

Adams122- Im glad we have freedom of speech too, so morons like you can be ousted when the stick their nose where they dont belong. If you would pay a little attention to the preceeding comments you would note that we are two opposing parties having a simple, civilized conversation regarding our differences. Now run along and play with the other kids.

"If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them."

  --  Isaac Asimov

I would not resort to the same ad hominem remarks as Adams122. But what I find interesting is that he praises the democratic achievement of free speech, but applies a purely subjective evaluation of our comments, which is sufficient for him to lock us (and others) up. All possibly intended humor aside—are you a fascist, Adams122?

CC, option B is a possibility, yes. Actually, the majority of evidence from the past years points to option B. What doesn't fit the picture is Obama's policy on executive appointments. Maybe he'll start with SCOTUS.

Im afraid i'll have to claim a bit of ignorance here Dr.

Please elaborate on Obamas policy on exec. appts, but don't lock me up with the rest of the nut cases.

You wrote it yourself: "Obama's current cabinet selections. I feel they are quite centrist". That's how many feel, in the media, some of his supporters etc., and some are even disappointed over his conservative choices. Maybe I'm reading too much into his political past, but it doesn't really match many expectations or his earlier, more liberal ideas. On the other hand, it could well be that he decided to play it safe, because the country is going through such hard times. Radical changes could rock the boat further, so trying first to ease the symptoms and consolidating is probably the right choice before getting to the bottom of it all and actually curing the disease(s).

Oh ok, I see what you meant now. And I dont think you're reading too much into it. I do agree he has already backed down on earlier more liberal ideas. Not only in cabinet appointments, but also in regards to taking down big oil and an immediate pullout from Iraq... I feel he's already facing harsh criticism from left wingers for this.

Actually, his career started in Hyde Park, in the anti-Daley, anti-machine, reformist wing of the Chicago Democratic Party. He later made some useful alliances in the machine, but was never really a part of it, and there's no evidence that he did anything wrong here (in fact, Blago is on tape complaining that he and his transition team wouldn't go along with his corruption), or that he ever abused any of the offices he held for personal gain. He's not perfect but by Illinois standards he's clean as a bar of soap when it comes to ethics. If there was ever any hint of him having any ethics problems, don't you think the Republicans (and the Clintons) would have harped on it endlessly during the campaign? Doesn't the fact that William Ayers was the best they could come up with tell you something about Obama?

by Illinois standards he's clean as a bar of soap when it comes to ethics

Apparently, those standards aren't very high.

But isn't it true that there's an anti-machine, reformist wing of the Democratic Party in Chicago, and that Obama, who got his start in Hyde Park, primarily came from that wing? I know he later forged some useful alliances with people like Emil Jones and later Mayor Daley, but my understanding was that he was never really a product of the Chicago machine and that he actually got his start in the reformist wing of the party.

You do realize that part of the tapes implicating Blagojevich show him complaining that Obama wouldn't bribe him or go along with any of his corrupt schemes, right? 

nohandouts if it is possible to develop a mental picture using facts at hand rather than indulging in a mental picture and hoping for some random event to validate the unexamined feeling of dislike you should do so.  I look at the facts on the ground and I like Obama but not Bush.  What do you want from Barach?  He somehow emerged from that political getto and won the presidency with more enemies trying to undermine him than you will ever know.

If Obama was solicited with the intent of a bribe, he should have reported it to the authorities.  Did he?

do you know he didn't?

This statement is not a Fox News only statement... The media in general has been doing this for years now, and each outlet has it's own agenda. 

It is time for the American people to stop relying on the "Media" to think for them. Americans should be objective when the watch the "news" on TV and use common sense and logic to discern the truth.