Religious Resignation

[kandrathe]

I don't think it's unreasonable to say that Obama, a relative political neophyte at the time, did not know much about Rezko's back room deals. This is not to say that he escapes this unscathed. It is either damaging to his honesty or his judgement of character, you are correct. However, politics is a dirty game, and none of the players are squeaky clean. You make friends who might not turn out to be your friends after all. You take money that you need to campaign without really understanding where it came from.

That's one theory. An optimistic white washing theory, but it's possible he was a naive dupe.

Obama is thus of a kind with "Whitewater" Clinton or "Keating 5" McCain, no longer able to claim he's pure as driven snow. If there's even a single politician in Washington who claims that, it's probably because someone near them hasn't been caught yet. But I think Obama has been clear and candid about his connections to Rezko, has given the money to charity, and strongly rejects lobbyist support for his campaign. (A luxury of convenience, perhaps, given that he doesn't need it, but he rejects it all the same.)

Clear and candid rather than fleeing and covering up is a refreshing change, but all the same it stinks.

That closeness is well demonstrated, at least in the past tense, and Obama has admitted as much. I think, regardless of whether you trust him or not, he has left that connection behind him, as it is no longer necessary, and is tremendously costly. All we can do is look to who he associates with during the campaign, and in the future. If, in the end, he's no better than Clinton was, then I won't be surprised. But he's not there yet.

It's a good thing he's broken with Rezko, because its hard to be a political adviser of the President when you are in jail.

His father phoned up his Senator's office and asked for a status check on Alsammarae. Obama's office did so. He would have done the same for any constitutent, it's part of the job to act as a conduit for this kind of information. What should they have done, yelled at him for being the father of a scumbag and hung up the phone? I don't see how this is suspicious.

Your honor, I rest my case. After that, Alsammarae was sprung from jail, flown to Chicago, and has had the Interpol warrant for his arrest vacated. Who is helping Mr. Alsammarae?

Careful with the data points, there is such a thing as over fitting your data.

I'm not drawing any lines yet, but it's interesting to plot the patterns to see trends.

(I believe Mav already warned us once. If we want to continue this conversation, I don't think "drunken hog" is the kind of thing we should be calling each other.)

There is a difference between calling you a "drunken hog" and saying you are gobbling up the BS being fed to you like a "drunken hog". It's called a "simile" and the only disparagement to you would be that I think you have your BS blinders on again.

Skepticism is not synonymous with suspicion. Skepticism is about wanting solid evidence for claims. If the evidence is just a scattergun of inconclusive "data points", then I try not to make solid judgments. We do not yet know Obama well. Perhaps he is a disaster waiting to happen, although I doubt it, from what I've seen. But, listening to the right side of the internet, you'd suspect we had a feature-length film of him and Louis Farrakhan at a Mujhadeen training camp, grabbing money from Rezko in one hand and forking it over to suicide bombers in the other. This is the kind of conspiracy theory that happens when you play connect-the-dots, rather than weigh the evidence.

Or, rather "systematic doubt and continual testing". It is not, "relying on only the facts" as you characterize it.

And that's grounds for impeachment now? Plenty of presidents in the history books had trysts that would have been humiliating if they were published in Hustler. They are well known. Kennedy? Jefferson? The Presidency does not come with an oath of celibacy. Previous generations, however, seem to have had the sense to let the private be private.

Well, it's vague what is an impeachable offense, and only Congress can decide that. I would hold that any one who demeans the Office of President with such a scandal may be impeached. It depends on the circumstances.