http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Barack_Obama_and_campaign_contributor_Antoin_%22Tony%22_Rezko

There is a reason why Obama made Judicial Watch's 10 most Corrupt Politicians in 2006 (honorable mention in the top 20) and top 10 in 2007.

Basically Obama was involved in several questionable land deals in the slum areas of Chicago - representing as an attorney - this Tony Rezko who will go to trial in February - unfortunately after most of the primaries. This is all over the news in Illinois as it happened while Obama was a state senator and involves his wife Michelle.

This site is impartial and just a collection of the news articles from Illinois and court documents.

The web is filled however with conservative websites touting this corruption of Obama. It will all probably hit the national news after the Democrats have foolishly selected Obama and it's too late to turn the page.

Not only a potential 4 to 8 years of Republicans if Obama moves forward in the line as a President, but good chance the Republicans will win back Congress.

Fight on Edwards and Biden!

Clinton whining again, and saying things are non democratic. That sounds more like I may not win and I'm gonna cry and piss and moan and act like a spoiled bitch.

I originally posted (frankly, somewhat tongue-in-cheek) regarding substituting a super primary first instead of completely non-representative Iowa. Interestingly, it was all Edwards & Company fans who attacked it.

Perhaps my problem is assuming that the current two party power monopoly system is far too entrenched (by those same corporate powers that SandyDoc accuses me of assisting through my "neat little scam of a electoral process would guarantee that no candidate untainted by corporate control could possibly ever win.") for mere primary reform to solve the real problems our country faces. I've read the various proposals for the primary reform posted by Mr. "Ad hominem Attack" Kevenseven and frankly, in the context of my concerns about that 2 party monopoly and corporate influence, and without some form of Electoral College or other reform that could either lessen or break the two party stranglehold, they seem like intellectual exercise equivalents of re-arranging of deck chairs on the Titanic. But then that's just my opinion. Feel free to call me names Kevenseven.
And SandyDoc - I disagree with your assumption that a grilling by living rooms filled with the good people of Iowa will bring out truth, or a more representative grilling, than if those grillings were done in the living rooms of my home state, California. The major candidates have been spending lots of time here already and I am sure that if California was up first with its numerous votes to be announced first they'd be digging a little harder and deeper still.
And Kasa5400, I think you are dreaming if you think an unrepresentative, tiny turnout in Iowa will have any effect on the "dollar vote" problem which I agree exists.
P.S. I am undecided and am waiting to see to whom the candidates are so dollar beholden, before I decide and will ignore personal attacks by more "enlightened" assholes, who again I note, all seem to be Edwards supporters.

Whyowa? Finally someone who calls a charade a charade.

Not the best time to say it, but it's true. Iowans all seem to be convinced that they deserve to be first, but they never offer a good reason why it should be them.

The Iowa caucus is so important to Iowans that in 2004, a grand total of SIX PERCENT OF REGISTERED VOTERS bothered to attend it.

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/iowa_caucus_polling_only_the_b.php

He's right, and the idea that this ultra red, ultra religious state should have substantial influence as to the next nominee, rather than Ca., NY., NJ., Il., Mich., Fl., etc. is obscene!!!!

Why, because Ohio Company Diebold isn't running the show?

The process in Iowa may have flaws but at least these folk pay attention.Half of the rest of America doesn't vote and of those that do 75% don't have a clue.
Let the larger states go first and you might as well just forget about voting and let the corporate hacks and party insiders choose the candidate.

What a moron. I guess Hillary will be able to point to this when Edwards wipes the floor with her.

Waa waa waa. If Hillary were going to win Iowa both Hillary and Strickland would be quite satisfied with the system.

What a clueless OAF

One doesn't criticize the Iowa caucus system's right to hold the First caucus...before the caucus VOTES....you do it afterwards­...sheesh!

the first primary should be a "Super Day" with California, New York, Florida, Texas and Illinois. One day and it would be over and we could cut all this tail wagging the dog crap.




Now THAT has to be one of the stupidest ideas in circulation.

Know who will win? The candidate who can sell themselves to the largest number of corporate bidders so they can get the money for a massive advertising campaign.

Why not just say the person who gets the most money by a certain date wins?

The good thing about these small states going first is that the candidates without corporate backing (health insurers, pharmecuticals, financial industry etc) can actually get out and be heard by real people who then decide on the merits of their postions - and NOT mass media advertising.

Democracy works best in small groups where the voters can actually hear the candidate in person and ask them questions. It forces the candidates to go beyond their soundbites and media advertising.

You would prefer the talking heads and the money-men to pick the candidate?

That is what you would get if they had to start campaigning in nearly every state in the country at once.

The current primary system, like the Electoral College, are broken beyond repair and need to be trashed.

The idea that Iowa, a puny state that does not represent the country in any way shape or form, demographically or economy-wise is given such power and prominence in the process of selecting the leader of the free world is beyond ridiculous.

If we must retain the primary system and really want to know who will be the candidates and save us all a bunch of time, money and trouble (while simultaneously depriving the MSN of another phoney news story to ignore the real issues in the world) the first primary should be a "Super Day" with California, New York, Florida, Texas and Illinois. One day and it would be over and we could cut all this tail wagging the dog crap.

August, 14, 2003

"I am committed to helping Ohio deliver it's electorial votes to President Bush next year."

Walden O'Dell ~ CEO DIEBOLD



December, 30, 2007

"I promise we will deliver Ohio to her (Senator Clinton) in 2008."

Ted Strickland ~ Governor of Ohio