Rezko? Are you serious? As you might imagine, it is all over the news here. (It was the Chicago Tribune that first ran the story). Sounds to me like Rezko contributed money to Obama's campaigns and hoped to gain influence with him in return. Holy moley, stop the presses! That's never happened in politics before! Seriously, this is exactly how fundraising works in politics. They all hate it and they all have to do it. It's only a problem when there is a quid pro quo where the politician does something he shouldn't for the donor. AFAIK Obama has not done any of that for Rezko. The dumb thing he did (self-admittedly) was take a loan from Rezko when he bought his house, a loan he repaid. Dumb because of the appearance of it, but there was nothing more to it than a bad appearance. If Obama did anything in return it has not come to light yet. And you know darned well the media have been digging.

>I disagree. His dealings with Rezko (not to mention lying about his contributions) were unethical.
>
>>Now that I don't like. You are of course free to like and dislike any candidates you like, as is everyone else. But I resent the part about Obama being dishonest and not very high on the ethics scale. I strongly disagree with that. If you don't like his positions, that's fine. But I don't think you have any basis for calling him dishonest or unethical.
>>
>>>There are things I like about Obama. Heck, there are things I like about Clinton. The problem is that the things I don't like tend to overshadow the things I do like. To really over-generalize:
>>>
>>>Obama: too much socialism and wrong view on Iraq
>>>Clinton: too much socialism and wrong view on Iraq (but not as wrong as Obama)
>>>McCain: too liberal in his immigration views (and others as well)
>>>
>>>The whole church issue and land issue concerns me with Obama. Personally, if I attended a church and the paster spoke in a bigoted manner, let alone like his paster, I would walk out on the spot. I'd expect no less from someone with political aspirations. He appears to be as dishonest as Hillary (neither very high on the ethics scale)
>>>
>>>We've gotten to the point here in this country where the choice appears to be:
>>>
>>>Democrat: spend and tax
>>>Republican: spend and don't tax
>>>
>>>It's amazing we have so many running but so few we can vote for:
>>>
>>>http://www.votesmart.org/election_president_search.php?party=Other&go.x=10&go.y=11
>>>http://www.politics1.com/p2008.htm
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>For a time I thought I could support Obama. Early on it seemed that maybe he was the next JFK; an idealist with a fresh perspective.
>>>>
>>>>But, here we go again, the injection of race into the process.
>>>>
>>>>I am sick and tired of race being an issue as if we hadn't grown since the 1960's. Obama attends church for decades with a firebrand preacher who talks as if it's 1963 and Mississippi. He claims that the sermons never bothered or impacted him. I call BS on that.
>>>>
>>>>I repeat: I am sick of hearing about race. And gender. The media orgasmed when Pelosi became first woman Speaker and, to a lesser degree, when Rice became Secretary of State. Why?? Why do they constantly point out the things were not supposed to pay attention to anymore?
>>>>
>>>>I want a candidate who's American. I don't want to hear black and white or male and female. Obama has slid into the trap the media sets with compartmentalizing based on color or gender. Whoops.
>>>>
>>>>Guess I'm voting for McCain. Or the Libertarian.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Well worth the read:
>>>>>
>>>>>http://www.drudgereport.com/flashos.htm