I agree with you. Obama is much to smart to get embroiled in this mess and have it proven by any reliable means. If anyone takes the fall, it will be Emmanual, and I don't think he will either. It is clear he had many conversations regarding Obama's replacement, but not how many. I tend to think 20 or 21 was a number 'leaked' in order to make the real number appear less extreme later. Then people will say, 'Oh, it was only 5 times...' I'm pretty comfortable thinking there were discussions, but I am not at all assuming that any promises or deals were in the works. One because of the same statement by the Governor you mentioned, and two because Obama is much too smart for that. My concern was why was Obama so evasive and appeared to be distorting the truth in his initial responses. That could be because 1) he knew there were communications but not precisely what words were used and what was discussed or 2) he didn't know anything precise regarding his staff. It is typical for a leader to give directives for example "Make sure he knows who we would like to see appointed" (I'm sure it would be someone who had the same views as Obama as any Senator would want someone to carry on with the same ideals and goals) and that is a far cry from directing someone to make any deal to ensure it is carried out.

I think in this case, there is smoke but no fire. Move along folks.... :o)

>Thanks for the details. I still am not concerned that there is any kind of scandal here. Obviously there is one involving Blago -- who is trying to carry on as governor, the jerk -- but no evidence that Obama or his staff have been part of it. Obama said he has had no contact with Blago or his office, and that no one on his staff was involved in deal-making. This is consistent with Blago's complaint on the wiretap that all they had offered was "appreciation." If he had denied that Emanuel, or anyone else on his staff or behalf, had even talked to the governor's office, then I would be concerned.
>
>I just saw on my morning news sweep that some liberals are upset over Rick Warren, a fire-breathing evangelical, being named to deliver the invocation at Obama's inauguration. He is reportedly also set to name another Republican to the cabinet. These are more signs that he really does want to be the President of all of us, not just liberal Democrats. I hope people at least give him a chance to do so.
>
>>This is a joint response to you and Tamar.
>>
>>Mike: Well, honestly, I hope it does. I don't want to see the President-elect involved in any deal-making as it sullies the country.
>>
>>Tamar: http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/12/obama_says_no_c.html
>>
>>The relevent quote:
>>
>>Asked about any contacts his staff had with Blagojevich or his office, Obama said he had no contact with the governor or his office.
>>
>>"That I know for certain," he said.
>>
>>Obama also said he is "absolutely certain" that no one on his staff was involved in "deal-making" in regard to the Senate seat, pointing out that in the FBI affidavit, Blagojevich was taped complaining that Obama wouldn't play ball.
>>
>>"That would be a violation of everything this campaign has been about. That's not how we do business," he said.
>>
>>----
>>But now it seems that there are 20+ tapes of Rahm Emmanuel in the wiretap. Let's see what it shows.
>>
>>>There was some contact there, apparently involving Rahm Emanuel. Obama and his staff insist they did nothing more than give some replacement suggestions to Blagojevich's staff. They have prepared a report they were going to release earlier this week, and are now holding until week at Patrick Fitzgerald's request. At that point this nothing should blow over.
>>>
>>>>The logical lie that he nor anyone on his staff had spoken to the governor about his replacement. Dude, that strains credulity. I don't know why Harvey CCs you but I do because, sometimes, you can be a free-thinker.
>>>>
>>>>>OF COURSE he's lying ;-) Which lie is it you and John H think he told? And why do you both keep copying me on your anti-Obama rants? ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>>>LOL.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Well, OF COURSE he's lying by assumption of the logic I already posted. I just don't understand why. He had nothing to lose by admitting that he and/or his staff was working with Blag on the transition of the Senate seat if they weren't complicit in the scandal. I truly believe that Obama would not have played along in this scandal and Blag's cursing him out in the tapes seems to back that up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The thing that bothers me is that assuming I'm right about Obama not playing games with Blag (good for him), why the knee-jerk reaction of a bald-face lie? Is this how he's going to react to any controversy going forward - lie to us and hope it sticks? If I were an Obama supporter listening to months of how open and honest he was going to be I'd be seriously perturbed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Hey, look, I want Obama to succeed. When the President does well the country does well. I don't have to like him to wish him well because if he fails we fail. But if you campaign on openness and honesty, dammit, be open and honest.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Yep, I'm not saying what the details are, just that I sense he is lying. I'm thinking he's concerned about the FBI having taped the governor, and probably him and/or Rahm. I'm waiting for the defecation to hit the rotary oscillator!<g>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I have faith in your cop skills as well as the simple logic that his office HAD to be in communication with Blagojevich to coordinate a replacement Senator. Common sense. Point: Would Obama had set a date to resign without any reasonable assurance that there was a replacement? When the story broke and Obama categorically denied ever talking to Blag I thought that was the stupidest lie I ever heard. It's like coming into your kitchen and finding your 2 year old with a cookie, the cookie jar open and asking her if she helped herself to a cookie. She'll knee-jerk answer "no"....that's what Obama did.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I don't think that Obama participated in Blag's "pay to play" scheme. The governors tapes indicate that Obama offerred him nothing, So, ummm, why did Obama knee-jerk lie and why the secrecy?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>There's something going on in all of this that doesn't pass the smell test. I believe that Obama did nothing wrong but by running with the "knee-jerk lie" he turned this into a long a drawn out investigation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I have a lot of faith in Obama's failure. He has never DONE anything, and (I believe) he will do even less as president. I'm still looking for another Ronald Reagan, and I think I've found an American version of Maggie Thatcher, in Sarah Palin. So.... hope springs eternal. I think Obama is doomed by this economic crisis, and I was watching him give an interview about the sale of his senate seat and all my cop skills say LIAR. Body language, the way he was answering the questions, etc tell me he is neck deep in this thing, but only time will tell.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>The Dems are on the clock and history says they will get tossed in two years. We shall see....
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>The left, the left, the left -- sigh. One of the things I have liked about Barack Obama from the start is he seems to offer us a way out of label politics. He may yet disappoint me -- the deck sure is stacked against him for economic reasons alone -- but I still believe we can follow him out of the finger pointing hole we have been in for the past 16 years and more.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>FWIW I am what would certainly be called leftist these days and have no enthusiasm whatsoever for Caroline Kennedy being named the junior senator from New York. She has not earned the position. She seems like a nice enough lady and has done some good works, as have many of the Kennedys. Let's just start a level or two below first and earn it. Senator from New York is not exactly head of the bake sale committee.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Oh please. At least be honest. Did you miss Obama's speeches? Sheesh...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>I have high hopes for Obama, but labeling him as someone who never pointed fingers or used labels is a fallacy.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Also, comments like 'the deck is stacked against him' won't cut it. It will not be his scape-goat if he fails. No excuses. Every President has to take responsibility for what they do or don't do. He will be no different.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Your attempt to provide an excuse out of the gate and set the stage for his failure is dissappointing.