Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry


Sometimes you have to stand in darkness before you begin to see the light.

On December 10 I wrote about the prez-elect's statement on blogobama-gate:

"I had no contact with the governor or his office, and so we were not, (uhh) I was not aware of what was happening, and as I said, it is a sad day for Illinois."

So, are we to wonder what the definition of "contact" is? Was the Obama camp ("we") aware of the deal-making, or investigation, and did they not inform Obama? Did they report any shakedown attempts to the Feds? What was Obama aware or "not aware" of? The Senate seat sale? The FBI investigation? The demands for quid pro quo?

Did I hit it on the nose or what? Like I said back then, too bad the investigation was halted before more rats started nibbling at the cheese. Thanks Chicago Tribune for spilling the beans and giving everyone a heads-up. (That is sarcasm)

In typical Obama fashion, we now learn that his top aide, Rahm Emanuel, spoke with Gov. Rod Blogojevich about Obama's Senate seat possibly as many as twenty-one times.

Today, a testy and stuttering Obama cut off a reporter in mid question with a, "J-j-j-j-ohn ... I'm cutting you off. I don't want you to waste your question."

So much for transparency and change, huh?

Obama will decide what questions to ask.

Hey, 52 percenters! You wouldn't listen.

Hey, media! Isn't it a little late to start investigating him now? We tried to do your job for you but you were too busy enjoying your "tingly feelings" and going though garbage cans in Alaska.

The corrupt Chicago political machine from which Obama emerged has never been a secret, no matter how much people like Jim Lehrer (What's the big deal?), George Stephanopoulos, and other Obama press agents and enablers in the media try to convince us that the selling of a U.S. Senate seat by Illinois Governor Rod Blogojevich is just a distraction, that his major error is getting caught and using bad language.

Well, like it or not, Blagojevich will one day have his day in court. Can't wait for that trial, and watching all the cockroaches as they start scattering for cover.

Elections have consequences. Voting for a pig in a poke, no matter how much lipstick you smear on its lips, can be disastrous.

Nicely done, everyone. Get used to it. There's more of the same "uh, uh, uh ... " on the way


( 2 comments — Leave a comment )
Dec. 21st, 2008 09:10 pm (UTC)
Isn't it a bit absurd to attempt to show Obama as somehow complicit in all this? It is pretty clear that this Gov. from Il. - who, by the way, has not been convicted of anything,; but seems pretty likely to be - is the one to rail against. He is the one with the dirt under his nails. Obama has had nothing to do with this. As for attempting to limit the association with the Gov. I would expect nothing less.

If he pardons him, THEN you have something to rail about.
Dec. 22nd, 2008 12:27 am (UTC)

Who said Obama is complicit? Didn't I say that Obama's name came up because Gov. Blogajevich ranted that Obama wouldn't give him anything? The fact is that there are cores of questions to be answered, and rather than wait for the investigation to pan out, the media has decided this is much ado about nothing.

Obama was basically absolved of any responsibility by the media minutes after the Tribune leaked the story (convenient)and Fitzgerald decided to stop the investigation.

It's funny that Fitzgerald didn't stop the Valerie Plame investigation even after the leaker TOLD HIM he was responsible. I wonder how many people will be tried for lying to the FBI?

My point is about media hypocrisy in providing cover for the Chosen One. In asking softball questions. In demonstrating yet another example of Obama not coming forward with honesty and transparency as he promised, instead of resorting to his old tactic of making misleading statements and then telling a little more truth bit by bit.

This is the corrupt political environment I spoke of for a year, the one Obama operated in, the one he used to advance his political goals.

I'm sure you'd agree with so many in the media who don't believe that this is such a bad thing anyway. It's just the way it is - with Democrats. They all know it. That's why no one bothered to investigate Obama's background. Now had this been a conservative Republican like, say, Sarah Palin ... ;-)
( 2 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

August 2014


Page Summary

Powered by LiveJournal.com