Obama clear of Blagojevich trouble

Details? None. Proof? Because Obama said so.

It’s Christmas after all. The season’s built in the modern day on wishful thinking.

There are signs about half the nation doesn’t quite believe Mr. Obama. From Rasmussen:

Forty five percent (45%) of U.S. voters say it is likely President-elect Obama or one of his top campaign aides was involved in the unfolding Blagojevich scandal in Illinois, including 23% who say it is Very Likely.

Comments

  1. Cindy, how about Obama’s clear of Blagojevich trouble because the U.S. Attorney said so?

    Seems to me that U.S. Attorney would know more about Obama’s involvement – or lack thereof – than anyone else on the face of the planet, seeing as how it’s his investigation.

  2. Tinkerbell says:

    This morning George Stephanopolus announced that Patterson should pick Kennedy to replace Clinton for the Senate BECAUSE CAROLINE KENNEDY CAN RAISE TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IF NOT MORE.

    This thinking is no different than I have read reported about the Illinois Senator’s seat.

  3. Zach, you’re light a link on that one.

  4. Randy in Richmond says:

    Zach W
    Actually Patrick Fitzgerald says this, “We make no allegations that he’s aware of anything” when referring to Obama. This is legalese but in no way clears Obama of involvement in this matter. They’re just making no allegations.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/09/us/politics/09text-illinois.html?pagewanted=5&_r=1

  5. Boy Randy, you’re really parsing words there.

    If you all want to keep holding out hope that a scandal will emerge where none exists, then so be it, but then again, that’s no different than what happened during the campaign, when conservatives threw every kind of attack they could at Obama, hoping something would stick.

    It’s just a shame you folks aren’t willing to be a little more evenhanded and give the president-elect the benefit of the doubt, considering that if we were talking about a Republican you supported – say, John McCain – I’m sure you’d be defending your guy.

  6. I suspect I’ll be just about as even-handed to BO as you were to Bush the last 8 years. You set quite a standard, there, Zach.

  7. Randy in Richmond says:

    Whoa.. I’m not holding out hope for anything. You said the US Attorney stated Obama was clear of this trouble and I say he didn’t say that. There may or may not be a link to Obama’s camp but the manner in which this has been handled by Obama and his advisors has been poor at best. Even before becoming President the promises of light and open-ness made throughout the campaign are being reneged on.
    As I’ve said before you can move the leopard but the spots say the same and go with him always. The people, events, and associations of Obama’s last twenty years are not going to disappear because he’s changing jobs. I at least thought they wouldn’t start to haunt him until he was in office this January.
    I promise you I intend to give Mr. Obama every benefit of the doubt President Bush has been given by the left and the MSM.

  8. Cindy, I won’t deny I don’t care for President Bush, but I’ll be honest – though he wasn’t the guy I supported in 2000, I gave him the benefit of the doubt after 9/11. I really wanted to believe he’d do us proud, but he let me down, and that’s why I’ve not been kind to him since I started blogging.

    Then again Cindy, I’m not the one with a blog claiming to be Fairly Conservative “in an evenhanded manner,” so pardon me for expecting a little more even handedness from you, as opposed to partisan hackery.

  9. It’s not partisan “hackery.” I simply think a little more work is necessary before BO gets to sound the all clear siren on this one. “Because I said so” is a pretty weak bit of proof.

  10. “I promise you I intend to give Mr. Obama every benefit of the doubt President Bush has been given by the left and the MSM.”

    Yeah, they started it. Sounds pretty even-handed to me.

    Don’t take the high road and judge the guy based on the decisions he makes while in office over the next 4 years or anything.

    I can assure you (regardless of MSM opinion) most Americans, including many liberals, gave President Bush all the “benefit of the doubt” in the world, pre 9-11 and during the invasion of Afghanistan (as confirmed by his approval rating during this period).

    His failures since this time are well documented and are directly related with his approval ratings falling off a cliff since then. Or should I saying jumping off.

    I see he still has those cat-like reflexes and excellent peripheral vision though. That first shoe was right on target if he doesn’t make that evasive maneuver the other day. It was hummin’ too.

  11. Randy in Richmond says:

    Zach
    I visited your site and I find the referendum Wisconsin just had regarding healthcare interesting. What did anyone expect the results to be? I’m surprised 28% voted against it. What were the statewide results? What do you think the results would be if the wording included: Your individual net taxes will increase approximately 10-15% immediately; you most likely will have to change doctors; some, if not many, doctors in the state will be leaving to practice in other states; to see specialists will result in 3-6 month wait or longer; you lose all choice in your healthcare decisions; remember this is the same government that operates the DMV, the TSA, FEMA, and regulates the Banking System and Stock Market.
    What if your state had a referendum asking: Should the state provide an automobile to every qualified citizen equivalent to the average car driven by the state legislators? You would get at least 72% to vote for this and probably more. That’s why we are a republic and not a pure democracy. There is a significant difference.

  12. J. – not so fun when it’s your guy on the hotseat, huh? There are a lot of high roads you could have, but did not, take over the last few months. It’s rather disingenuous to demand one be taken now.

    Randy – head on over and leave those questions on Zach’s site. I’m sure he could use the traffic. :p

  13. Randy in Richmond says:

    Strupp
    Oh, I will judge Mr. Obama on the decisions he makes in the future just as I do on the ones he has made in the past–which is the only yardstick available now. That is how I easily reached the decision to not support him for President. Plus I am giving my opinion based on what he says he is going to do–most of which I totally disagree. If he changes I will be the first to commend his actions but we all know that isn’t going to happen.
    I’m not up on the well documented failures of President Bush that you allude to. Are you talking about the economy we are now experiencing that can be laid right at the feet of the Congress?

  14. Randy in Richmond says:

    For eight years it’s been about freedom of speech and dissent. All of a sudden it’s about taking the low road, sour grapes, or partisan hackery.

  15. Tinkerbell says:

    Dear J-S,
    That humming shoe headed for Bush’s head reveals much about the failure of the Secret Service personnel, who BTW BO is acquiring. Try putting the shoe on the other foot, so to speak. Will it be so funny to you if someone makes a similar attack to BO in the presence of the inattentive and/or slow to respond SS?

    Bush himself takes a high rode, downplaying a potentially perilous circumstance… meanwhile drama has followed BO, with him reporting numerous threats to his life during the election campaign (“threats” whose circumstances we are not familiar with… possibly less dangerous than humming projectiles aimed at one’s head?)… or were they threats to his political life, the information being leaked about his birthplace, birth certificate, renounced US citizenship [see it rehashed in this week’s Globe at the grocery store check-outs], about his deported Auntie, who never left the country but was living on the taxpayer dollar?

    There are a number of things about BO which merit further investigation / scrutiny but may be sidetracked due to the same payola (power, influence, jobs, money) which Blago is accused of. I believe we have the pot calling the kettle black here.

  16. Randy in Richmond says:

    Cindy
    I like your new smiley face!

  17. Randy in Richmond says:

    Our new Education Secretary Designate, Arne Duncan, a Harvard graduate reading from a prepared statement. Me likes him.

    http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1155201977/bctid4943390001

  18. hm, flawed logic about Zach being harsh on Bush. I wouldn’t be surprised if you were harsh on Clinton.

    It’s fallacious logic.