Here is one more reason that it is dangerous for Democrats to put forward an unvetted candidate. In today’s LA Times, an article appeared with information of a financial relationship in which an Obama campaign contributor in Illinois received state grants that might be insinuated as legal but questionable ”kick backs.” Not a thing has been proven, and I want to emphasize this. Obama is not accused of any wrongdoing. As the candidate advocating “transparency,” though, this ping-pong deal looks less than bright and shiny.
It’s rare that a candidate has risen from such relative obscurity to a position of such prominence in so short a time, especially in politics. Obama supporters sometimes point to Abraham Lincoln as such a case. Fair enough, but Lincoln did not have the internet and 24/7 news to contend with or things like his “unstable” and highly disliked wife, Mary Todd Lincoln, might have been food for fodder. His views on slavery, which were still being formed and were sometimes inconsistent, might have made him seem unable to lead.
In this age of politics, it’s not possible to have squeaky clean candidates, because we are flawed human beings. Yes, even Senator Obama has made boo-boos. I don’t think American voters are unable to see through most of the media spin, but if something is repeated often enough, it is hard to ignore it. The mantra that Hillary is a liar is something repeated so often that when asked what she lied about, people will say “I dunno.” They might point to the Bosnia comment or to her saying she had always been a Yankee fan, but are these the kind of substantive “lies” (if they are lies at all) that voters genuinely mean when they say she is liar. I think not. It is a media creation. George Bush the First got labeled as a “wimp.” You will still hear it. Is there any proof he is a wimp? Not really. People don’t why he got the moniker. Obama has yet to show whether he can wear a moniker with impunity. The media are trying out different ones, from the Messiah to the Marxist.
Anyway, here is the story, in part, and a link so you can read the rest. Again, my position is not that Obama has been “caught” but rather that these kinds of things need to be put to bed before he’s ready to be POTUS. We have seen what Republicans can do to a president they hate.
WASHINGTON — After an unsuccessful campaign for Congress in 2000, Illinois state Sen. Barack Obama faced serious financial pressure: numerous debts, limited cash and a law practice he had neglected for a year. Help arrived in early 2001 from a significant new legal client — a longtime political supporter.
Chicago entrepreneur Robert Blackwell Jr. paid Obama an $8,000-a-month retainer to give legal advice to his growing technology firm, Electronic Knowledge Interchange. It allowed Obama to supplement his $58,000 part-time state Senate salary for over a year with regular payments from Blackwell’s firm that eventually totaled $112,000.
A few months after receiving his final payment from EKI, Obama sent a request on state Senate letterhead urging Illinois officials to provide a $50,000 tourism promotion grant to another Blackwell company, Killerspin.
Killerspin specializes in table tennis, running tournaments nationwide and selling its own line of equipment and apparel and DVD recordings of the competitions. With support from Obama, other state officials and an Obama aide who went to work part time for Killerspin, the company eventually obtained $320,000 in state grants between 2002 and 2004 to subsidize its tournaments.
Obama’s staff said the senator advocated only for the first year’s grant — which ended up being $20,000, not $50,000. The day after Obama wrote his letter urging the awarding of the state funds, Obama’s U.S. Senate campaign received a $1,000 donation from Blackwell.
Obama’s presidential campaign rejects any suggestion that there was a connection between the legal work, the campaign contribution and the help with the grant. “Any implication that Sen. Obama would risk an ethical breach in order to secure a small grant for a pingpong tournament is nuts,” said David Axelrod, Obama’s chief political advisor.
http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-killerspin27apr27,0,2875554.story?track=ntothtml
If you would like to see what Robert Blackwell, Jr. had to say about Sen. Obama on Feb. 14, 2008, read this:
6 Comments
April 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm
When you add up all the money mentioned in the article, not from grants but going back and forth between the state of Illinois and Blackwell, and Blackwell and Obama, it doesn’t look that small.
I agree with your point that this is the kind of issue we need time to learn more about. I just don’t feel like I know enough about Obama, and when I first started hearing of him I liked him, but now I am definitely for Clinton.
April 27, 2008 at 3:51 pm
I think you’re being too “fair” to Obama. This is the kind of corruption that goes on all the time in Chicago and he just played the game. What has he done for black people there? They’ll tell you–nothing. He’s too busy getting bucks for the white guys who are his backbone.
April 27, 2008 at 4:00 pm
A month ago, I would have said nothing could hurt this man, but now, the media seems ready to go after him. Sadly, what may be nothing might be what gets him. If the LA Times really thinks there is nothing illegal or problematic about this, why are they printing the article?
April 27, 2008 at 6:42 pm
But the problem with Obama is in the way he handles a crowd. I don’t have TV, and I have watched only 2 videos, both published by supporters. His talk diction was so rhythmical that I thought the audience and I would presently start to dance to his talk and pauses. He never said a thing. — It is scary that so many people do not mind that overdose of bingo club style. I wonder how Putin and those in China are sizing him up.
April 27, 2008 at 7:17 pm
Much ado about nothing!
The only part of the equation that has any relevance is the $1,000 contribution, which was completely legal (even by Karl Rove’s standards).
April 28, 2008 at 4:35 pm
[...] Will PingPong Grant Hurt Obama? [...]