About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Disregarding Fitzgerald's warning, media use Blagojevich scandal to engage in guilt-by-association against Obama

December 10, 2008 4:43 pm ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

SUMMARY: Disregarding U.S. attorney Patrick Fitzgerald's warning to "not cast aspersions on people for being named or being discussed" in the criminal complaint against Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, several in the media have used the scandal as an opportunity to engage in suggestions of guilt-by-association against President-elect Barack Obama, by rehashing Obama's purportedly "questionable associations," or suggesting that Obama is a product of corrupt "Chicago politics."

61 Comments

Disregarding prosecutor and U.S. attorney Patrick Fitzgerald's warning to "not cast aspersions on people for being named or being discussed" in the criminal complaint against Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D), several media figures and outlets have used the Blagojevich scandal as an opportunity to engage in suggestions of guilt-by-association against President-elect Barack Obama. This guilt-by-association has taken the form of rehashing Obama's purportedly "questionable associations," or suggesting that Obama is a product of corrupt "Chicago politics." A number of these media figures have linked Obama to Blagojevich or convicted Chicago businessman Antoin Rezko but ignored the fact that Obama has not been accused of any wrongdoing with regard to either case. Other media outlets, like the Associated Press, have used the Blagojevich scandal to revisit Obama's associations to controversial figures who have not been accused of any criminal wrongdoing, such as Columbia University professor Rashid Khalidi and Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr.

"Questionable associations"

  • In a December 10 article headlined "Questionable associations of Obama," The Associated Press discussed "notable figures who have drawn scorn and scrutiny" with whom "Obama has crossed paths." However, more than half of the individuals the AP cited have not been charged with any criminal wrongdoing: Wright, Khalidi, Illinois Senate President Emil Jones, and Rev. Michael Pfleger. As for the three "figures" who have been charged with wrongdoing -- Blagojevich, Rezko, and former Weather Underground member Bill Ayers -- no criminal accusations have been brought against Obama in connection with these cases.

    While the AP article did note that the charges against Rezko "have no connection to Obama" and that Obama "had a very limited relationship with Ayers" that began years after criminal charges against Ayers were dropped, the article did not mention, as reporter Liz Sidoti pointed out in a separate December 10 AP article, that "Obama isn't accused of anything" in the criminal complaint against Blagojevich.
  • During the December 9 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, host Sean Hannity asked fellow Fox News host Mike Huckabee: "Why is he [Obama] friends with all these radical, corrupt people? What -- what does that say about him?" Huckabee responded: "Well, I think that his past relationships are certainly questionable. I still think Bill Ayers ought to be in prison." Co-host Alan Colmes then said, "Didn't we have an election? Didn't we just decide all this?" to which Huckabee replied: "Yeah, we did. But I'm just talking about Bill Ayers. But Barack Obama, I don't think has any connection to the specific bribery issue."

    Hannity later added: "I wonder if we're beginning to see, perhaps, a lot of what we suspected about Barack Obama. A lot -- that I think the Tony Rezko issue is going to be a big problem for him, especially because he's all over this document. The pres -- the word president-elect is mentioned 44 times in the document. Pretty troubling." In fact, none of the references to "President-elect" in the complaint against Blagojevich indicate any wrongdoing by Obama. Rather, some of the instances in which the term "President-elect" is used suggest that Obama and his advisers were unwilling to conspire with Blagojevich, while other mentions were mere descriptions of the Senate seat vacated by Obama or references to his forthcoming presidential administration.
  • Discussing the charges against Blagojevich during the December 10 edition of MSNBC Live, anchor Norah O'Donnell asked NBC News political director Chuck Todd: "[C]an Obama avoid being tainted by all this?" Todd replied that "obviously, Chicago Democratic politics, Illinois Democratic politics has a lot of concentric circles. People who used to work for Blagojevich, maybe in his 2002 campaign, have connections now with Obama." Todd went on to assert that "the guilt-by-association stuff, it'll serve as a Republican talking point probably for four or eight years, depending on how long Obama is president," but did not condemn such "guilt-by-association stuff" in any way. O'Donnell subsequently noted that "prosecutors said yesterday that there is no evidence of involvement by the president-elect."
  • As Media Matters noted, during the December 9 edition of MSNBC Live, co-host Contessa Brewer baselessly speculated that the criminal charges against Blagojevich might "taint" Obama. Newsweek investigative correspondent Michael Isikoff responded, in part, that "this is a very sticky matter for Obama." He added: "There are a lot of -- a web of interrelationships between Obama and Blagojevich's political world that's gonna make this awkward. For one, one of the key witnesses against Blagojevich who has recently cut a -- believed to have recently cut a deal with the prosecutors is none other than Tony Rezko, Obama's long-time fundraiser, a guy that got a lot of scrutiny during the campaign because they bought adjoining houses together -- they being Obama and Rezko. It's also interesting that Blagojevich had previously held the congressional seat that -- that went on to be held by Rahm Emanuel, the new White House chief of staff."

"Chicago's extreme corruption"

  • In the December 10 edition of ABCNews.com's The Note headlined "My Kind of Town," Rick Klein asserted that "President-elect Barack Obama wanted to bring some Chicago with him to Washington. But with one stiff wind, Chicago has grabbed Obama and his transition -- and blown it off-course for the first time since Election Day." Asserting that "[i]t isn't about the direct implications," Klein went on to write that the "stunning charges leveled against Gov. Rod Blagojevich, D-Ill. mean ... [t]he underbelly of the Obama political operation, with all its Chicago tints and taints, is now fair game for reporters looking for a story."
  • While noting that "Fitzgerald made clear that Obama was not implicated" in the criminal charges against Blagojevich, Chris Matthews also said during the December 9 edition of his MSNBC program, Hardball, that "Barack Obama, of course, rose to political power in a city, Chicago, in a state, Illinois, known for corruption."
  • In a December 9 blog post on National Review Online's The Corner, conservative author David Freddoso wrote that "Barack Obama was always willing to turn a blind eye" to "Chicago's extreme corruption." Freddoso added that Fitzgerald "has worked doggedly to send corrupt politicians (many of them Obama's friends and political allies) to prison."
  • In a December 10 Politico article, senior political writers Ben Smith and Jonathan Martin noted that Fitzgerald said "'there's no reference in the complaint to any conversation involving the president-elect or indicating that the president-elect was aware of it." However, Smith and Martin also asserted that Republicans are attempting "to show that Obama is more a product of Illinois's malfeasance-prone political culture than he is letting on" and reported: "[O]ne prominent Chicago Democrat close to many of those named in the indictment suggested the risk for Obama is 'Whitewater-type exposure.' ... What this Democrat meant with his analogy -- which on the facts so far seems a bit premature -- was that Obama could suffer by being in the proximity of a back-scratching and deal-making culture, even if he was mostly a bystander." Smith and Martin concluded the article by asserting that Obama "seemed still to be in that Chicago straddle when asked about Blagojevich's arrest yesterday, mustering only word that he was 'saddened' and 'sobered' at a time when even other Illinois Democrats were demanding Blagojevich resign."

From the December 9 edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews:

MATTHEWS: Barack Obama, of course, rose to political power in a city, Chicago, in a state, Illinois, known for corruption. But Fitzgerald made clear that Obama was not implicated today. Here he is, quote, "The complaint makes no allegations about the president-elect whatsoever." Obama said this afternoon that he had no contact with Governor Blagojevich over who was gonna fill that Senate seat.

Still, there are many unanswered questions, including that one. What conversation did occur between Blagojevich and Barack Obama about who would fill his Senate seat once he became president? Obama said this afternoon there were none at all.

What conversations, if any, did Governor Blagojevich have with Rahm Emanuel about his replacement as a Democratic candidate in the special election in Chicago? Will this Illinois scandal in any way distract Obama from dealing with the financial crisis? What happens to Obama's Senate seat now? Who gets to fill it? The disgraced indicted governor? The state legislature? Who? And what is it about Illinois that seems to make the state's politics so relentlessly corrupt?

From the December 9 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes:

HUCKABEE: I think the greater issue is that the corrupt -- the corruptible person is the governor. I do not see that Barack Obama would be stupid enough to even worry with it.

HANNITY: All right. Why is he --

HUCKABEE: I just don't.

HANNITY: -- friends with all these radical --

COLMES: Here we go.

HANNITY: -- corrupt people? What -- what does that say about him?

HUCKABEE: Well, I think that his past relationships are certainly questionable. I still think Bill Ayers ought to be in prison. I think he ought to be in prison.

HANNITY: Yeah.

COLMES: Didn't we have an election? Didn't we just decide all this?

HUCKABEE: Yeah, we did. But I'm just talking about Bill Ayers. But Barack Obama, I don't think has any connection --

HANNITY: Yeah.

HUCKABEE: -- to the specific bribery issue --

HANNITY: You know what's interesting?

HUCKABEE: -- because he just has nothing to gain from it. Nothing.

HANNITY: Everything that we heard in the Gennifer Flowers tapes came true.

HUCKABEE: Yeah.

HANNITY: I wonder if we're beginning to see, perhaps, a lot of what we suspected about Barack Obama. A lot -- that I think the Tony Rezko issue is going to be a big problem for him, especially because he's all over this document. The pres -- the word president-elect is mentioned 44 times in the document. Pretty troubling.

HUCKABEE: But one thing let's keep in mind. You never saw the two of them out campaigning a lot together. They weren't doing a whole lot of stuff.

HANNITY: All right. Governor, thanks for being with us.

From the 9 a.m. ET hour of the December 10 edition of MSNBC Live:

O'DONNELL: You know, some Republicans already jumping on this. The Republican National Committee says Obama's comments so far are insufficient at best. Can the president-elect, can Obama avoid being tainted by all this?

TODD: Well, it depends on your definition of taint. I mean, obviously, Chicago Democratic politics, Illinois Democratic politics has a lot of concentric circles. People who used to work for Blagojevich, maybe in his 2002 campaign, have connections now with Obama. But, you know, the guilt-by-association stuff, it'll serve as a Republican talking point probably for four or eight years, depending on how long Obama is president. But, you know, the next thing I think that the Obama folks have to brace themselves for is it's possible somebody in the Obama transition team is on tape talking to Blagojevich, that it's possible that they returned a phone call to the governor. Wouldn't be -- it wouldn't be surprising.

It's unlikely that any of these people would have said anything or somehow agreed to Blagojevich -- I mean, the most exculpatory part, I think, for Obama are Blagojevich's own words and the criticism that he had for Obama's folks that they weren't playing ball with him. So that's -- if there's an upside for Obama. I also expect you will see Obama today probably have a stronger statement condemning Governor Blagojevich. I think yesterday there were some folks who were surprised that he -- that it was a passive statement -- very much in Obama's demeanor. He always is very cautious in initial reactions to things like this. I imagine we might see a stronger statement today.

O'DONNELL: Yeah, and prosecutors said yesterday that there is no evidence of involvement by the president-elect --

TODD: Right.

O'DONNELL: -- but people are raising questions about Obama's relationship with Blagojevich.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by Caseysprings (December 10, 2008 4:58 pm ET)
         
      Its Christmas time, they have nothing else to talk about.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by JLyons (December 10, 2008 5:03 pm ET)
         
      There is no relationship, it is the same as Governor Spitzer and Hillary Clinton. God I hate the Media when they start playing these games.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by captfoster2 (December 10, 2008 7:39 pm ET)
           

        Everyone...

        Keep this to yourself.... but don't let Hannity or any of the other rightwing blowhards that not only are Blagojevich and Obama politicians from Illinois...

        But.....ahem.... um...... ah..... well...... Hillary Clinton is from Park Ridge, IL

        If the rightwing got reminded of this information.... there's no telling what they might do!

        Mums the word....... ok.    ;)

        Report Abuse
    • Author by historygeek001 (December 10, 2008 5:04 pm ET)
         

      Raise your hand if you're surprised that the media is trying to connect them when there is no connection.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by JLyons (December 10, 2008 5:07 pm ET)
           

        Not at all.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by DAWUSS (December 10, 2008 5:12 pm ET)
             

          And there are polls out there asking if this taints (their) image of Obama. I'm curious if we'll ever learn the results.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by Caseysprings (December 10, 2008 5:18 pm ET)
               

            Dawuss if the media have what they want it will taint the image of Obama . The media will drive this until the next big news story cycle.  I never bought the story that the media protected Obama, they will do whatever they can to destroy him.

            Report Abuse
      • Author by Caseysprings (December 10, 2008 5:11 pm ET)
           

        Ia m not surpised at all. 

        Report Abuse
    • Author by wesley (December 10, 2008 5:20 pm ET)
         

       -- several media figures and outlets have used the Blagojevich scandal as an opportunity to engage in suggestions of guilt-by-association against President-elect Barack Obama. -- mmfa

      Thanks to the tip from bruce1ace...the media list that mmfa refers to also includes Rachel Maddow of MSNBC:

       -- Has Rod Blagojevich materially ruined Barack Obama‘s political honeymoon? --

       -- Is there a risk that this scandal could stick to the president-elect? --

       -- the potential fallout for the Obama team. --

      Like the Dutch boy with too few fingers to plug all the leaks in the dike...mmfa can't even keep a leading liberal TV host from baseless speculations about the Blago/Obama connection.

      Charge on Don Quixote!

      Report Abuse
      • Author by commonsenseliberal (December 10, 2008 5:36 pm ET)
           

        OK, I'm not sure what your point is (other than trying to make Maddow look bad), but here's the thing:  Maddow is the host of her program.  She has the responsibility to ask questions, some of them tough at times.  The questions she asked do not claim that there is a relationship between Blago and Obama.  They don't even hint at a connection.  They are questions whether or not, in the eyes of the media and the American populace, Obama will feel any fall out from this situation.  The only thing Obama and Blago have in common in this situation, is the Senate Seat and the state of Illinois.  That's it.

        Rachel Maddow was not positing that Obama was guilty by association.  She was asking (1) about Obama's transition - and IF there is any ruination of Obama's 'political honeymoon' (No - as most Americans know better than to believe this kind of bs, unless they're of the partisan hackery type.); (2) IS there a risk that it could stick to the pres-elect (No, because Obama has nothing to do with the situation, and has even repudiated Blago.  They don't even like each other!!); (3) Potential fallout for the Obama team, as in, WILL there be any political fallout for the Obama team (No, because again, only right-wing hacks would see Obama as even remotely associated with this).

        And of course, it doesn't matter to you right wing snotrags that Obama has formally requested the RESIGNATION of Blago.

        Finally, MMFA's goal isn't to "...keep a leading liberal TV host from baseless speculations about the Blag/Obama connection".  MMFA's mission isn't to 'keep' anything from happening.  MMFA's mission is to expose conservative misinformation.  And for you and Bruceace to bring up Rachel Maddow's show, spin her questions to make it look like she is making baseless speculations, when you know for a fact that she's not dissing Obama.  Disingenuous to say the least.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by wesley (December 10, 2008 5:53 pm ET)
             

           -- I'm not sure what your point is (other than trying to make Maddow look bad) -- csl

          Let me help you out...I'm not trying to make anyone look bad. I'm just pointing out the silliness of mmfa selectively targeting their bombing runs on this issue. Here's what Contessa Brewer said that got her strafed by mmfa:

           -- How will it affect his transition effort and his image going forward? --

           -- Does this taint him in any way? --

          Here's what Maddow said that elicited nothing from mmfa:

           -- Has Rod Blagojevich materially ruined Barack Obama‘s political honeymoon? --

           -- Is there a risk that this scandal could stick to the president-elect? --

           -- the potential fallout for the Obama team --

          There's not a speck of difference between the two...except Brewer plays for the wrong team...in the world according to mmfa.

          Brewer baselessly speculates...while Maddow speculates baselessly...it's all one and the same in reality.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by DAWUSS (December 10, 2008 5:57 pm ET)
               

            It's a "Yes/No" vs. "Somewhat, moderately, and very" difference. Same thing, just worded differently to produce a different range of answers.

            Just my analysis

            Report Abuse
          • Author by tommy (December 10, 2008 6:14 pm ET)
               

            No difference.  MMFA's weak attempt to make this some conservative media conspiracy against Obama is ridiculous.  Sure, there are your Hannitys who will be Hannitys, but by and large the angle many will steer this story from puts Obama squarely in the meat of the headlines.  Maybe it's not fair, but it is his seat, and his governor, so there can be no easy separation.  However, those that convict Obama based on this "connection" should be called out as well, absolutely.  But to act as if even mentioning his name as its associated with this story in and of itself is cause to haul out some misinformation slap on the hands is silly.  Let it play out, Obama will be fine, in my opinion. 

            He better get used to this kind of thing, if the media loves one thing it's to knock down someone a peg or two, after they've just propped him up.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by oscar the grouch (December 10, 2008 8:05 pm ET)
                 

              Also, one had to dig very deep into most of the media stories to find the party affliation of the IL governor.  MMFA was all over the media last year for failing to disclose party affliations, especially when an R or GOP was involved.

              Report Abuse
              • Author by deeznuts (December 10, 2008 10:54 pm ET)
                   

                Wow.

                Not only are you completely incorrect...but spectacularly so.

                link

                Now go sit in the corner and think about what you've done.

                Report Abuse
                • Author by deeznuts (December 10, 2008 10:58 pm ET)
                     

                  For those who won't bother to check the link:

                  The NY Times, LA Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, AJC (?), Christian Science Monitor, Boston Globe, ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, even the UK Guardian, China Daily and Die Welt ALL had Blagojevich's political affiliation RIGHT NEXT TO HIS NAME.

                  Links are provided for verification.

                  Oscar fails at the Internet.

                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by JLyons (December 10, 2008 11:30 pm ET)
                       

                    Oscar is just playing games, it has been blased everywehre that he is a DEM.

                    Thanks deeznuts for setting the record straight. Dont you just love the internet age?

                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by oscar the grouch (December 11, 2008 12:13 am ET)
                       

                    Seven newspapers out of how many in the US? You looked at those, I looked at others along with a few websites (and MMFA who was so forceful at noting the lack of party affliation in the media last year, conveniently overlooked it here).

                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by political_left-religious_right (December 11, 2008 9:27 am ET)
                         

                      Seven newspapers out of how many in the US?

                      Come on, Oscar, deeznuts gave us a good smattering of some of the most significant newspapers.  No one in his right mind is going to ask him to provide links to a majority of the nation's newspapers, or anything like it.  Strike one.

                      You looked at those, I looked at others along with a few websites

                      What did you look at?  Have you provided links?  Strike two.

                      (and MMFA who was so forceful at noting the lack of party affliation in the media last year, conveniently overlooked it here).

                      You already made this claim earlier, and it was shot down.  Making it again is a sign of a lost argument.  Strike three.

                      Report Abuse
                  • Author by Tbone Slickens (December 12, 2008 12:38 pm ET)
                       

                    The big three morning shows didn't metion party affiliation at all.  None, zero, zip, nada...

                    Bad Matt, Diane and whatever shlepp is in front of the camera at cbs.

                    Report Abuse
      • Author by temphandle desist93baker (December 11, 2008 6:44 am ET)
           

        Sorry Wesley, but Rachel Maddow has been doing the Chicken Little thing since way before the election. The fact that she, now a member of the corporate media, feels the need to fan the flames in order to pump up her own ratings and justify her existence is no surprise to anyone who has watched, or listened to her for any length of time.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by proudconservative (December 10, 2008 6:00 pm ET)
         

      Not that the leftists ever tried to link Mr. Libby's misspeaking to his superiors or to the Bush administration as a whole.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by snoopy (December 10, 2008 6:09 pm ET)
           

        Libby, Libby,... oh yeah, the criminally indicted slug who committed crimes at the direction of the bush administration. Gee, I can see why you would suggest that one. Not even close...

        Report Abuse
        • Author by proudconservative (December 10, 2008 6:16 pm ET)
             

          snoopdawg,

          Evidence? or a leftist wetdream?

          Report Abuse
          • Author by snoopy (December 10, 2008 6:33 pm ET)
               

            Fact. That's why Bush commuted his sentance and will most likely issue a pardon to help cover up the whole affair. But don't let that get in the way of your attempted comparison to Blag and Obama.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by proudconservative (December 10, 2008 9:07 pm ET)
                 

              furryfriendofwoodstock,

              Cover up!?!  Two years after knowing that he wasn't the leak,fitzgerald get libby on a process crime.  He never outed plame.  Two years of wasted time when fitz knew it was armitage that leaked the name.

              So I guess it won't stop me from comparing scooter's misspeaking with Axelrod's 3 week delayed clarification of his misspeaking.

              Report Abuse
    • Author by robotchubby (December 10, 2008 6:09 pm ET)
         
      I want to know what the scoop is on the Gennifer Flower reference.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by fantagor (December 10, 2008 7:16 pm ET)
         
      Attention trolls: Libby was PART OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION. Blagojevich, Illinois governor, has NO PART IN THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION NOR WILL HE. Maddow speculating on the flak Obama will receive for knowing Blagojevich is proven out by the likes of Hannity the Manatee. She never made connections, just predicted (correctly) that others will make spurious politically motivated connections.

      Please, trolls, stop making apples to aircraft carriers comparisons, and stop comparing Maddow, a journalist, to Hannity, a clueless hack. It's embarrassing.

      Randy
      Report Abuse
    • Author by jonesjax2374 (December 10, 2008 9:15 pm ET)
         

      Heard Hannity screeching on the way home (must be masochistic today) about Obama being FRIENDS with IL Gov.  I thought it was quite the opposite.  Is there anything that implies they were friends?  I don't see any connection to this scum with Obama, other than they had to play nice on the Chicago playground - seems to me O didn't care for the man.   No there there, oui?

      Report Abuse
      • Author by my4cents (December 10, 2008 10:18 pm ET)
           

        In the Great American's world, facts do not matter. You just have to repeat freedom, liberty , America is god's gift to man etc, enough number of times.

        If someone gets his pocket picked in Chicago tomorrow and Obama does not prove that he did, he is guilty.

        Chicago politics dirty. Obama from Chicago. Proof enough to Rightwingers that Obama is dirty.

        Sheesh.No wonder the country is going down the drain if 10-12 M of its population is listening/watching this idiot 2-4 hours a day.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by semiarid (December 10, 2008 10:44 pm ET)
         

      Hannity is a monster. Limbaugh is twice a monster. Restore the Fairness Doctrine asap!

      Report Abuse
    • Author by donaldmaddog5642 (December 10, 2008 11:54 pm ET)
         

      After repeatedly stating that there is NO relationship between the Illinois Gov. and Obama, these Media Hacks STILL also repeatedly stated that "there are many more questions" about the relationship.  WTF???  Just WHO are the questioners?  Name names, already!  "Well, er, you know, there MAY be something there, ya know.  We're not sure, but there just MIGHT be a connection, after all..."  Let's just keep this story going, but also make sure that Obama's name is always used in the same sentence.  If we pound the rumors home often enough, we can do harm to Obama.  Isn't that the whole point?

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (December 11, 2008 1:18 am ET)
           
        HANNITY: You know what's interesting?...Everything that we heard in the Gennifer Flowers tapes came true.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (December 11, 2008 1:24 am ET)
             

          (Bad format Box!)

          "came true"? who uses that phrase except for Hannity and 5 year-olds? Like "my dream about the new bicycle came true!", or "repeating something enough times made it come true!".

          I was sort of busy & out of the loop, and I actually heard some Of Fitzgeralds statements on Hannity's show for the first time. Seanny's spin was great, he played the line about Obama not being named in the complaint, and noted that often major factors aren't named in the case, figuring from there that the statement was pretty damning for Obama.

          Meaning, using Hannity's logic, the case is pretty damning for Sir Isaac Newton, Burt Reynolds, and me, as none of us were named in the charges. This may be more entertaining than the birth certificate "scandal".

          Report Abuse
      • Author by Tbone Slickens (December 11, 2008 4:13 am ET)
           

        Really?  No relationship...at all? 

        Previous PhotoNext Photo 1 | 2 | 3

         (AP)


        .hideit {display:none} if (ANSW.Trigger.altClickSupported()) { if (document.getElementById('hideit'))document.getElementById('hideit').disabled=true; } Answers.com
        Report Abuse
        • Author by temphandle desist93baker (December 11, 2008 6:51 am ET)
             

          Wow, Tbone. Are you trying to sat that the Senator from Illinois met and shook hands with the Governor of Illinois? Say it isn't so!

          Report Abuse
          • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (December 11, 2008 10:14 am ET)
               

            I'm just impressed with how many "relationships" I'm involved in at this very moment. Apparently, everybody who I've ever shaken hands with. I got game.

            Report Abuse
        • Author by DorisRussell (December 11, 2008 8:57 am ET)
             

          Senator and Governor from same state ?

          Report Abuse
        • Author by Tbone Slickens (December 11, 2008 9:25 pm ET)
             

          Ah what the hey! 

          Rahm Emanuel Avoids Reporters' Blagojevich Questions

          Play Video PlayVideo

          Has this happened before?  A Scandal BEFORE inauguration?  Got to hand it to you dems...

          Hillary isn't looking so bad now!

          Report Abuse
        • Author by catsagainstbush (December 12, 2008 3:09 pm ET)
             

          Really?  No relationship...at all?

           <img src = http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/rumsfeld-hussein.jpg>

          Report Abuse
        • Author by catsagainstbush (December 12, 2008 3:12 pm ET)
             

          Wow! Every person I have shaken hands with I am responsible. Same talking point during the campaign... Why is it that McCain during the campaign got away with every relationship he had, including Pastors Hagee and Parsley but Obama was tainted by even people whom he worked as if he condoned their past activities? I'm still waiting for HageeFest considering the media blew its load on the Festival of Wrights...

          Report Abuse
    • Author by MiddleLeft (December 11, 2008 8:50 am ET)
         

      "Barack Obama, of course, rose to political power in a city, Chicago, in a state, Illinois, known for corruption."

      Oh darn.  I'm from Illinois too and I worked for the state for 30 years so I guess my graduate degree and a lifetime of accomplishments are also tainted according to Mathews.  We are all doomed.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by donaldmaddog5642 (December 11, 2008 10:17 am ET)
           

        Louisiana is one of the most famous states for corruption.  I was born there, went to school there (grades 1-12, undergrad and grad) so I am corrupt.  Got me!  I give up!  Come and put the cuffs on me!  Tbone Slickens sho' nuff has my number, boy.  Jes lookit how he's got that there PICTURE, plain as day, of that lyin' rascal, Barack HUSSEANE Obama, who used to be a, what?, Senator, shakin' hands wid dat Illinoise guv-ner.  

        Report Abuse
        • Author by Tbone Slickens (December 11, 2008 9:12 pm ET)
             

          You said there was NO (your emphasis) relationship.  I just find it hard to believe there was NO (my emphasis) relationship between a former State Senator/US Senator/Pres elect and a State Gov, from the same state that supported each others campaigns.  I have no doubt BO is innocent of any malfeasance.  I just want the investigation to be complete.  He doesn't have anything to worry about, so let the investigation run it's course.  It will be better for him in the long run. 

          We just need to know what Obama knew and when did he know it.  That's all.  My prediction is Rahm the knife wielder will take the fall.  Any bets?  

          Report Abuse
    • Author by jsapere (December 11, 2008 9:24 am ET)
         
      T-Bone, How about a picture of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Hussein (Google it)? Was there a relationship there? Guilt by association, George Bush and Saddam Hussein worked together in a 'relationship' to torture and gas Iraqi's, to support Hussein's dictatorship, and to 'support Al Qaeda in the 9-11 attacks(according to Bush 43).' Hey, this guilt by association thing really works :) I wonder how many pictures of people shaking hands I can find to support my accusation that there's plenty of "guilt by association" to go around.... FREAK
      Report Abuse
      • Author by donaldmaddog5642 (December 11, 2008 4:38 pm ET)
           

        Here, HERE, Jsapere!  If guilt by association is a legal term, then everybody that worked in or around the White House is a criminal, including the gardner.  At some big-shot overseas summit conference recently a video showed not ONE leader even wanting to shake the hand of our beloved President-not ONE.  He was given the classic "cold shoulder".  So that let Japan, Israel, France, Germany, and the rest off the hook.  I guess the only way for a politician to be free of "guilt by, etc." is to NEVER shake hands with anybody or even nod in their direction.  You can never tell if the hand you shake today may be holding a knife to stab you in the back when the time is right.  

        Report Abuse
      • Author by Tbone Slickens (December 11, 2008 9:16 pm ET)
           

        Ask and ye shall receive!  You got to go back to '83 when we were Allies, but anything to help! 


        February 25, 2003

        For more information contact:
        Joyce Battle (202) 994-7145

        (Right: Iraqi President Saddam Hussein greets Donald Rumsfeld, then special envoy of President Ronald Reagan, in Baghdad on December 20, 1983.)

        Report Abuse
    • Author by jerrycDenver (December 11, 2008 2:41 pm ET)
         
      Oh boy - a tempest in a toilet - I don't even want to look.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by sherlock6047 (December 11, 2008 3:41 pm ET)
         

      There was a working relationship between Blago and Obama. What's the harm in looking into it?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by elvis22 (December 11, 2008 4:45 pm ET)
         

      Difficult to take Hannity seriously. No wonder Colmes is leaving.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by sherlock6047 (December 11, 2008 7:24 pm ET)
         

      Wow, the Left has been playing the guilt-by-association card for years with Republicans but now you're crying because the media is applying the same standard to Obama! Welcome to the big leagues, boys and girls. Now it's time for you to wake up and realize that Obama is a politician just like the rest of them. He's not some innocent who just happened to make his way through the muck of Chicago politics without getting dirty. Grow up.

      As for media bias: Google "Blagojevich indictment" and look for party affiliation. Then Google "Stevens indictment" and look for party affiliation. There's a reason the media is being accused of bias in favor of the Dems.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by catsagainstbush (December 12, 2008 3:17 pm ET)
           

        Guilt-by-association card? Yes, those who suggested the other party were allies of Saddam Hussein and Bin Laden, those who suggested that just because they opposed that party's War on Terror were terrorist-sympathizers...those who suggested that Obama was a TERRORIST because he worked with William Ayers, those who suggested that Obama HATED America because his pastor was Jeremiah Wright....I'm sure they were all Democrats who accused the poor, little Republicans of all those things. No, guilt-by-association is the Republicans' game and with the help of the media, they tried to paint Obama as someone who supported Wright's rhetoric and Ayers and wanted to bring down the country.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by Tbone Slickens (December 13, 2008 9:15 am ET)
             

          catsagain'bush posted:

          they tried to paint Obama as someone who supported Wright's rhetoric and Ayers and wanted to bring down the country.

          WE didn't try and paint Barry as someone who supported Wright and Ayers.  Obama DID support Wright and Ayers. 

          Go to your google and look and see how long Barry sat in the pews at Trinity United Church of Christ.  I'll save you the trouble; 20 years cats.  If that doesn't shout support from the rooftops I don't know what does. 

          As for Ayers, he is one in a cast of thousands of FAR left wing nuts who Barry supported at times in his meteoric rise to power.  Nobody as far as I've seen says that Barry commited CRIMES with Ayers, but that he HAS supported and befriended the hippie terrorist.  He kicked off his state senate run in Ayers house. 

          Please feel free to refute these facts with facts.







          Report Abuse
    • Author by catsagainstbush (December 12, 2008 3:13 pm ET)
         

      To conservatives who want to create these FAUX scandals such as this and the birth certificate, 

      YOU LOST! GET OVER IT!

      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.