Ever heard of Tony Rezko
Posted By: ?? on 2008-09-05
In Reply to: I briefly thought something similar when I first heard of him, - but then I listened to what he had to say
Do your research.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Biden also has ties to Tony Rezko...
http://mpinkeyes.wordpress.com/2008/08/27/joe-biden-has-ties-to-tony-rezko/
Have you ever wondered where Tony Blair went?
Case in point.
Could Tony Blairs Tight Fist be Coming to a City Near You...sm
I ran across this article today and it explains from British citizens point of view what happens when you allow leadership to dismantle the principles (Constitution) of a nation. I understand the *concept* behind the Patriot Act, wiretapping, and detainee laws (where the president is the decider), but if the public lets the powers that be slip in laws like this with no protest we could find ourselves under arrest and DNA swabbed for not returning a child's ball that landed in your yard.
(Long read but interesting.)
The Way Police Treat Us Verges on Criminal
Guilty until proven innocent now seems to be the watchword of a government that increasingly treats its law-abiding citizens with absolute contempt
Henry Porter
Sunday October 29, 2006
The Observer
A father and his eight-year-old son got off a train at Blackpool on a Friday evening two weeks ago to be confronted by a number of police officers moving passengers towards a scanner. There was a mildly threatening manner about them and it was clear that they expected everyone to pass through the scanner, which they said was being used to search for knives.
The man, whose name is Danny, quietly told the police that unless they had a very good reason, he would not be searched. One or two passengers hesitated, then joined him in refusing to go through the scanner. The police were clearly disgruntled, but couldn't do anything because Danny was right: they had to have reasonable grounds for suspecting he was carrying a knife in order to search him. 'I am not some rabid left winger or civil libertarian,' he wrote in an email to me. 'It just seems we are allowing a police state to be developed without an argument.' On the phone, he seemed to modify this by saying that the police behaviour had been oppressive.
Thank God there are still people like Danny who know the law and understand that part of its fragile essence is the respect for the rights of the innocent citizen when confronted with authority. The British Transport Police may insist that its Operation Shield, as this random trawl is known, is for the common good in that it fights knife crime, but think twice about the attitude it betrays and you realise that it is another small erosion in the esteem for the individual. Such behaviour makes everyone a suspect.
Tony Blair talks incessantly about respect, yet there are few who have done more to degrade authority's respect for the public. Nowhere is that better seen than in the behaviour of the police, which gradually becomes more coercive and imbued with the idea that we are all bad hats until we prove otherwise. We now live in a country where the idea of wrongful arrest has become a historic curiosity and where anyone can be arrested for the slightest offence and compelled to become part of the government's DNA database.
We live in a country where young boys - one was just seven - are taken aside and questioned for trying to knock conkers out of chestnut trees on public ground. Where a grandmother whose neighbour accused her of not returning a ball kicked into her garden was arrested, fingerprinted and required to give her DNA. The police went through every room in her house, even her daughter's drawers, before letting her go without charge or caution.
Where two sisters can be arrested after a peaceful protest about climate change, held in solitary confinement for 36 hours without being allowed to make a phone call, then told not to talk to each other as a condition of their bail. As this paper reported, their money, keys, computers, discs and phones were confiscated, their homes searched.
There is much more, all of it enabled by Blair's laws and encouraged by a vindictive and erroneous contention that defendants' rights must be reduced in the pursuit of more and quicker prosecutions. Our prisons are full, problem teenagers are, by default, exiled to a kind of outlawry and every citizen becomes the subject of an almost hysterical need by the authorities to check up on and chivvy them.
The government regards us not just as wedded to too many regrettable vices - smoking, speeding, drinking too much, eating unhealthy food and taking no exercise - but also as innately prone to law-breaking. Perhaps with good reason, since, according to the Liberal Democrat homes affairs spokesman, Nick Clegg, some 3,000 criminal offences have been created by Labour. The more crimes there are, the more criminals there will be.
Mass surveillance has begun on our motorways and in our town centres. Metropolitan drivers increasingly find themselves pressed into numberplate-recognition camera traps on the same principle that inspires Operation Shield. Everyone has something to hide unless they can prove otherwise, which is why the police also enthusiastically pursue samples for the DNA database. (Incidentally, by next year, the total number of profiles will rise to three million, one in five of which will belong to black people.)
The police are in their very own heaven and demand more and more powers of instant justice, a contradiction in terms if ever there was one. These will allow them to crush people's cars, issue more on-the-spot fines and ban 'undesirables' from any area they choose without having to go to court. Even parish councils are to become part of this culture of minatory bossiness. Instead of having to apply to central government to introduce new bylaws, they are to be given powers by Ruth Kelly, the Communities and Local Government Minister, to levy instant £100 fines for skateboarding, not cleaning up dog mess, busking and, no doubt, scrumping for apples and playing Pooh sticks. How will it end - with CCTV cameras watching small boys for inappropriate behaviour in the vicinity of horse chestnuts?
In his frantic terminality, Blair plans the sinister information-sharing index, otherwise known as the universal child register, and last week was musing that we should all have our DNA stored on the national base. Link this to his earlier remarks about identifying problem children who might grow up to be a menace to society by intervening before they were born and you begin to feel the chill of the technology-driven authoritarianism.
What runs through all this seems to be a rather surprising dislike of the British people. It was once possible to believe the government's unusual attention to law, order and behaviour was benevolent yet ill-conceived. Now it looks more like the result of late-onset sociopathy, influenced by a long period in power and the degenerate entanglement between Downing Street and the seething red-top newspapers.
The prevailing account of Britain in the current political establishment has become deeply pessimistic and, to my mind, wrong. Yes, we have problems with home-grown terrorism, loutishness, a swelling underclass, unintegrating minorities, but there is another story. Britain is also a success and it should occur to one of our political leaders to defy the orthodoxy of decline and compliment the nation on its adaptability and deep reserves of virtue and toleration.
Think of the charitable activity in this country, of the level of public debate that wells up in BBC programmes such as Any Questions, the deep interest in history, the eagerness of the audiences at arts festivals all over Britain, the humour and generosity of spirit, the commitment to local communities, to understanding each other's needs and of the array of passions and hobbies which absorb so many millions of people whose quiet, law-abiding fulfilment as Britons goes undescribed by the furious negativity of the moment. It is these people, with their stored-up virtue and unself-conscious decency, who the government seeks to turn into suspects and infantilise by its morbid intrusion.
It is not the government's business to encroach on our experience as individuals in a democracy, to threaten us with so much oppressive legislation and always to assume our guilt. But there is another reason and that is because we are soon going to have to have the debate about individual liberty in the context of rapid climate change. That will only work if the government treats us like adults and says: 'Look, this is potentially the greatest crisis civilisation has ever faced and we need your help.' The resulting contract must be between equals - the people and the state - and in a relationship where respect flows both ways.That, ultimately, is what this nagging and suspicious government threatens.
Obama's poor judgement...Michael Pfleger, William Ayers, Tony Rezco..
Jeremiah Wright, Franklin Raines, Jim Johnson, Jamie Gorelick, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac big bucks. We could both go on and on. All politicians are crooked to some extent. Face it, neither one is a great candidate, we have louse options on both sides this time. Fortunately, whoever does win will only serve one term.
Rezko Reality
Summary
On the defensive over the extent of multiple McCain homes, the GOP candidate strikes back. But his TV spot gives an oversimplified and misleading account of how Obama bought his own $1.6 million house in Chicago.
The ad says Chicago power broker Tony Rezko got "political favors" including "$14 million from taxpayers." But there's no evidence of any connection to the Obama home purchase. The $14 million was to build apartments for low-income seniors. Obama wrote a letter supporting the "worthy" project, but both men say Rezko didn't ask for the letter.
It says Rezko "purchased part of the property [Obama] couldn't afford." Rezko's wife did buy an adjoining tract but later sold the land at a profit. Obama paid market price for his home.
McCain launched the attack after Obama ran one capitalizing on McCain's inability to recall for an interviewer how many homes the McCains own. Obama's ad says it's seven. The best tally we've seen puts the figure at eight, counting all the apartments and homes owned by McCain's wife, Cindy, and various family trusts, for themselves and their children.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/154782
Obama - Rezko
http://www.newsmax.com/smith/barack_obama_tony_rezko/2008/09/02/126890.html
Personally, I never said that, but Wright, Rezko,
nm
Yeah, Rev Wright does not matter, Rezko does not
nm
What about judgement? Wright, Rezko, Ayers,
nm
Why do Wright, Rezko, Khalidi, Odinga, etc. not
nm
Worse is that you ignore Ayers, Wright, Rezko
nm
Respectable? Like his friends Wright, Rezko, Ayres
nm
Fitzgerald renews interest in Rezko-Obama deal...
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/?pageId=83760
Hero of what? Hero to Wright, Rezko, Ayers, and
nm
Heard that before.
When was that? Oh yeah! Gee, I really miss Nan, I wish she'd come back to the board. LOL!!!
I apologize to those who don't know what I'm talking about - again, the guilty party knows full well.
Anyway how's this for a subject? - The mayor New Orleans was a Republican before he ran, and switched his party affiliation to Democrat before he was successfully elected. Landreau is a Democrat. The Louisiana governor is a Democrat. Seems we have a lot of democratic leaders in an otherwise supposedly Republican state.
Wonder what effect if any that has had on the slow and disinterested response from the federal govt. in helping the people of New Orleans?
Everybody's heard of her now, eh?
That was a long article, but I think it did highlight the fact that Bush is neither a friendly or a courteous guy - insiders have been saying that for years. Can't use the excuse that he didn't want some antiwar journalist raking him over the coals - that kind of journalist would never have been allowed within the same building as he, if she had that kind of reputation.
It seems clear that the Bushes consider themselves American Royalty and that's unfortunate, because America was born from a resentment of just that kind of above-the-law holier-than-thou don't- speak-until-he-does kind of nonsense.
This is the first I heard of this.
Thanks for posting it. I love the title, Water the Bushes. :-)
Have you heard this one before?
The proof is in the pudding.
That's because I have heard sm
holding one's breath until one turns blue tends to affect cognition. But I have only heard that, I am not sure there is any truth to it. Would you happen to know?
I heard that.
It was published in some conservative magazine but was unfounded. He never went to school in Africa at all. The magazine said that they got it from the Clinton campaign. I am wondering since when did a conservative publication print anything the Clinton campaign has to say. Anyway, I still think knowing first hand something about Muslims and Islam would be beneficial.
Well, I have heard
that it is "HARD WORK" and he is "WORKIN HARD" I know this is true coz this is what he told us in the last prez debate.
only heard a little of it, but
apparently did not realize he had a "hot" mike and said something about obama may be talking down to the black communities. now it has been "taken out of context" and he has apologized and made it clear he supports obama.
Sorry. I did not know that. Had not heard that.
I will post link from now on. My apologies.
No....the last I heard they really don't know...
who is going to speak when. I had not heard he cancelled. Several have been postponed because of the hurricane.
I heard this, but....
I heard the story too. I have not been able to find a credible source to be able to acknowledge or deny it. But I think she would have some very very serious problems. I remember some religious leaders were trying to ban the Harry Potter books and there was a huge uproar. People may think she's going to do this or that, but I think we have to remember she has to get approval from congress. The VP alone cannot make these decisions and pass laws. It would have to be voted on.
I heard what he said....he did not say the...
economy was strong, that is not what he said this morning. He said the foundation of the economy is strong, and it is, or the situation on wall street today would have been much worse. He, in fact, said that the economy was in crisis and it needed to be dealt with in the way of reforming of lending companies, regulating non-bank lenders, etc. (non-bank meaning lenders not backed by the FDIC)...which all makes very good sense, since all these lenders folding and the housing decline have more to do with the economy going downhill than anything else. At least he is not talking about raising taxes on already stressed companies like Mr. Obama is.
And come to think of it...how can Obama give a tax break to 95% of people when right about 40% don't even pay taxes? How can you give a tax break to someone who doesn't pay taxes anyway? Oh yeah...you tax the companies that provide about 80% of the jobs in this country and give those 40% a freebie. And somehow that is supposed to help?
I heard
I heard reports he did not quit.
as you may have heard
long ago in pre-history class, the prez and VP work FOR us. If they want the job, they have to communicate with us, even when they don't like it or are having problems with Todd.
Here is what I heard
Okay, I've been working all day but DH has had the TV up full blast (he's a news junkie), so have caught things here and there.
My understanding is this (and someone please correct me if I'm wrong because I don't want to pass on false information).
JM and BO both go to WA and there is a big meeting with the pres and all the other people. I heard that things were "cordial" when the press was in taking pictures but once they left there was yelling, arguing, fists pounding on desks, etc, etc. I heard it did not end very good at all and people ended leaving and sounds like some people won't talk to others. My understanding is that the democrats proposed a solution, but it didn't hold the responsible parties responsible, and what they submitted would still let the CEOs and higher up people walk away with all their money and the American people would be left the ones who pay for the bail out. I understand the republicans said no it wasn't good enough and JM refused to back down and said the American people should not be the ones to pay for this. I've heard a lot of other people talk and they said it was not a good proposal at all.
I believe (again this is what I think and have caught from tid bits here and there) that JM wants to stay in WA until this crisis is worked out but BO wants a debate no matter what and he wanted to hurry to get where ever the debate is and he ended up telling the people "Call me if you need me" and then left.
That's my understanding on it. I've been listing to all the news stations and cannot even begin to tell you what all the people said about this because they say it so much better than I ever could. But that is my brief summary.
I was just stunned thinking this is a major major crisis and it needs to be resolved and BO doesn't want to stick around and says "Call me if you need me".
All I say is brother, what a mess we have.
I heard
They were threated with martial law if they did not vote for it.
Something that I have heard nothing about...sm
is medical care of veterans coming back from Iraq and Afganistan. Their injuries are so severe that in prior wars they would be dead. Now they are coming back alive but so severely injured, brain injuries, limb loss, PSD, etc. The veterans should come first, along with their families, national guard, regular army, navy, air force and marines. They should be getting the best care that money can buy, not only for their acute injuries, but for their rehabilitation. It is a disgrace that they become invisible when they come home.
Sorry, I never heard his name.
Republican radio talk show host? Well, why does that not surprise me?
I heard about this too.
Where does it stop?
Had not heard this before....
http://www.newsmax.com/timmerman/obama_harvard_/2008/09/23/133199.html
You can do a search on the names and find the video of Sutton talking about Al-Mansour raising money for Obama (long before he ran for office...money being raised to help with his education). This Al-Mansour is quite a character. Read up on him. Very enlightening.
IS a man known by the company he keeps?
and yet I have heard you say more than once
that you are not voting for Obama, but against McCain. Is that not hammering McCain? And who says that my REAL reasons have not already been posted? I am perfectly capable of thinking for myself and tired of being called names for not thinking like others. It is silly because it doesn't matter to anyone who has already made up his/her mind why I vote the way I vote. I don't wish to be called a racist or rabid or any other names anymore, so while I might read this because I really have nothing else to do, I think that I have had enough posting.
I think I just heard....
the founding fathers screaming and whirling in their graves. No wonder this country is in the shape its in.
From what I heard
There were two black panthers. One of them had a night stick and he was escorted away by police, but the second one lives there and is actually a polling officer or watcher and so he has a right to be there. but I don't think he should be allowed to be there dressed that way. He told a polling officer that they were tired of white supremacy and that's why they were there.
okay - what I heard -
Okay - exactly what Obama said is that "you are absolutely right, McCain has not questioned my Muslim faith", GS then says "your Christian faith" and Obama replies, "I mean that McCain has not suggested that I am Muslim".
He is saying that the McCain campaign was not bringing that out themselves because they knew it was not true and that it was just lies being spread by people.
He NEVER said he was a Muslim and it is clear to me that he is saying he is not.
Last I heard,
spelling/grammar police are against the law on this board.
Yep you heard right?
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/11/13/officials-obama-considering-hillary-clinton-secretary-state/
I just want to say I hope you will feel better soon and I do not want to upset you, but I will be praying for you that you get the best doctors that will fix and correct the area in your back. You take care and get better. Believe it or not, you will be missed.
and where does this come from? Never heard that before now - nm
x
When I heard.............sm
that when the Walmart tried to close its store but customers kept shopping and refused to leave because they had been waiting for hours for the store to open and "we aren't leaving" I about lost it. No decency whatsoever. 
I heard that! sm
I had to check this morning to see if I had a waddle under my chin and feathers on my posterior! LOL
What I heard was ....(sm)
that Bush did come to an agreement with the dems, but now won't let go of the money. His plan is not to bail them out, but rather make sure they have an *orderly bankrupcy* -- whatever that means.
Also, that nice little bill he just squeaked through for the *right of conscience* thing goes into effect either today or tomorrow. Yeah, it was aimed at abortion, but is very broad in its interpretation. For example: If you have a child who needs antibiotics, the child is prescribed antibiotics by doc, you go to the drug store, and guess what.....the cashier just happens to be a Christian Scientologist....(who, by the way does not believe in antibiotics). That cashier can refuse to sell you that drug and does not have to give any explanation whatsoever to either you or the company they work for. Passing this bill will take about $44 million, and how much money will it take to reverse it? That would be our tax dollars at work! Nice going Busher!!!
I have never heard of this before until now.
Does he not believe in B-day gifts and Christmas gifts? And if so, what is the real reason?
The last I heard was he was not going to tax the
nm
I just heard on TV that he's not planning
on talking about the war in Iraq, per se, but more about the war on terror.
Does this mean he's targeted another country to "spread freedom" to? With 74% of the American public thinking Iraq was a mistake, I'd LOVE to see him try to sell another war to this Congress, after all his lies the first time.
Having 9/11 being an inside job is only a notch or two lower than using that tragedy to promote his own personal war against Iraq, so I don't think it would surprise me.
I don't know if I can stomach watching him or not, so I haven't decided yet.
I heard that, too. And obviously someone must agree with
your point of view because the military hasn't been able to meet their recruiting quotas for several months now.
Might be a combination of all the parents out there saying NO, combined with just general common sense of the would-be recruits who've just heard too much about lack of adequate equipment, that little "fine print" rule that has had soldiers who thought they were finished with their time in the military being dragged into Bush's war, etc. I've also heard that the Department of Defense hired a civilian marketing firm to create a database of high school and college students to find out their birth dates, social security numbers, academic results, ethnicity, subjects studied, and personal EMAIL ADDRESSES to use for recruiting purposes. Hmmmmmmmm... I wonder which groups would be targeted. Maybe that's why they are asking for ethnicity and subjects studied.
now screams are heard
Now there is no electricity, running water or even sanitary water, just mud holes, so when the Iraqi's are killed by Bush's war, every scream and cry is heard.
hadn't heard about this. sm
What do you think about it?
I never heard that quote before. sm
Please provide a link. I would like to read the entire article.
|
