I can't take much more of Campaign Hillary

I question her judgment in using this tactic of "slumlord" namecalling, agains a fellow Dem she most certainly will expect to campaign for her and to campaign for others downticket.

By damaging Obama, she's degrading us all, and having a negative effect in a lot of downticket races.

get their hands on Obama.

Hillary needs to think of the repercussions of her actions, not just her own selfish motives.

Hillary showed her true colors tonight.

I don't want that change... I prefer to change for the better.

Obama/Edwards 08!

campaign for hilary..cause he'll be campaigning for himself. The question is what will ol' bill and hill be doin'.

she is making that all but impossible!

It makes no sense. It's just strategically dumb.

they're goin' for broke?

isn't calculated and vetted..if hilary thinks she's going to start losing are they going to ratchet up the acts of desperation even more?

I saw her calculations in Oct 2002 when she voted to send our Soldiers on a bush errand.

He didn't mention them, or Burtle, Chalwat and a host of other corrupt individuals connected to the Clintons.

that the mediawhores have given obama a free ride and now maybe someone will look into this matter and all the other chit obama slings out there.

For those who don't know, Tony Rezko, was a Chicago figure who financially supported many Democratic campaigns and also a Chicago landlord. He is also facing charges on federal corruption for kickbacks among state employees' pension funds. Obama was linked to Rezko because he contributed $10,000 to his campaign in 2004, and in recent court documents, Obama is listed as an "unnamed politician" receiving money from Rezko. Rezko also provided a deal for Obama to buy land adjacent to his home, which Obama later called "a bone-headed move" on his part. Obama's campaign will be donating funds contributed by Rezko and his associates to charity, a little more than $80,000.

January 20, 2008
BY DAVE MCKINNEY, NATASHA KORECKI, CHRIS FUSCO AND TIM NOVAK Staff Reporters

For the first time, Democratic White House hopeful Barack Obama has surfaced in the federal corrupton case against his longtime campaign fund-raiser, Tony Rezko, the Chicago Sun-Times has learned.The Illinois senator isn’t accused of any wrongdoing. And there’s no evidence Obama knew contributions to his 2004 U.S. Senate campaign came from schemes Rezko is accused of orchestrating.

The allegations against Rezko that involve Obama are contained in one paragraph of a 78-page document filed last month in which prosecutors outline their corruption and fraud case against Rezko, who was also a key money man for Gov. Blagojevich and other politicians.

Rezko is set to go to trial Feb. 25. The revelation that Obama’s name could come up in court is a political headache he doesn’t need as he heads into a round of primaries that are likely to determine his party’s nomination for president.
Obama is not named in the Dec. 21 court document. But a source familiar with the case confirmed that Obama is the unnamed “political candidate” referred to in a section of the document that accuses Rezko of orchestrating a scheme in which a firm hired to handle state teacher pension investments first had to pay $250,000 in “sham” finder’s fees. From that money, $10,000 was donated to Obama’s successful run for the Senate in the name of a Rezko business associate, according to the court filing and the source.

Rezko, who was part of Obama’s senatorial finance committee, also is accused of directing “at least one other individual” to donate money to Obama and then reimbursing that individual — in possible violation of federal election law.

A spokesman for U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald declined to comment.

The long line of corrupt bullshit that they've got in their recent history and that hasn't even been really exposed yet.

The Rezko thing has been beat to death in the newspapers and she knows it. Rezko's a crook, Obama returned campaign money, and that's all there is to it. It was pure slime.

give me a break.

The Clintons did attack first. That's what Obama was responding to.

really understand why people can't criticize without being really ugly and petty.

By damaging Obama, she's degrading us all, and having a negative effect in a lot of downticket races.

She's not the one degrading us all. Fanaticism seems to be doing that job much better than any of the candidates.

How anyone could look at Hillary Clinton, John Edwards or Barack Obama and think they're "degrading us all" is beyond all comprehension. You (and some of the other fanatics around here) should be ashamed.

"fanaticism" is interesting though. Which candidates supporters would you call fanatics?

1) uncritical devotion
2) excessive enthusiasm

Any seasoned DUer can recognize a fanatic. You don't need me to name them.

I could have sworn it was Obama who started the mudslinging in the debate with the walmart quip, not Clinton?

republican president in 2012. He's not going to come out and publicly oppose her but there isn't going to be anything he is going to do to help get her elected.

won't say anything negative about him once he's the nominee....

the democratic party. Which is all anyone of right mind needs to know about her. I was particularly impressed with her salacious attack on Obama re: sex shops and children. I cannot even remember a time when I hated a politician with the same fervor I hate her, including the present Resident. There is a difference when this shit comes from a democrat who should know better, but who simply does. not. care.