David Brooks, Writing As Charles Krauthammer

Charles Krauthammer takes up the very effective attack line that I first noticed a while back from David Brooks, the gist of which is, where is the evidence of Barack's transcendence and bipartisanship?  From Krauthammer:

What makes [Barack] different from the other candidates, from the "old politics" he disdains, is the promise to rise above party, to take us beyond ideology and other archaic divisions, and bring us together as "one nation."

It's worked. When Americans are asked who can unite us, 67 percent say Obama versus 34 percent for Clinton, with McCain at 51.

     How did Obama pull that off? By riding one of the great non sequiturs of modern American politics.

It goes like this. Because Obama transcends race, it is therefore assumed that he will transcend everything else -- divisions of region, class, party, generation and ideology.

...The problem is that Obama's own history suggests that, in his case at least, it is not. Indeed, his Senate record quite belies the implication.

The Obama campaign has sent journalists eight pages of examples of his reaching across the aisle in the Senate. But these are small-bore items of almost no controversy -- more help for war veterans, reducing loose nukes in the former Soviet Union and the like. Bipartisan support for apple pie is hardly a profile in courage.

On the difficult compromises that required the political courage to challenge one's own political constituency, Obama flinched: the "gang of 14" compromise on judicial appointments, the immigration compromise to which Obama tried to append union-backed killer amendments, and, just last month, the compromise on warrantless eavesdropping that garnered 68 votes in the Senate. But not Obama's.

Who, in fact, supported all of these bipartisan deals, was a central player in two of them, and brokered the even more notorious McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform? John McCain, of course.

This was David Brooks from Feb 19:

How is a 47-year-old novice going to unify highly polarized 70-something committee chairs? What will happen if the nation’s 261,000 lobbyists don’t see the light, even after the laying on of hands? Does The Changemaker have the guts to take on the special interests in his own party — the trial lawyers, the teachers’ unions, the AARP?

The Gang of 14 created bipartisan unity on judges, but Obama sat it out. Kennedy and McCain created a bipartisan deal on immigration. Obama opted out of the parts that displeased the unions. Sixty-eight senators supported a bipartisan deal on FISA. Obama voted no. And if he were president now, how would the High Deacon of Unity heal the breach that split the House last week?

Hmm, Krauthammer even cited the same three issues - immigration, FISA, and the Gang of Fourteen (why wasn't that the "Magnificent Seven x Two"?  Nevermind...)  I at least tossed in McCain's efforts on the regulation of carbon dioxide as an example of McCain's desire to be a bipartisan breath of fresh air in the Senate, although presumably Barack would support something similar.

It's a good attack line, so I expect we will see it all summer and fall.  Krauthammer slides by the obvious problem with it, of course - every time McCain mentions these "accomplishments" he is nearly drowned out by teeth-grinding from the right.  We need to move on, my fellow righties - we can win with McCain or lose to Obama.  Or Hillary!

MORE:  My own guess at attack lines from last Feb missed out on Rezko, but the scales have fallen from my eyes.

BONUS LAUGHER. MAYBE:  Per this story, Obama couldn't manage to work with John McCain himself on a bipartisan ethics bill.  Jiminy - if you can't work with McCain on ethics reform, who can you work with?

Comments

[clarice]

I,too, thought the Krauthammer piece today compelling,TM.
Love that quote from McCain in today's NYT article--One could argue that the Dems are making way too much of God's annointing them for the task, but , as Francis U would say,"One could say that, but it would be wrong..."

[anduril]

This long story, Barack Obama and Me, linked on Hugh Hewitt's blog, gives a personal view of Obama's rise in Illinois politics. It begins:

It's not quite eight in the morning and Barack Obama is on the phone screaming at me. He liked the story I wrote about him a couple weeks ago, but not this garbage.

Months earlier, a reporter friend told me she overheard Obama call me an asshole at a political fund-raiser. Now here he is blasting me from hundreds of miles away for a story that just went online but hasn't yet hit local newsstands.

It's the first time I ever heard him yell, and I'm trembling as I set down the phone. I sit frozen at my desk for several minutes, stunned.

This is before Obama Girl, before the secret service detail, before he becomes a best-selling author. His book Dreams From My Father has been out of print for years.

I often see Obama smoking cigarettes on brisk Chicago mornings in front of his condominium high-rise along Lake Michigan, or getting his hair buzzed at the corner barbershop on 53rd and Harper in his Hyde Park neighborhood.

This is before he becomes a U.S. senator, before Oprah starts stumping for him, before he positions himself to become the country's first black president.

He is just a rank-and-file state senator in Illinois and I work for a string of small, scrappy newspapers there.

[Jane]

This, also from Hugh's blog is interesting. A reader sent it. I don't know squat about real estate, but I know I am among the brilliant.

'm a lawyer who lives in Chicago and has been reading your updates about this Obama/Rezko situation. I did a bit of digging myself on the local government websites to see if I could find the sellers' names or lenders. Ironically, or rather not so ironically because this is Chicago and the Chicago machine, afterall, there are no records available for a lot of this. I took the tax returns of Obama from the Powerline website with the address and plugged it into the Cook County Assessor's website (Cookcountyassesor.com) to obtain the property index numbers (PINs) for Obama's house (and apparently there is a second smaller lot behind it) as well as Rezko's lot next door. I then went to the recorder's website to look at the deeds (ccrd.info) and lo and behold, it stated that the records were not available or my request had timed out! Time wasn't an issue because I did it right away so I have to conclude that they have been purged! I then went to the treasurer's website (cookcountytreasurer.com) to see who receives the tax bills and what the txes are. Obama's lots are registered to two different people: [*******] for the large lot with the house and a [ ] for the smaller lot. [HH Note: Neither is registered to Obama or Rezko] Generally, the prior year's tax bills also are available just under the tax bill for this year and they were not available in this case. As a real estate lawyer in Chicago, I review a lot of tax bills and I have NEVER seen a situation where the prior year's tax bill was not available. When I plugged in Rezko's PIN to obtain the tax information on his lot, it said that there was no such property. This is VERY unusual.

If you want to do your own digging, Obama's PIN is 20-**-***-***-0000 for the smaller lot and 20-**-***-***-0000 for the lot with the house. Rezko's PIN is 20-**-***-***-0000. Of equal interest is the fact that there are maps on the assesor's website that will provide you with information if you input the PINs. When I tried to pull up information about these 3 different lots, it read that there was no information available.

Something's going on and I thought perhaps you would put this information to good use.

[anduril]

Steve Sailer re the economy:

"I won't pretend that I understand what all those terms like FHA, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac mean, but I think the gist of the following Business Week story is that we Californians aren't going down alone. We're taking the other 49 states down with us. See you in taxpayer bailout hell!"

[Neo]

Meanwhile back at the ranch ..

The air force originally chose Boeing to supply it with 100 tankers. But Congress cancelled the deal after it emerged that Darleen Druyun, a former top air force acquisitions official, had held illegal job discussions with Boeing while still negotiating the deal. Ms Druyun admitted boosting the value of the deal to help Boeing.

Mr McCain has pointed to his aggressive investigation into the Boeing deal as evidence that he is willing to stand up to powerful corporate interests.

.. but now that the contract goes to EADS ..

Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic House speaker, said Boeing had been on course to supply the US Air Force with tankers until Mr McCain "intervened".

.. so let's sum this up.

Contract going to corporate outlaw .. bad .. except when breaking the law is trumphed by domestic interests.

Nancy Pelosi is a jerk.

[anduril]

Hugh Hewitt says he got the following email:

I'm a lawyer who lives in Chicago and has been reading your updates about this Obama/Rezko situation. I did a bit of digging myself on the local government websites to see if I could find the sellers' names or lenders. Ironically, or rather not so ironically because this is Chicago and the Chicago machine, afterall, there are no records available for a lot of this. I took the tax returns of Obama from the Powerline website with the address and plugged it into the Cook County Assessor's website (Cookcountyassesor.com) to obtain the property index numbers (PINs) for Obama's house (and apparently there is a second smaller lot behind it) as well as Rezko's lot next door. I then went to the recorder's website to look at the deeds (ccrd.info) and lo and behold, it stated that the records were not available or my request had timed out! Time wasn't an issue because I did it right away so I have to conclude that they have been purged! I then went to the treasurer's website (cookcountytreasurer.com) to see who receives the tax bills and what the txes are. Obama's lots are registered to two different people: [*******] for the large lot with the house and a [ ] for the smaller lot. [HH Note: Neither is registered to Obama or Rezko] Generally, the prior year's tax bills also are available just under the tax bill for this year and they were not available in this case. As a real estate lawyer in Chicago, I review a lot of tax bills and I have NEVER seen a situation where the prior year's tax bill was not available. When I plugged in Rezko's PIN to obtain the tax information on his lot, it said that there was no such property. This is VERY unusual.

If you want to do your own digging, Obama's PIN is 20-**-***-***-0000 for the smaller lot and 20-**-***-***-0000 for the lot with the house. Rezko's PIN is 20-**-***-***-0000. Of equal interest is the fact that there are maps on the assesor's website that will provide you with information if you input the PINs. When I tried to pull up information about these 3 different lots, it read that there was no information available.

Something's going on and I thought perhaps you would put this information to good use.

[anduril]

Hey!

[anduril]

Years ago I used to do that kind of stuff (by hand, not online). I think he has a point.

[clarice]

Well I don't know about HH's lawyer correspondent but yesterday's UK Times article had a great deal more info on the properties than we've seen elsewhere, including the fact that Ms Rezko dols the remaining lot to her husband's lawyer who know has it on the market for $995k (a figure I think unreasonable and just given in order to refute the obvious--the lot minus the part sold to the O's at a bargain price is now worthless.)

As to Neo's point--It seems preposterous to me that Boeing should loose this impt contract and EADS which is desperate, on the rocks, and the brain child of those Euros who did everything they could to undercut us would profit.
Surely there was another way to deal with the problem--like a big fine to Boeing or something.

I think giving this contract to EADS is ridiculous.

[clarice]

**sold**

**lose this impt contract***

[anduril]

OT

Good column by Kathleen Parker: Crime and Punishment for Reading.

WASHINGTON -- If an author can't make the Oprah cut, the next best thing may be getting censured by a university.

Ever heard of Todd Tucker?

Didn't think so. Obviously, some have because he has books and readers. But he's not Michael Crichton or John Grisham.

Yet.

Tucker's name recently surfaced beyond Amazon's pages when one of his books sparked an investigation at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) because a janitor was reading it.

So you're thinking, this book must have been pretty bad. Something like "Poached Puppies and Other Pet Recipes" or "What's So Wrong With Necrophilia?"

[anduril]

Headlines from the WSJ--Google Reader version:

US Payrolls Shrink Dramatically

Stocks Crumple on Jobs Report

Housing, Bank Troubles Deepen

DOW Falls Amid Escalating Problems in the Bond Market

I hope McCain is getting an economic plan together, and isn't going to try to ride the Bush-Bernanke one.

[Appalled Moderate]

Here's the link to andruil's story above. You can take it, and be relieved that Obama is not the naive choirboy that's often portrayed. You can take it as a reporter's sour grapes. Or you can conclude that this is someone who can play the game as well as Hillary, and may not be afraid of getting in the mud.

Interesting.

[PMII]

Peggy Noonan has a nice article in the WSJ.

[Ranger]

Here's the link to andruil's story above. You can take it, and be relieved that Obama is not the naive choirboy that's often portrayed. You can take it as a reporter's sour grapes. Or you can conclude that this is someone who can play the game as well as Hillary, and may not be afraid of getting in the mud.

Interesting.

Posted by: Appalled Moderate | March 07, 2008 at 10:32 AM

Is that an admission that "Hope and Change" and the call for a "new politics" are just lies on Obama's part to con the voters with?

[Rick Ballard]

"Obama's lots are registered to two different people: [*******] for the large lot with the house and a [ ] for the smaller lot. [HH Note: Neither is registered to Obama or Rezko] "

This why I didn't write this up for AT. Hewitt's correspondent professes to be a real estate attorney yet did not do the requisite research to determine the status of the small lot adjacent to BHOs which has the same address but not the same PIN. Had he done appropriate research he would have found that the "buried" lot had been split off in another transaction, prior to the Docs purchase.

There had to have been an easement granted for access to the buried lot, as you can see that cars park on the north side of the house (which was probably servant quarters for BHO Manse at one time). The attorney also didn't note that the subdivision of lots 2,3 and 4 (site of BHO Manse) also created a fourth lot also owned by the person who owns the buried lot. It is adjacent to the buried lot on the south (Hyde St) side and has a Hyde Street address.

Per the original subdivision there were only two lots (8 & 10) which were subsequently divided into four and renumbered 1,2,3,4 which were then furter subdivided into six "parts" with letter descriptors P and E added to the lot numbers. BHO Manse sits on all of 2 and a slice of 3 (less the western part), Rezko is a slice of 3 and all (but the western part) of 4 and BHO's neighbor to the north has lot 1 with no subdivision.

Pretty simple, right? The "I've never seen..." comment by HH's correspondent may indicate a certain lack of experience, 'cause I'm no real estate attorney but I've seen botches worse than this.

What I can't find are the last two revisions to the plats. The one that further subdivided 2,3 and 4 into east and west and the division which created BHO's Rezko Sliver. Perhaps they're just misfiled?

[Porchlight]

You can take it, and be relieved that Obama is not the naive choirboy that's often portrayed. You can take it as a reporter's sour grapes. Or you can conclude that this is someone who can play the game as well as Hillary, and may not be afraid of getting in the mud.

Hmm, or I could take it as evidence that Obama's relatively-newfound preacher-man saintly persona is just a tad unconvincing. But YMMV.

Speaking of that phenom, has anyone seen this YouTube response to the will.i.am/Dipdive videos? Set to "Building A Religion" by Cake. I thought it was great.

Obama - Building A Religion

[Ranger]

What I can't find are the last two revisions to the plats. The one that further subdivided 2,3 and 4 into east and west and the division which created BHO's Rezko Sliver. Perhaps they're just misfiled?

Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 07, 2008 at 10:46 AM

Or maybe Obama and Rezko just never got around to doing the paperwork? It is Chicago afterall, and no little formatlity is going to get in the way of a "deal" getting done.

[Sue]

Barack Obama and me...

...what is it with men whose hands tremble and their bodies shake and why on God's green earth would you admit it?

Anyway, good article about Obama.

[Appalled Moderate]

Anyone who thinks they can change a system had better have some ability to operate in the old system. If Obama is really the well-spoken lightweight many here believe him to be, he will not survive the next few weeks. Hillary's abttalion of wronged feminists and Bill's gang of slime artists will demolish him-

I figured that anyone who has operated successfully in Cook County politics was going to have the side to him shown in this article. It's necessary for survival.

The question is whether said pol has any sense of the public good. That's the risk...

[Sue]

Rick,

I wouldn't trust their websites either. A trip to the records office would probably clear it up or at least back up his claims.

[anduril]

Thanks, AM. I could try to blame typepad, but obviously it was me that goofed with the link (n.b., "it was me," not "it is was I").

[Ranger]

Appalled Moderate,

So, in your view, it is ok to lie to people to conceal your "schooling" in politics so you can achieve the level of power required to actually acomplish change?

[Appalled Moderate]

Ranger:

For the moment, I am simply not accepting your premise. I don't see aything the article that has to be inconsistant with what Obama has said. The reporter has had a bad experience with the guy; I would imagine other reporters have, too. The one thing I've noticed is that Obama clearly does not like the press.

[Porchlight]

I figured that anyone who has operated successfully in Cook County politics was going to have the side to him shown in this article. It's necessary for survival.

True. I don't at all begrudge a politician the ability and willingness to jab a sharp elbow when needed. I guess what bothers me is the enormous difference between this reality and his public persona.

And as Ranger pointed out, the fact that he is now staking a claim to purity with his call for a "new politics." When in fact he is a product of the old politics just like Hillary.

[Ranger]

Also, the issue with the Rezko deal on the house is more than just about learning to do politics, it is about enjoying the payouts of doing politics that way too. It's one thing to learn the game, quite another to personally benifit from it.

[Jane]

Obama clearly does not like the press

No worries because he makes them all atingle!

[RichatUF]

Jane-

Rick, GMax, and Ranger among others had a thread about a week back with all the PIN numbers and link rich that went through the real estate transaction.

Rick-

MO left the Landmarks Board in March 05. I dropped a link in a previous thread to a page at MyDD which went through the process that the doctors had to go through to list the house, with the implication that MO had to have known about the house well before March. Also, the author at the link claims that for the lot to have been divided as it was it would have required more than 1 public hearing because it would have had to go through more than the Landmarks Board. FWIW.

Another rich area to mine might be the sale of the Obama's condo in late 2004.

Porchlight-

The video is creepy. I'm glad that B♥O steers clear of corporate interests, except those that are sycophantic to his campaign. Too bad that the FEC doesn't have a quorum...

[clarice]

charlie's latest--Health insurance

[anduril]

Rick, can I bother you to provide a link to the best summary of your earlier research? I confess I wasn't paying attention to the R/E details, but this business of subdividing the lots and buried lots, seems strange to me given the settled nature of the property and all. This is a neighborhood of mansions and I, at least, wouldn't have expected this kind of stuff. Can you relink the aerial view--for continued reference? I'll understand if you don't want to go to the trouble.

BTW, I think you're a little unfair to the lawyer. He's not claiming to have done a thorough historical research of this R/E. He's simply making the point that these properties appear to be treated differently on government websites than is very much the standard:

"As a real estate lawyer in Chicago, I review a lot of tax bills and I have NEVER seen a situation where the prior year's tax bill was not available. When I plugged in Rezko's PIN to obtain the tax information on his lot, it said that there was no such property. This is VERY unusual."

[Sue]

He is running on the politics of change & hope and how he has the better judgment. When things tend to show he is the same old, same old, and his judgment is being questioned, the thin veneer he is wearing won't last through November. Hillary played this wrong. She should have played to type and taken him down with her. Somehow the scum rises to the top and the Clintons always seem to rise.

[Ranger]

Well, the lack of a property tax bill may not be that strange in this case, given that the new owners get an 8 year abatement if they agree to maintain the house and property in its historical condition. Now, I don't know how Chicago does that, but if the abatement is a full waiver of the tax bill, then they may not even generate a bill for the property until the 8 years expires.

[Ranger]

An interesting point that just occured to me is that in that MyDD posting, one of the final comentators (who apparently lived in the house at one point) said the lot had been split back in the 80s, so the issue of how that got approved for the Docs while MO was on the Historical Board was moot. But, for the Rezko's to sell the strip of land would also requre a lot change needing the same approval would it not? If that is the case, then it seems to have gone through rather quickly and quietly. Did Obama get favoratism in the consideration of this action? Was he moved to the head of the line? Did the lot change requested conform to the required guidlines? Where the required public hearings held? This is a completely new set of questions that no one seems to be asking at the moment.

[anduril]

Ranger, are you suggesting that the lot split for the Rezko strip was a necessary preliminary to the sweetheart deal for Obama?

[Sue]

Samantha Power has resigned from the Obama campaign. I guess the truth really does set you free.

[GMax]

I dont think Rick was being unfair at all. The shallow level of understanding of the "real estate attorney" troubled me quite a bit too. Maybe he just plays an RE Attorney on the internet? Most Real Estate attorneys would have enough connections to get a title commitment on the property which would pull every single document out of the title plant, and whether or not Cook County were trying to hide stuff on their website would have zero effect, cuz all the large title companies have their own plant which is updated constantly. Thus its pretty impossible to have "misfiled" docs for any significant period, somebodies plant will notice and point it out, its one of the ways they never have the kind of problems that require title insurance actually having to pay off.

[Rick Ballard]

Sue,

Whose claims? There are four separate tax parcels covering portions of three lots. The BHO/Rezklad lots were assigned new PIN numbers just prior to their sale by the Docs.

I certainly agree that it would take a trip to the recorder's office (or a title search) to follow the actual lot line changes but the statement that "When I plugged in Rezko's PIN to obtain the tax information on his lot, it said that there was no such property. This is VERY unusual." simply doesn't reflect the fact that the PINs with 34,35 (BHO, Rezko) identifiers had previously been identified as 26,29. It's unsurprising that new PINs don't have prior tax records, what's surprising is that the old PINs don't show up in the database either. Maybe a change in PINs is unusual but it had happened once before with the same parcels when the "buried" lot and the "new" Hyde Street lot were created.

The PIN for the buried lot is 2011115270000 and you can access the tax records for it here, including a mapping and photo selection which lets you pan the other lots (but does not return tax info on BHO/Rezko).

Eventually someone will follow the trail back to this transaction and start speculating.

My point concerning the attorney had more to do with the difficulty in writing about what appears to be a "simple" transaction in a manner which provides for clear understanding of facts. I may be picking too small a nit but anyone who writes about this will be sure to be shredded unless all i's are dotted and t's crossed.

Anduril,

The link to the assessor's office map function allows you to pan back and forth between lots and to zoom in and out. If you look at the three lots to the north of BHO Manse you can determine the "original" size of the lots in question.

[Sue]

Sue,

Whose claims?

The supposed real estate attorney who doesn't know that there is nothing unusual about documents and records not appearing on the websites but are in the record books. Happens here all the time. Which is why I have to make a trip to the courthouse, appraisal office, tax office, to confirm something really isn't there. The website is a tool, but it isn't official.

[anduril]

Thanks, Rick.

Right--it was only an email. Maybe you SHOULD try to do a more thorough account of this. It's beginning to look less "simple" than at first sight.

[Porchlight]

Ranger,

I don't think the MyDD commenter was saying the lot was split up in the '80s. I think he was saying that when he lived there in the '70s, it was a double lot. Then it was sold in the '80s. No mention of a split back then, although he does offer what I think is his opinion that it would make sense to divide the property.

Unless I'm reading wrong? Here's the comment, tell me if I'm missing something:

Re: How To Buy A Mansion You Can't Afford (none / 0)

I lived in this house for a number of years in the 70's. So, for the record, 5046 S. Greenwood was a double lot on the corner of 51st and Greenwood, across from KAM Isaiah Israel. The 51st St side of the lot was just fenced lawn...wrought iron fence standing on a cement base a foot or two high. The driveway was on the north side of the house, going from Greenwood and heading directly west, past the port cochere, to the coach house. It makes lots of sense to divide the parcel into two, as that huge lawn was plenty big for a second home.

A bit of history, as an aside. The house had been owned by the uncle of Leopold (Leopold and Loeb murdered Bobby Franks. Bobby's house was on 51st St, a couple blocks west of this property. After the scandal Uncle Leopold gave the property to KAM, and supposedly left town in shame. I can't vouch for that. The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod purchased the property, intending to tear it down and build a large church structure. In the meantime, they used the first floor as a church and the staff lived on the 2nd and 3rd floors. The Lutherans sold the home to a private party sometime in the early 80's, as I recall.

It's a great building, and the purchase price doesn't seem out of line for similar homes in the neighborhood. Although you can't park across the street in from of the KAM entrance, there's plenty of street parking, the garage/coachhouse, and a very long driveway.

Just wanted to correct some misperceptions about the property.

by Chiboy on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 04:10:30 PM EST

[Neo]

I think giving this contract to EADS is ridiculous.

I think so too, but blaming McCain for exposing bid-rigging is the wrong way to frame this.

It shows Pelosi eager to "by-pass" the law when politically necessary. Quite typical of a "bad" or corrupt politician.

[anduril]

A LOT less "simple". (pun intended)

[Other Tom]

"Hillary's battalion of wronged feminists and Bill's gang of slime artists will demolish him-"

But what if they do? He still cannot fail to arrive at the convention with a majority of the pledged delegates, and the only way he can be denied the nomination is by action of the superdelegates. And if that happens, I'm not sure he would accept the VP position; I'm not sure Hillary would even offer it; and I have some doubts that the blacks and the young crazies would be satisfied with it if he did accept it.

The only way out I can see for the Dems--and I'm not sure it's a way out--is a unity ticket with him at the top. I have real doubts about whether that's a winning ticket.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

Thanks, Clarice!

[Ranger]

Ranger, are you suggesting that the lot split for the Rezko strip was a necessary preliminary to the sweetheart deal for Obama?

Posted by: anduril | March 07, 2008 at 12:08 PM

Not exactly (I don't think). What I am wondering about is the fact that a lot of effort seems to have focused on the split between the house plot and the Rezko empty plot, which appears to have required a lot of effort to make happen at some point. But, there is now someone saying that this split seems to have happened in the 80s, so that the Doc who sold the house to Obama were stuck with that situation when they bought the house. Fair enough, but if that is true, it still doesn't answer how the subsequent lot split on this historical property was approved so that Obama could buy the 10 by 150 strip from Rezko.

Given all the hoops that the MyDD post discussed for this type of aproval, it seems that it would have required quite a bit of lead time.

So, here are the questions I don't see being asked about the Rezko "sell back":

Was aproval from the Historical Board required to approve such a lot split for sale?

If so, when was the aproval process started?

How quickly was the plot modification approved and was that speed normal for such requests?

Did the request meet the minimum threashold of justification for approval?

Were all the required steps followed?

If the process was speeded up or if steps were skipped, why did that happen?

These are just questions that occure to me in looking at this story. It would be interesting to see when the process started also to see if it was part of the land deal all along that Obama would eventually buy back the strip of land (which would further dent Obama's claim that there was "no co-ordination" between the Obamas and the Rezkos on the deal).

[Ranger]

Porchlight,

I may be confusing that post with one that GMax or one of the other JOM researchers laid out listing the plots and when they were registered. For some reason I was thinking we had (at some point) established the plot was split earler than the MyDD author proposed, thus limiting the abuse of power charges.

[Jane]

The only way out I can see for the Dems--and I'm not sure it's a way out--is a unity ticket with him at the top. I have real doubts about whether that's a winning ticket.

It's all quite fabulous isn't it?

[Porchlight]

Thanks, Ranger. I'll go back and look. At any rate, clearly this all needs to be hammered out - a timeline would be great. I wonder if any of the Chicago reporters covering Rezko are working on it. Not much love lost between them and Obama at this point.

[anduril]

Right, there must be a timeline somewhere at this point, with an accompanying narrative of what was going on.

[GMax]

The hits just keep on coming, Sam Powers resigns from the Obama campaign after being told " NO, no you cant."

This guy is in a bit of a slump for being a Messianic candidate, isn't he?