From the source....

This Rev. Wright stuff is terrible. I'd walk out if I were at church and the preacher started spitting this. But Americans will make a judgment, and I don't believe in guilt my association. I have plenty of associates who say offensive things but have redeeming qualities.

I'm satisfied to take Senator Obama's word on his association and knowledge of these sermons, because having read all of this autobiographical materials, and countless profiles and stories, I've never once detected anything that would lead me to believe otherwise.

This is politics, a story that has been around for a year is like blood in the water. Soon enough, the sharks will smell it.

See for yourself, from the Obama Campaign:


Oh, and the Chicago Tribune, not the friendliest Obama Paper, is satisfied in putting the Rezko issue to rest. Explain to me again about the Obama media bias?

The Colvin Report: Obama Denounces Preacher's Remarks

After the widespread publication of the recent controversy, which I first addressed several weeks ago when it was being ignored by the main stream media, Obama has come out to publicly denounce the statements from his spiritual advisor.

"I categorically denounce any statement that disparages our great country or serves to divide us from our allies, ... I also believe that words that degrade individuals have no place in our public dialogue, whether it's on the campaign stump or in the pulpit. In sum, I reject outright the statements by Reverend Wright that are at issue."

My questions is, when you chose to go to this church for 20 years, is denouncing his continual attitude in wake of controversy really good enough?

There has to be another church in Chicago that Obama could have went to.

But he did not attend another church, he went to this church under this preacher for 20 years. Rev. Wright married Obama and Michelle and he baptized their children. Obama has spoken candidly about his christian faith, his involvement in the church, and close relationship with Rev. Wright; he had nothing negative to say until recently.

Maybe I'm a critic, but his relationship with his church just doesn't sit right with me. Fair is fair, bash McCain for his evangelicals, but at least they are proud to be American's.

The Colvin Report: Always Protect Yourself... And Your Friends (Maybe)

Somewhere in America there is a man paying child support to someone he never slept with or for that matter touched in any sexual way. No he wasn't a sperm donor, or at least not in the traditional sense.

Imagine this. Two couples are in a car at the local make-out spot. The couple in the back seat starts to heat things up and wisely uses protection. After a few moments, the couple in the front seat decide to follow their lead. Unfortunately, the guy in the front seat wasn't prepared. So naturally he turns to his friend, "hey man, let me get a condom."

Thats where things turn ugly. The guy in the back seat was willing to go a little too far for his friend. He took off his condom and gave it to his friend. This friend without second thought turned it inside out and went to town.

Well... nine months later a kid pops out.

Tests come back negative on the boyfriend, you guessed it... the guy in the back seat practicing safe sex with his girlfriend got the girl in the front seat pregnant.

Fella's we can all learn a little something from this guy. Friends may share everything, but "everything" comes with a disclaimer. Used condom's aren't included.

This is a true story and the guy is paying child support for the next 18 years.

Bush thinks it'd be "romantic" to be on the front lines

Wow, just when he was beginning to enjoy his irrelevance...

Bush has a Victorian fantasy to be in Afghanistan, on the front lines of his wars. Boy, he certainly didn't jump at the chance to do so during Vietnam. Unless of course you count protecting the skies of Texas from the Vietcong.

Relatedly:

Having an out of touch leadership produces an out of touch electorate. Example A - The percentage of people who know the number of US troops killed in Iraq (3887 as of today): 28%

ABC Reports on Obama's Spiritual Advisor

God Damn America. U.S. is under the influence of the KKK. Black republicans are sell-outs. U.S. brought on 9/11.

What does Obama say? "i don't think he is particularly controversial." (although his advisors now repudiate the statements)

What do church members say? "Its not radical, its being black in America"

More controversial statements are sure to come as Obama's church is now selling their sermons to the media.

Parole: What's the sense?

After reading another article of senseless killing in the UNC/Duke murders, I am questioning the logic of a system that grants prisoners parole. Suspects in the murder UNC of student body president Eve Carson are currently on parole. Although, I have no statistics indicating that people on parole commit more crimes than others, I would be willing to bet as a percentage of the general population people on parole do commit more crimes, and crimes in escalating violence. In fact, the BBC seems to agree with me.

Although critics might argue that everyone deserves a second chance, I would argue that that should not be true. After all, when you get to sent to "time out" when in kidergarten you aren't let out early for "good behavior." To me, parole seems to violate a system designed to give retribution to the victim. Someone steals money from you, or kills one of your family members, they should pay. Many crimes carry a certain sentance of course, but there is always the possibility that the sentance is cut short by parole. That create the situation where someone really hasn't paid for their crime. They paid a price in jail time, but not the full price, and we risk it that these people won't commit further crimes.

Given the increase in crimes commited by those on parole, I think people should pay the full price for their actions. They should not pay the bargain basement price they get becuase they were a model citizen in prison. Maybe paying the full price would make people think harder about thier actions.

Paging Mr. Bloomberg, Albany is waiting

Eliot Spitzer made a big mistake. And he will probably face pressure to resign after serving just 13 months as governor of the Empire State. It has been an incredibly rocky year for the Spitzer administration, but this scandal is probably his death knell in politics for the near future. This is a truly unfortunate happening for the people of the State of New York.

Spitzer violated the trust of his family, and I believe that is an unforgivable sin. Politician or not, marriage is a sacred vow of fidelity to anther for eternity. If you can't pass this test, don't get married, and don't ever have children. That's the bottom line. If you don't love your partner enough to stay faithful, get a divorce. It's cowardly to have it both ways, and in this way, Eliot Spitzer has peddled immoral wares.

That said, the illegality of prostitution is probably a mistake as a policy. It punishes, on a whole, women, and drives the world's oldest profession into the black market. This policy makes prostitution especially dangerous and unnecessarily so. Nevada is a model for the proper regulated paid-sex business, and it should be commended. The libertarian point of view, one which I subscribe to on many issues, is quite right in this regard. Adults shouldn't be barred from intimate conduct, or from imbibing in substances for that matter, of their own volition and accord. Without impinging the rights of others, and to the degree that the marginal negative effects can be sustained, we ought to be free to act in the manner we deem appropriate without a nanny-state, puritanical government batting down the door.

Notwithstanding my feelings on the law concerning this issue, Gov. Spitzer participated in an illegal scheme under the Mann Act. Federal prostitution prosecutions are very rare, and in fact, almost never focuses on the customers to these "human trafficking" organizations. Whatever, the result of the Federal investigation, it is sad to see a brilliant legal mind suffer such a terrible fate. Eliot Spitzer, by any accounts, is a genius. He scored a near perfect 1590 on his SAT. On his law school entrance exam, the LSAT, he achieved a perfect score of 48 (the old test). He was editor of the Harvard Law Review and clerked for a prestigious New York Southern District Court Judge. When he was elected Attorney's General after several years in private practice and as a Manhattan County District Attorney, he began his crusade as "sheriff of wall street".

His victories over Merryl Lynch, Marsh, AIG, and the NYSE stunned observers. The untouchable giants of Wall Street were brought to their knees under various New York State Laws including the pivotal Martin Act. It gives great power to the AG of New York to investigate corruption , intermingling of interests and general malfeasance. But, unlike Giuliani (whose crusade against organized crime almost always resulted in show trials), Spitzer always used the art of the compromise to wretch Wall Streeters to the bargaining table. By threatening business downturns and negative stock performance, Spitzer got the upper hand. He also advocated effectively for stockholders who had been taking a bath as a result of a complacent and aloof SEC during the late 90s and early 2000s.

His gambit then was his vigor and his ability to outsmart almost everyone in the room. Which is why this particular incident is so jarring. How did he allow himself to be caught in such a mess?

By all accounts, Eliot Spitzer was a political steamroller. He won the governor's race by 40 points, 70 to 30. He was mentioned as a serious contender for President of the United States (and the first Jewish one at that). His (and my) hero is former New York Governor-turned-President Theodore Roosevelt. But he had few friends in the Democratic Party in New York. And he had even fewer across the aisle. He fought ferociously with old Republican Political Boss Senator Joseph Bruno, and even clashed with fellow Democrats over state priorities and appointments. He went so far as to actively campaign last fall against a sitting Democratic Representative in order to install someone to his preference. By insisting on pushing an unpopular measure to grant drivers licenses to undocumented aliens, he alienated voters in all corners of New York State.

Still, the circumstances of his demise are quite suspect. ABC News reported that it was a Bank that turned over information to the US Attorney's office due to "unusual financial transactions" in the Governor's account. It certainly seems as if Spitzer's old enemies had a close eye on his maneuvers. It wouldn't take much to believe a financial institution, still aching for Spitzter's blitz, would be eager to find fault in the Governor. What the bank thought were bribes, however, turned out to be something far different. It certainly doesn't help Governor Spitzer that the Department of Justice threatened to leak his name immediately unless he made a public admission. Nothing of the sort occurred when Justice investigations into the call-girl service revealed Senator David Vitter's number. But, that's politics when the other party is in control of the executive.

In all, it's sad for a rising reformer like Governor Spitzer. He crashed into office hoping to clear the girdlock in Albany, and clean up government. Say what you will about his tactics, but he won incredible legal victories against some of the best funded entities in the world. He always played to win, and that's the epitome of advocacy. He set the mold for other crusading Attorney's Generals, like current Florida Governor Charlie Crist and CT AG Richard Blumenthal, to turn their legal acumen and anti-corruption stances into political success.

Eliot Spitzer should resign. New York will now have it's first black, and blind, Governor, David Patterson.

Personally, I can't wait until Michael Bloomberg is sworn in to office in 2010 as Governor of New York, after prevailing over Rudy Giuliani in a close race. There's still hope for New York.

The Colvin Report: Does Hillary Drive Men To Other Women?

Paula Jones in an Arkansas Hotel Room.

Monica Lewenski in the Oval Office.

And we can't forget long-term lover Jennifer Flowers.

HIllary drives men to other women and apparently it doesn't stop with the hubby.

Now we can add prostitutes in Washington D.C. hotel rooms to the list.

Governor Spitzer, the steam roller who wouldn't allow one bit of corruption in New York suddenly changed face after he threw his allegiance behind Hillary Clinton.

Maybe its a coincidence, maybe he is just a hypocrite, but I'm trying to find some connection. Why do all the men in Hillary's life run to other women?

This is one more reason why we should avoid a Clinton/Obama ticket. Obama still has young children, we cannot do this to his family.

Just look how happy Bill looked before extensive time with Hillary.

The Colvin Report: Client Number 9

Is Gov. Eliot Spitzer Client Number 9?

In a sealed complaint, Governor Sptizer is not named, but he is being implemented in part of a prostitution ring.

He served as Attorney General and is currently in his first term as Democrat elect Governor of New York. Ironically, he is known for being a self-righteous prosecutor of a large prostitution ring in 1994. He also preached ethics reform and fought corporate corruption.

He did not address the situation specifically, but he came out to say that he must dedicate time to restore the trust of his family.

Client number 9 was caught under a federal wire tap while trying arrange to meet a prostitute. The transfer of money took place across state lines from NY to DC and therefore became a federal matter. Client 9 paid for the services, made travel arrangements, made hotel reservations, and met with at least 1 prostitute in DC on February 18, 2008.

The honorable thing for an elected official to do in such a scandal is to resign, whether it be a prostitution ring, a foot tap in the bathroom stall, or even aluminum foil wrapped mystery money hidden in the fridge.

As for his law license, that will depend on whether he is charged with a felony or misdemeanor. More will develop in the future.

Either way, it undermines his policy of soap box ethics reform and his status as Sheriff of Wall Street. He has few friends in NY and things are not looking very good for him. Wall Street is screaming "Hypocrite."

How Do Candidates Respond Under Pressure?

I wanted to post this video to show how McCain handled a reasonable question during a normal press session. As you can see he isn't his normal self, or maybe he is; after all, he is just another grumpy old man. This is experience in action.

The Colvin Report: How Do The Candidates Respond Under Pressure?

As I posted earlier this week, Obama had in interview where he got angry and walked away. I wanted to post these videos to show how McCain handled the "sex scandal" compared to how Obama handled the Rezko and NAFTA scandal. I can't find a full video of Obama's interview, but as you can see he isn't his normal self. McCain on the otherhand completely defused the situation and has since moved on. This is experience in action.

Obama Exert



McCain PART I


McCain PART II

The Colvin Report: Does Obama Really Care About College Aged Voters?

It is no secret that Obama has a huge backing of college students around the country. They are inspired by his hope and change and one of his visions hits right at home. Student interest rates have been on the rise for the past 6 years. When I started Undergrad government loans were approximately 2% and now they are 6.5%. For law school, my Grad Plus loans from the government are 8.5%.

Obama has promised change for the young people. He has promised he will make it easier, lower interest rates, repayment, etc.

But, in his brief period in Congress he has had the opportunity to do these things and has failed to act.

Here is his record from VoteSmart.Org. NO VOTE on all of the following:

11/07/2007 Appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies
10/23/2007 Appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies
09/07/2007 Student Loan Lender Subsidy Cuts and Student Grants
07/20/2007 Student Loan Lender Subsidy Cuts and Student Grants

So, What is he going to do as President? After he gets the college vote, is he really going to act, or will he pull a no vote?

I know he was preparing for a Presidential campaign, but Hillary had time to come out and vote YES on 7/20/2007, why couldn't he? Both Clintons have a proven record of supporting college students, so why does Obama get the young democrat vote?

Further, for those students trying to work their way through college and the rest of the country struggling to get by, I find it strange that Obama would vote NO to raising the minimum wage.

06/21/2006 Increasing Minimum Wage Amendment - NO
03/07/2005 Minimum Wage Amendment - NO

Is that the kind of change America's young democrat's are looking for?

For the Dems, It's Sunshine and Rain

That the race to the Democratic nomination is between a black man and a woman is a good thing, right? I guess. That this thing is only going to get uglier, however, is not. The intensity of this race is, of course, thrilling, but it may end up ripping the Democratic party at its seams. That wasn't so much true before last night when Obama had all the momenutm. But now that this thing is in fact a dead heat, what are the superdelegates to do? What is Howard Dean to do about Florida and Michigan whose Governor's have produced a joint statement demanding that thier delegates be seated?

Both HRC and Obama have seen sunny days and rainy days during this primary season, and last night it began to rain on Obama's head again. It's hard to see how all of this can have a happy ending. I imagine that those superdelegates are frozen now. Obama has the following, more states and more delegates. Clinton has won the big states. How do they choose? It seems that the only way to lessen the blow of all this is to have that dream ticket, but I get the feeling that these two can hardly stand each other and that makes the dream ticket look less than realistic.

Obama finds himself in a awkward position. He's run his campaign as that of new, not old, politics. But the scrutiny that everyone has been calling for has reared its head, and I imagine that this scrutiny and Rush Limbaugh helped HRC get those victories last night. And Hillary has greatly sharpened her attacks, too. And they'll only get sharper.

So, what does Obama do? Can he go negative? No, that would undermine his entire message, but because he can't win by losing he does have to find a way to get tougher. Firing that advisor who sent that memo to the Canadians is a start. Distancing himself from Rezko and Farrakahn won't hurt either. He should also make HRC prove this foreign policy experience that she asserts. When the phone rings at 3am would she react presidentially, or would she just cry?.

Maybe a debate in Pennsylvania is in order. I don't know, but she's throwing the kitchen sink at him, and, to get this dark cloud from over his head, back at her he's got to throw the refrigerator.

Bill Endorses 'Hope'

The Colvin Report: Angry Obama Dodges Questions

The first time Obama has to confront the string of allegations, what does he do? He takes a few questions, gets caught in lies, gets mad, and runs for the hills.

As he exits, he angrily replies to the reporters, "come on! I just answered, like, eight questions."

So what were these questions about? Take this exert from the NY Daily News:

"The first question was about a private talk an Obama economic adviser had with a Canadian official - reportedly saying that the harshness of Obama's criticisms of the North American Free Trade Agreement was for political show.

Last week, Obama denied an initial media report about the conversation. But after a Canadian government memo surfaced, he acknowledged yesterday there was a conversation.

"When I gave you that information, that was the information that I had at the time," he said. His camp still disputes the memo's account of the discussion.

The questioning then turned to Obama's links to ex-fund-raiser Tony Rezko, who went on trial in Chicago Monday on corruption charges. A reporter asserted Obama hadn't fully answered journalists' questions on Rezko.

Obama insisted he had - during a past news conference with Chicago media. But another persisted that questions remain unanswered, such as ones about fund-raisers Rezko held for him.

Obama replied, "These requests, I think, can just go on forever. ..." He said the "pertinent" information had been provided."

Sorry Obama, but America is finally realizing that it takes more than a good speech to make a good man.

CNN Reports On Obama/Resko Relationship

The Colvin Report: Change Round 3

In wake of Clinton's victories, I wanted to remind everyone what type of "change" Obama brings to the table. Here is a transcript from Jan 5, 2008 during the New Hampshire Primary Debate. It highlights why Obama doesn't like to talk about what he has done in Congress. Mr. Spalding was the moderator.






SEN. OBAMA: I just want to add I agree with John, which is why I prohibited lobbyists from buying meals for members of Congress --

MR. EDWARDS: Good idea.

SEN. OBAMA: -- because -- and some of them complained. They said --

MR. EDWARDS: Maybe they'll get a little --

MR. SPRADLING: Well, with all due respect --

SEN. OBAMA: -- they said, where am I going to eat?

MR. SPRADLING: They can now buy food for members of Congress if the members of Congress are standing up. (Laughter.) That's my understanding what the rules have changed. You can't sit down and eat, but you can stand up and eat.

SEN. OBAMA: Yeah, well, the --

MR. SPRADLING: Tell me why that's changed. (Laughter.)

SEN. OBAMA: Here's -- here's -- here's -- here's what we did. They can't buy meals, they can't provide gifts; they can no longer lend corporate -- (off mike) --

MR. SPRADLING: They can have huge parties for you as long as you're standing up.

MR. EDWARDS: They can't eat as much if they're standing up, John (sic). (Laughter.)

The Colvin Report: Clinton Wins Big

Clinton wins the Ohio primary by over 225k votes, she wins Rhode Island 106k to 73k, and she wins Texas primary by nearly 100k votes. She fell in the Texas caucus by 2k votes and Vermont by 30k votes, but she overwhelmingly won.

And she won despite allegations of Pollsters in clinton-rich area's of Texas lying to voters, telling them there was no caucus and a judge in an obama-rich area of Ohio ordering polls stay open till 9.

America has spoken.

As soon as press coverage dropped from 5:1 pro Obama to 2:1 pro Obama, Hillary was able to fight back.

She once again exposed Obama's foreign policy inexperience when he got caught giving the "wink-wink" to Canadian officials about his NAFTA stance and McCain helped by teaching Obama that Al Quada is in Iraq.

The phone rang, and Hillary answered.

Obama had went unscathed, chanting about how we should of stayed focused on Afghanistan, but turns out as Chairman of the oversight committee, he hasn't had time in over a year to schedule a meeting.

People are seeing Obama for what he is... Hype not hope... Rhetoric not solutions.

No longer can Obama hide behind the media, this could get ugly.

"When Green's gone too far..."

Maybe all the McCain environmentalism (you know, Global Warming props, talking about winning California on the strength of the 'environmental vote') is going to Republicans' heads.

Headline:

"GOP convention may go much greener than party will" - MinnPost.com

Maybe going green has gone too far... I mean, with Fox News telling conservatives that it doesn't exist, how did the MN GOP get away with this? Didn't they hear their corporate masters?

But what if GE, Wal-Mart and others, just thought it was good business? No matter how much the dead-enders protested, I guess we're going that way. And I think we'll be just fine, either way.

The Colvin Report: Chicago Sun-Times Takes Up for Farrakahn

In a Chicago Sun-Times article titled "Why Obama denounced Farrakahn: It wasn't candidates best move -- but most blacks understnad," Mary Mitchell gives her praise to Ferrakahn and says she understand that Obama is just playing politics.

Here is an exert:

"Although Obama scored points for defusing a political bomb, his answer was insulting.

Yet the stakes are too high for African Americans to lose faith...

At 74 years old, Farrakhan has paid his dues in the battle against racial oppression and hatred. Over the years, a lot of black people have disagreed with Farrakhan on his stance regarding Israel, and many of us have regretted his ongoing controversy with powerful Jewish leaders.

Yet Farrakhan's appeal to masses of African Americans is that he is not a politician. And he is free to speak his mind because his organization does not depend on outside support.

Obama should have found a way to escape Russert's trap without denigrating Farrakhan's legacy.

But, like I said, we understand."

I will shy away from the Farrakahn debate... but this article was too good to pass up, the problem in America is obviously deeper than Obama.