Obama Got State Grant For Donor
April 28th, 2008 at 02:02pm Matt Margolis
And I’m sure Obama and his supporters will call this story a “distraction,” just like Rezko, Wright, the last debate, Bittergate, etc. etc. etc.
After an unsuccessful campaign for Congress in 2000, Illinois state Sen. Barack Obama faced serious financial pressure: numerous debts, limited cash and a law practice he had neglected for a year. Help arrived in early 2001 from a significant new legal client — a longtime political supporter.
Chicago entrepreneur Robert Blackwell Jr. paid Obama an $8,000-a-month retainer to give legal advice to his growing technology firm, Electronic Knowledge Interchange. It allowed Obama to supplement his $58,000 part-time state Senate salary for over a year with regular payments from Blackwell’s firm that eventually totaled $112,000.
A few months after receiving his final payment from EKI, Obama sent a request on state Senate letterhead urging Illinois officials to provide a $50,000 tourism promotion grant to another Blackwell company, Killerspin.
Killerspin specializes in table tennis, running tournaments nationwide and selling its own line of equipment and apparel and DVD recordings of the competitions. With support from Obama, other state officials and an Obama aide who went to work part time for Killerspin, the company eventually obtained $320,000 in state grants between 2002 and 2004 to subsidize its tournaments.
While Obama may not have been in Washington long (especially since half of his short term as a U.S. Senator has been spent running for president) but he’d be a liar if he claimed that he wasn’t a typical politician.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Corruption, Democrats
35 Comments
1. OhioOrrin | April 28th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
and the ’splainin keeps piling up 4 ear bama.
gas-up the swifties, mission to be acomplished!
2. InDaVa | April 28th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
::sigh:: another non-issue…..
3. Telstar | April 28th, 2008 at 4:28 pm
“Senate salary for over a year with regular payments from Blackwell’s firm that eventually totaled $112,000.”
Funny, $112,000 is the same amount McCain received as a campaign contribution in the Keating Five scandal.
4. celticman | April 28th, 2008 at 5:05 pm
5. Matt Margolis | April 28th, 2008 at 5:45 pm
Funny how all the liberals think any questionable actions by Obama or Hillary are “non-issues” but then manufactured stories about McCain are so important.
6. SteaM | April 28th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
Which manufactured stories regarding questionable actions of McSame are you referring to?
7. InDaVa | April 28th, 2008 at 6:08 pm
“Which manufactured stories regarding questionable actions of McSame are you referring to?”
Yes, please tell….
8. Kahn | April 28th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
Telstar, the DEMOCRAT council for Congress has publicly stated that the only reason mcCain was included in the scandal was because otherwise the Keating “four” were 100% Democrat and the Congress, then controlled by Democrats refused to move forward if that was the case.
Then, as now your party is scum. Cynical, say-anything, scum.
Steam and INDAVA, well how about the innuendo that he had an affair with a lobbyist? Not one fact, not one supporting that premise was put forth. Yet, there it is.
In fact, if memory serves - both you were on board with it at the time…
Scum.
9. FmrMarine | April 28th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
Matt;
Between the “reverend” wright blowing his racist marxist garbage all over the country.
We now have the “reverend” al $harpstone threatening a RIOT in New York because he disagrees with the LEGAL outcome of a trial, and RIOTS in Denver if earbama isnt anointed by the rats super delegates.
Is the “CHANGE” ear bama promises white America?
cowtow to the black race or we will burn down our cities?
If white America is watching this B hussein obama will be toast in nov.
Heck i may even hold my nose close my eyes say la la la and vote for the king RINO, McLame. UGH!! shower time!
10. Beehive | April 28th, 2008 at 7:37 pm
8. Kahn | April 28th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
“Telstar, the DEMOCRAT council for Congress has publicly stated that the only reason mcCain was included in the scandal was because otherwise the Keating “four” were 100% Democrat ”
Can you provide the quote from the Democratic council? I would love to see it. I think McCain met with Keating on two separate occasions and then a $112,000 campaign contribution arrived. I think the only reason he was able to get off was because Keating was a constituent.
I am getting this from Bush and Rove’s 2000 South Carolina campaign literature so it has already been vetted.
11. Tractatus | April 28th, 2008 at 8:12 pm
Which manufactured stories regarding questionable actions of McSame are you referring to?
Well, there’s that one about the crazy, anti-Catholic, anti-gay preacher whose support McCain both sought and proudly trumpets. Oh, wait….
Remember:
Republican + crazy preacher = Good!
Democrat + crazy preacher = The single most important issue our country faces (aside from flag pins, of course)
Funny how Matt Margolis dutifully obeys the talking-point-o-matic and “thinks” any questionable actions by McCain are “non-issues” but then manufactured stories about Clinton or Obama are so important.
12. Matt Margolis | April 28th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
Tractatus,
What’s more amusing is that you think Hagee’s endorsement of McCain is even close to Obama’s longterm relationship with Wright which include 20 something years of attending his church. If you think that’s the same thing, then you’re a fool. McCain repudiated Hagee’s anti-Catholic comments. Barack Obama refused to disown Wright, and has said that he didn’t think his church was controversial.
The issue here is not about an endorsement. You can’t control who endorses you. But in addition to Obama’s two-decades-long relationship with Wright, Wright also had a role in Obama’s campaign.
But you see, this is how you’ve proved my point… Wright is a legitimate issue, as it speaks to Obama’s character that he apparently didn’t find anything wrong with Wright’s anti-American, racist comments for 20 years. So, what do Obamaniacs do? they try to make Hagee a similar problem for McCain when it’s not even close.
13. The Sun God Ra | April 28th, 2008 at 8:58 pm
Rezko keeps getting associated with Obama on this blog. Fair game I guess for intellectual cretins but be honest and admitt Rezkos’ ties to Karl Rove and the Bush administration. A simple Google of Rezko + Rove will provide more than enough substantiation. The authoritarian posters here might also be interested in this link. I can imagine the hysteria now….
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/04/why-indies-are.html
14. Diana Powe | April 28th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
I think the “manufactured story” about McCain along this line is the one that appears in sworn testimony:
Senator John McCain, as Matt would put it, a completely “typical politician”.
15. neocon | April 28th, 2008 at 10:16 pm
First of all Diana, Obama is the one going around claiming to not be the typical politician. So highlighting McCains “typical politician” tactics is just a transparent and pathetic distraction from Obamas dalliances that you ultimately have no answer for.
Secondly, you have proven so far that McCain wrote a letter on behalf of the developer. Big scandal.
16. Diana Powe | April 28th, 2008 at 10:28 pm
neocon,
Obviously, you didn’t read and comprehend the last sentence in the quoted text. Senator McCain has claimed, falsely, that he stands off from lobbyists. In actuality, they’re right there with him on the inappropriately named “Straight Talk Express”.
17. js | April 28th, 2008 at 10:50 pm
so tell us putz…why is it that your changing the blog from obama and his problems…and making a about mccain and your imagination….dont you usually get deleted about here…..
rezko was tight with obama…thats a fact…nobody else who is strapped for cash drops that much on a landlocked, unappreciable piece of property without a reason…and there was absolutely no investment potential there….unless it was just a back door to a politicaly corrupt deal….buying senator obama…for a piece of dirt…get that…the only people that dont are liberals that think obama is somtin he aint….and trust me…he aint no savior for the DNC….shoot…he cant even keep his nose out of his cousins insurgency against kenya’s legally elected government….let alone…figure out what a racist is….
and you guys want this moron to be president??
18. Steve | April 28th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
Great site you have!
Would you like a Link Exchange with The Internet Radio Network? At the IRN you can listen for free to over 70 of America’s top Talk Shows via Free Streaming Audio…
http://netradionetwork.com
19. Kahn | April 28th, 2008 at 11:49 pm
But you ignore the actual example I gave. Pathetic. Actually dangerous.
20. Kahn | April 28th, 2008 at 11:54 pm
Beehive, just for you. From Wikipedia - but available in other places…
“After 1999, the only member of the Keating Five remaining in the U.S. Senate was John McCain, who is the Republican candidate in the 2008 U.S. presidential election. Before McCain was named the presumptive nominee, The New York Times ran an article on January 28, 2008 revisiting the scandal in addition to some other allegations of inappropriate behavior by McCain. Robert S. Bennett, whom McCain had hired to represent him in this matter, defended McCain’s character and was one of many people who criticized the piece. Bennett, who was the special investigator during the Keating Five scandal that The Times revisited in the article, said that he fully investigated McCain back then and suggested to the Senate Ethics Committee to not pursue charges against McCain because of “no evidence against him.” Bennett was coincidentally on Hannity and Colmes the night the story broke to talk about his autobiography. On the show, he said that he felt the Committee pursued charges against McCain because, without him, the case would have been entirely against Democrats. [6]”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keating_Five
21. Kahn | April 28th, 2008 at 11:56 pm
Diana - lobbyists are evil?
So, teachers unions, Teamsters, NAACP, Sierra Club, proponents of wind and other alternative energy should all stay out eh?
It is our system.
22. dickvee | April 29th, 2008 at 12:12 am
Two items divulged in this mess that will cause irreparable damage to the dems nominee. Originally Obama said Wright was ‘like an Uncle to me’…(Uncle said our flag equals Al Q’s..and our Marines are like the Romans who crucified Christ)….and Wright himself divulged the fact today, that he wasn’t featured at Obama’s original announcement of running for President, but he prayed with the family in the basement beforehand. Obama’s untruths are being uncovered. Gonna be awful hard to make us whitey’s believe his upcoming forceful speech disowning Wright. He may get 98% of the racist black votes, but he’ll get few from anyone else with half a brain. Half a brain is what the dems usually count on.
23. Barack Obama News »&hellip | April 29th, 2008 at 12:25 am
[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]
24. Dennis | April 29th, 2008 at 2:01 am
Matt, in post 12 you keep beating that dead horse about Obama refusing to disown Wright. He should not do so. Since you invoked the topic, I feel free to refer you and your readers to the video link down in the body of the article linked below.
You should at the least allow Wright the basic right to define himself, rather than wearing the ill-fitting cloak of bigotry you keep wanting to hang on him. The video of his talk at the National Press Club is rather long (48 min); the first half is his talk, the second half is answers to questions - but it is pithy and substantial. If you listened to this with a modicum of objectivity it would neutralize most of the false assumptions created by the highly prejudicial, selectively edited coverage of his most controversial sound bites, by providing an intelligent context within which to evaluate them.
Without such reasonable context, all those sound bites are little more than pretext for the false accusations of bigotry you and others like dickvee (above) keep pumping here.
Of course dedicating a half hour or so to objective listening and learning is a lot to ask of rabid Obama haters, not to mention Wright haters. But Wright might actually have something about reconciliation to teach you and your resident theologian Noonan, if you had half a mind for understanding. Dickvee says, “Half a brain is what the dems usually count on.” Do you have even that much? Are you intellectually game enough to hear it?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/29/us/politics/29watc.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=slogin
25. Freedom1 | April 29th, 2008 at 4:21 am
Have to add another name to this list of shame and corruption…
44. FmrMarine | April 28th, 2008 at 6:37 pm
1. Not a neighbor, a KNOWN MOBSTER.
2. This BOZO earbama is running for PRESIDENT for crying out loud.
He had NO CLUE about rezko?
He had NO CLUE about wright?
He had NO CLUE he BELONGED to a marxist, Afrocentric CULT?
He had NO CLUE his friend, advisor, pastor has ties with the nation of islam?
Robert Blackwell Jr. - Obama had NO CLUE he was a typical politician!
This empty suit sure does have NO CLUE….period.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Showing once again that Obama is either TOO STUPID or TOO CORRUPT to be a Senator let alone the President.
26. Freedom1 | April 29th, 2008 at 4:43 am
Obama’s Church: Gospel of Hate - Frontpagemag.com
27. js | April 29th, 2008 at 9:09 am
so in reality, black theology isnt christian at all…but heretical…and they worship thier own separate religion that has a false god…who does not love us for who we are…but kills whitey because of the color of his skin…
its a shame this even exists…over a half of a million white men died in the civil war…to end slavery….this condemnation of white men and white society is no better than the original slave holders who sold black slaves from africa…to white men…..a lie can make it around the world twice before the truth gets out….and surely….wright and obama are a complete, unadulterated lie….
28. Rich | April 29th, 2008 at 10:08 am
This is getting too funny. You libs complained that Wright was taken out of context for the past few weeks. So what does he do? He has a press conference and shoves these views right back into the open. Now Dennis has the gall to say he was taken out of context again? Are you serious Dennis? You are a joke.
29. InDaVa | April 29th, 2008 at 10:18 am
“In fact, if memory serves - both you were on board with it at the time…
Scum.”
Kahn , you old fart. Wrong scumbag! I thought that was a non-issue as well. I expected nothing less from you though.
Oh and don’t you know Kahn that you shouldn’t use Wikipedia, as it isn’t a credible source here. Nice try at deflecting though.
Very typical, you think McCain was totally innocent in the Keating Five scandal? I will quote Matt Margolis and say that McCain’s actions in the Keating Five scandal are “questionable” at best. Only one of the Keating five is running for President?
This is where you say ‘it’s a non-issue’. Round and round we go….
30. Amanda | April 29th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
Tiny problem there, though. McCain actively sought Hagee’s endorsement.
31. Dennis | April 29th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Yes Rich, I’m serious. Are you? Did you listen to Wright’s presentation at the Nat’l Press Club, unedited and in full context? I didn’t think so.
Unless you let Wright speak for himself in full and evaluate his words by Scriptural and historical criteria, you have no standing to ridicule or diminish him. You’re just repeating hearsay. That doesn’t hold up in a court of law - but the court of public opinion is a vulgar venue.
If you knew anything about the Bible you would recall the Old Testament prophet Jeremiah was hated for being an anti-patriot, for pronouncing the nation under the judgment of God and prophesying doom. He was persecuted, imprisoned and finally thrown into a deep, miry pit. The king preferred false prophets who only spoke of national greatness. Too late the nation learned the false prophets had been wrong and Jeremiah was right. Because they spurned all calls to repentance, the Jews were taken into Babylonian capitivity and their nation taken from them. See http://www.injil.org/TWOR/56.html
I do not necessarily compare Rev. Wright to the Old Testament Jeremiah, but there are enough parallels to be very wary of dismissing him out of hand. He makes a strong case for many of his controversial remarks - but it takes some Scriptural erudition to discern this. To judge him by political or even shallower “patriotic” criteria is a real mistake. Obama should not disown him.
Jeremiah Wright is an American patriot (six years in the Marine Corps), he is a scholar and moreover he is a genuine Christian. And indeed he also is misjudged, grossly and preemptively - largely by people without the knowledge or qualification to even understand what he is saying, let alone judge it.
32. Beehive | April 29th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
8. Kahn | April 28th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
“Telstar, the DEMOCRAT council
Bennett is your democratic council? He’s a repug and may even be a neocon.
“Bennett was coincidentally on Hannity and Colmes.” This line alone should have been a dead give away.
33. Kahn | April 29th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
Beehive, actually - you are wrong. He’s Democrat and was council to the Senate during the affair. It is hard to discuss this with someone as ignorant and hate filled as you.
He was promoting a book and was scheduled to be on before the scandal broke. He was the actual lawyer working for the Senate. But why let facts cloud your hatred and ignorance.
So, G.F.Y.
What an a**hole.
34. Kahn | April 29th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
Well, one point. Bennett is a Republican NOW. He was a Democrat THEN. Before he became disillusioned with the sanctimonious hysterical left.
Of course, he was THE guy on the scene. The actual player. And history now records that the Senate Council told the Democrats that McCain wasn’t involved and they attacked him anyways for purely political reasons. So, put that in your pipe and smoke it. Better take the hash out first.
35. Kahn | April 29th, 2008 at 11:41 pm
Ever notice how these strings go silent after you make a good point on the conservative side> God forbid a liberal admit he or she is wrong about ANYTHING.
Liberal infallibility.