Interesting:

A former employee of Mutual Bank Corp. seeks $4.2 million in damages, claiming he was wrongfully fired after alerting his superiors to concerns involving a loan given to felon Antoin “Tony” Rezko.

In a lawsuit filed in Cook County Circuit Court, Kenneth J. Conner, a graduate of Benedictine University in Lisle, says his bosses at Mutual Bank in south suburban Harvey terminated him after he spoke up about a missing report regarding a South Side Chicago parcel belonging to Rezko, a fundraiser for Illinois politicians who was convicted in a multimillion-dollar kickback scheme.

Rezko’s wife, Rita, in June 2005 closed on purchasing the parcel for $625,000, aided by a $500,000 loan from Mutual, the lawsuit states.

A portion of the property – 10 square feet – was eventually sold in January 2006 to Barack and Michelle Obama.

However, Conner claims when bank officials asked him in either late 2005 or early 2006 to appraise the property, he concluded the parcel was overvalued by at least $125,000. He said his report was included in a file kept by the bank.

The lawsuit then states on Oct. 19, 2006, the bank received a subpoena from a Chicago grand jury asking for that bank file while federal officials investigated Rezko. The lawsuit alleges the file turned over to FBI officials failed to include Conner’s report and instead reflected an appraisal dated June 15, 2005, stating the value of the parcel was $625,000. Conner claims when he discovered his report was removed, he went to his bosses who fired him in October 2007, not wanting attention from a high-profile case.

Very screwy – the property is valued at 500K, that is how much the Rezko’s obtained from Mutual Bank; where did the other 125K come from and go to? Chicago politics is, of course, corrupt from top to bottom and Chicago business is hip deep in it – this wasn’t done out of altruism but because the people involved were a well-connected wire-puller and a up-and-coming Democratic politician. Juxtapose this with the stories that Rezko has started to sing, and we can see a spreading scandal which laps ever closer to Obama.

You really want to help elect this guy, liberals?

Want national health care? Well, be careful what you wish for:

Dozens of incentive schemes have been uncovered which allow GPs to profit by slashing the number of patients they refer for hospital care.

Under one scheme, GPs stand to gain £59 for every patient not referred to hospital, if they cut an average referral rate by between two and eight per cent.

Torbay care trust in Devon will pay up to £15,000 to the average-sized GP practice if it hits a swathe of targets, including reducing hospital referrals.

NHS managers say referral rates, which rose 16 per cent nationwide during the first quarter of this year, have to be cut to save money. They claim many patients can receive equally good care from community NHS staff, such as physiotherapists and nurses.

But critics fear that patients could suffer if GPs’ decisions are swayed by the prospect of a cash bonus.

A leading surgeon said that patients’ cancers had already gone undiagnosed after they were denied specialist care under two such “referral management” schemes.

Orthopaedic surgeon Stephen Cannon, former president of the British Orthopaedic Association and a consultant surgeon at the Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, described the cases as an “absolutely terrible” warning that decisions by non-specialist doctors could have devastating consequences.

He said: “I recently encountered two cases in which patients referred to physiotherapists later turned out to have a malignant tumour. If they had been sent to a consultant the outcome may have been very different.

“In one case a young man was referred to a physiotherapist because of sudden knee pain. Had he come to a specialist the symptoms should have been recognised and he should have been urgently referred to an oncologist. In this case, after the delays, the outcome was amputation. It was devastating for the patient and his family.”

If we could find a way to staff a national health service entirely with Saints, we’d be ok – but as we’re going to staff any health service with human beings, we’re going to have to deal with the fact that human beings will act, well, like humans.

Think of it like this: the bureaucrat in charge of budget matters wants to find a way to cut costs because the government is pleased when costs are kept low and money is freed up for new initiatives which make it look like things are constantly advancing – now, the bureaucrat can cut costs by cutting bureaucracy, or by cutting services to patients. Which way do you think the bureaucrat will go? Cutting the bureaucracy means you’ll have a bunch of people you work with shouting at you and threatening to go out on strike, which will make your elected bosses look bad, and they won’t like you as a result…cutting patient care means that people you don’t know won’t receive treatments you don’t know about with results you’ll never be made aware of. Its a no-brainer – unless the bureaucrat is a Saint along the lines of Francis of Assisi…and just as soon as the socialized medicine people find thousands of Saint Francises to staff our health care system then I’ll find it in my heart to support such a scheme.

We’re getting back into the region of a statistical dead heat:

Democrat Barack Obama’s lead over Republican John McCain in the presidential race has dropped to 3 points, according to a Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll released on Sunday.

Obama leads McCain by 48 to 45 percent among likely U.S. voters, down 1 percentage point from Saturday. The four-day tracking poll, which has a margin of error of 2.9 points.

Pollster John Zogby said the numbers were good news for McCain, and probably reflected a bump following his appearance in the third and final presidential debate on Wednesday.

“For the first time in the polling McCain is up above 45 percent. There is no question something has happened,” Zogby said.

He said the Arizona senator appeared to have solidified his support with the Republican base — where 9 out of 10 voters now back him — and was also gaining ground among the independents who may play a decisive role in the November 4 election.

Obama’s lead among independent voters dropped to 8 points on Sunday from 16 points a day earlier.

‘RED FLAGS’

“If that trend continues, it is something that has got to raise red flags for Obama,” Zogby said. “It suggests to me that his outward look of confidence may be as much strategy as it is real.”

I agree with that – while Obama and his MSM cheerleaders are trying to convince all and sundry that the race is over, the actions of Obama are telling a different story. Obama’s money, time and staffing are going in places which indicate a need to thread the needle, especially if it turns out that Pennsylvania is falling to McCain (the time in the “red” States can be a sign of victory, or a sign that Obama realizes that to get to 270 he’ll have to peel off more “red” States than he originally anticipated – Murtha calling western Pennsylvanians a bunch of racists will not help Obama in that State). Ten days from now, if McCain is back in Michigan and Obama is right behind him, then anticipate a long night for Obama on November 4th.

The hometown paper – and while newspaper endorsements are usually not all that big a deal, in the very closely divided State of Nevada, any small thing can make a big difference:

…Sen. McCain has a proven record of battling the drunken sailor culture so pervasive in our nation’s capital. He has been an outspoken advocate for fiscal restraint, angering many of his colleagues by embarrassing them over their penchant for pork. Sen. McCain vows to veto any bill that includes earmarks and says he will freeze spending in many areas of the budget.

That would represent real change.

Sen. McCain opposes any tax hikes, recognizing that in these troubled times leaving money in the hands of those who earned it offers the best hope for encouraging the creativity and entrepreneurship that defines this nation’s legacy. He would be far more likely to appoint judges who respect freedom and individual liberty and who recognize the restraints our Constitution imposes on the federal government.

On energy, Sen. McCain — while acknowledging the importance of developing alternative sources — understands that for the foreseeable future the nation must continue to harness its domestic supplies of clean coal and oil. This is in stark contrast to Sen. Obama, who falls in line behind the greens and advocates a radical and massively expensive economic upheaval in order to build more windmills and solar panels.

But while the economy has jumped to the fore in this campaign, the United States remains engaged across the globe in a struggle to establish democracy in Iraq and cripple the Islamic extremism that led to 9/11. We are winning — and Sen. McCain is best prepared to ensure we continue on that course.

No, Sen. McCain’s service as a Naval aviator in Vietnam — including his five years in a POW camp, during which he was mentally and physically tortured — don’t automatically qualify him for the presidency. But his experience certainly offers a snapshot of the man’s character, honor and sense of duty.

Sen. McCain realizes the long-term ramifications for failure in Iraq and is prepared to make the difficult decisions that will no doubt confront our next commander in chief. His military background and foreign policy expertise project an image of strength, decisiveness and determination, in stark contrast to Sen. Obama, who has voted to cut and run in Iraq and was spending time as a “community organizer” in Chicago while Sen. McCain was distinguishing himself on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Our national security would be in good hands with Sen. McCain in the White House.

“Hope is necessary in every condition,” wrote Samuel Johnson. And even during these trying months, Americans retain the sense of optimism and conviction that have served as pilot lights for this nation’s very survival over the past 230 years. Regardless of who is elected this November, we will emerge from these times stronger in spirit. But one man is uniquely qualified to guide us through any coming storms, both domestically and overseas.

That man is John McCain.

Couldn’t have said it any better, myself – leaving aside Obama’s connections with the corrupt and the anti-American, the hard facts of Campaign ’08 clearly indicate that only Senator John McCain has the experience, judgment and courage to be President of the United States in these hard times. On the economy, War on Terrorism, military policy, foreign policy, social issues and right on down the line, McCain has staked out the positions which are common sense and entirely in line with mainstream American views. The man and the hour have truly met, and John McCain is that man and this is his hour.

The New York Times doing oppo research on Cindy McCain for the Obama campaign generates this response from Mrs. McCain’s attorney:

…Any further attempts to harass and injure her … will be met with an appropriate response. While she may be in the public eye, she is not public property nor the property of the press to abuse and defame.

It is worth noting that you have not employed your investigative assets looking into Michelle Obama. You have not tried to find Barack Obama’s drug dealer that he wrote about in his book, Dreams of My Father. Nor have you interviewed his poor relatives in Kenya and determined why Barack Obama has not rescued them. Thus, there is a terrific lack of balance here.

I suggest to you that none of these subjects on either side are worthy of the energy and resources of The New York Times. They are cruel hit pieces designed to injure people that only the worst rag would investigate and publish. I know you and your colleagues are always preaching about raising the level of civil discourse in our political campaigns. I think taking some your own medicine is in order here…(emphasis added)

If it was just peachy to have us treated to President Bush’s ancient DUI in 2000, why can’t we get a page 1, above-the-fold interview with Obama’s drug dealer? Is he dead? In jail? What is the story on the guy? How about some conversations with an ex-boyfriend of Mrs. Obama? And the people have a right to know just how many of Obama’s cousins live in abject poverty in Kenya. But, none of that – and, of course, none of it would be relevant, anyways…but the fact that we are getting the MSM looking into the less flattering aspects of Mrs. McCain’s life (and who among us doesn’t have some of those which we’d be mortified to find reported in the pages of the New York Times?) and not getting the dirt on the Obamas shows the MSM bias.

You can bet dollars to donuts that the MSM – in coordination with the Obama campaign – will dump as many nasty stories about the McCains and the Palins as they can in the last week of the campaign. Tabloid trash to be trotted out when its too late for McCain/Palin to make a response. And while Team Obama will say they had nothing to do with it, the facts of reporting on Campaign ’08 clearly indicate collusion between Team Obama and various elements in the MSM…they are just too often on the exact same page at the exact same time for it to be mere coincidence (this, by the way, is another criminal investigation to have done once McCain/Palin are in office – whether or not the apparent coordination between Obama and the MSM can be proved and, if it can, who gets to go to jail over it).

I will give this advice to Obama and the MSM – for us on the right, chivalry is not dead. When we see you launching cruel attacks against honorable women, it makes our blood boil and all the more determined to emerge victorious, if only to teach you how to treat ladies with proper respect. The things being done to Mrs. McCain and governor Palin are things which, in a different age, would result in a duel. We cannot get that satisfaction in 2008, but we can sure as heck do everything we can to make you eat your disgusting words.

Yeesh!

A host of well-known figures, including some Republicans, have indicated they would be willing to serve in some capacity as Obama begins to acquire a winner’s glow. From Senator John Kerry, the 2004 presidential candidate with hopes of becoming secretary of state, to Larry Summers, a former US Treasury secretary under President Bill Clinton, and Chuck Hagel, the Republican senator who has been tipped as defence secretary, there are plenty who have signalled their availability.

A guy who compared our soldiers to savages; a guy who was asleep at the switch while the accounting scandal grew in corporate America; a RINO who will just tick off Republicans if he were appointed in an Obama Administration; yeah, that’s the way to bring us together…I’ll also note, with care, that all three of them – like Obama’s VP pick – are hip deep in the politics-as-usual, culture of corruption which is Washington DC…not a maverick or outside amongst them. The change we need – in a pig’s eye.

In his weekly radio address:

…some big problems with my opponent’s claim that he will cut income taxes for 95 percent of Americans. You might ask: How do you cut income taxes for 95 percent of Americans, when more than 40 percent pay no income taxes right now? How do you reduce the number zero?

Well, that’s the key to Barack Obama’s whole plan: Since you can’t reduce taxes on those who pay zero, the government will write them all checks called a tax credit. And the Treasury will cover those checks by taxing other people, including a lot of folks just like Joe.

In other words, Barack Obama’s tax plan would convert the IRS into a giant welfare agency, redistributing massive amounts of wealth at the direction of politicians in Washington. I suppose when you’ve voted against lowering taxes 94 times, as Senator Obama has done, a new definition of the term “tax credit” comes in handy.

At least in Europe, the Socialist leaders who so admire my opponent are upfront about their objectives. They use real numbers and honest language. And we should demand equal candor from Senator Obama. Raising taxes on some in order to give checks to others is not a tax cut it’s just another government giveaway.

What’s more, the Obama tax increase would come at the worst possible time for America, and especially for small businesses like the one Joe dreams of owning. Small businesses provide 16 million jobs in America. And a sudden tax hike will kill those jobs at a time when need to be creating more jobs.

Fortunately, America has an alternative to the phony tax cut my opponent started talking about only months ago. The McCain-Palin tax cut is the real thing. Among our other serious tax reforms, we’re going to reduce every income tax bill in America, and double the child deduction for every family. We will cut the capital gains tax. And we will cut business taxes to help create jobs, and keep American businesses in America.

As Joe the Plumber has now reminded us all, America didn’t become the greatest nation on earth by letting government “spread the wealth around.” In this country, we believe in spreading opportunity, for those who need jobs and those who create them. And that is exactly what I intend to do as President of the United States.

It would be nice if Obama and his Democrats would come right out and say what they’ll do if the do win the trifecta of White House/House/Senate. Of course, if they were to announce clearly just how much taxing, spending and tearing down of traditional morality they plan, they’d not win that trifecta, now would they? So Obama is reduced to a fiscal sleight of hand in order to try and fool a majority into supporting him – and it may work, thanks to an MSM which is fawning in its coverage of The One.

Fortunately for us, we do have a real choice on November 4th – John McCain and Sarah Palin are coming on strong and battling it out toe to toe with Obama and his liberal and leftist allies. With the polls tightening over the past few days, we can see that this race will go right down to the wire and, in the end, I’m very hopeful that McCain will pull off the biggest upset in American political history. Should we win this battle then we’ll be able to proudly state that while being slandered by the MSM and outspent massively by the Democrats, we still managed to secure the support of the American people – and John McCain will have secured a mandate to bring about the real change we need to get America back on track.

Archbishop Chaput states the case:

When Jesus tells the Pharisees and Herodians in the Gospel of Matthew (22:21) to ”render unto the Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s,” he sets the framework for how we should think about religion and the state even today. Caesar does have rights. We owe civil authority our respect and appropriate obedience. But that obedience is limited by what belongs to God. Caesar is not God. Only God is God, and the state is subordinate and accountable to God for its treatment of human persons, all of whom were created by God. Our job as believers is to figure out what things belong to Caesar, and what things belong to God – and then to put those things in right order in our own lives, and in our relations with others…

…As Christians, we can’t claim to love God and then ignore the needs of our neighbors. Loving God is like loving a spouse. A husband may tell his wife that he loves her, and of course that’s very beautiful. But she’ll still want to see the evidence in his actions. Likewise if we claim to be ”Catholic,” we need to prove it by our behavior. And serving other people by working for justice and charity in our nation’s political life is one of the very important ways we do that…

…I believe that Senator Obama, whatever his other talents, is the most committed ”abortion-rights” presidential candidate of either major party since the Roe v. Wade abortion decision in 1973. Despite what (pro-Obama Catholic) Prof. Kmiec suggests, the party platform Senator Obama runs on this year is not only aggressively ”pro-choice;” it has also removed any suggestion that killing an unborn child might be a regrettable thing. On the question of homicide against the unborn child – and let’s remember that the great Lutheran pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer explicitly called abortion ”murder” – the Democratic platform that emerged from Denver in August 2008 is clearly anti-life.

Prof. Kmiec argues that there are defensible motives to support Senator Obama. Speaking for myself, I do not know any proportionate reason that could outweigh more than 40 million unborn children killed by abortion and the many millions of women deeply wounded by the loss and regret abortion creates.To suggest – as some Catholics do – that Senator Obama is this year’s ”real” prolife candidate requires a peculiar kind of self-hypnosis, or moral confusion, or worse. To portray the 2008 Democratic Party presidential ticket as the preferred ”prolife” option is to subvert what the word ”prolife” means. Anyone interested in Senator Obama’s record on abortion and related issues should simply read Prof. Robert P. George’s Public Discourse essay from earlier this week, ”Obama’s Abortion Extremism,” and his follow-up article, ”Obama and Infanticide.” They say everything that needs to be said.

I understand the argument – while Obama is pro-choice (so-called), he’ll provide those social services for pregnant women which will convince them that they can, indeed, carry the child to term. There are two flaws in this argument:

1. It pre-supposes that the vast majority of abortions are the result of mere lack of resources for pregnant women.

2. Even if it is verified that lack of resources are at the bottom of most abortions, Obama’s support for the inhuman “Freedom of Choice Act” would still disqualify him for pro-life support because it would prevent any regulation of abortion at all, including the ban on the horrific barbarism known as “partial birth abortion”.

We can’t really know why abortions occur because the abortion-industry fights desperately to prevent any sort of comprehensive, independent study of the matter which would allow us to understand who is getting abortions and why they do it and, of course, what physical or psychological problems might result from it (yes, I know there are studies – but the sort of study we need to render a judgment on this has not been done, and will never be done if the abortion industry has anything to say about). My best guess on the matter is that most abortions result from an attitude rather than a need – there is a huge network of groups around the nation who will provide pre- and post-natal care, parenting classes and adoption services for any pregnant woman who is contemplating abortion but wondering if there’s a way to bring the baby to term. Give this support network, I don’t buy the argument that an increase in resources would have a large effect on reducing abortions – there might be a marginal improvement, but nothing which would justify a pro-life person supporting a pro-abortion candidate, supposing that candidate steps up and offers vastly increased resources for pregnant women.

To be sure, I want vastly greater resources applied to the issue – with the preference for faith-based groups dispensing the aid, as they are most likely to be both genuinely caring and cost-effective with taxpayer dollars. But to decrease the number of abortions requires a mental and moral shift in that portion of the population of the United States which obtains abortions. It requires, in my view, a lack of respect for life, a lack of respect for self and a feeling of despair to get an abortion – we have plenty of such people in the Unite States because we’ve spent decades now propagandizing for the culture of death, the degradation of the self and that life is a hopeless misery. With the relentlessness and ubiquity of the propaganda, it is absolutely no surprise that we have a large number of abortions – but the key to the fact of abortions is the lack of respect for life, which lack of respect was greatly accelerated when the Supreme Court rendered its unconstitutional Roe decision.

Ultimately, to lower the number of abortions will require a renewed respect for life, and self, and an end to despair. Given this, we of the pro-life community daren’t offer our support for those who advance the cause of abortion. It would be one thing to offer up some support to a person who merely refuses to ban abortion or restrict it, its quite another to support someone – like Obama – who have pledged themselves in advance to support the most extreme pro-abortion positions.

In the battle for life in 2008, the only rational choice for a pro-life American is to support Senator John McCain and governor Sarah Palin. Only they are pledged to a stout defense of life and to advance laws, regulations and judges who will allow the pro-life community to slowly, bit by bit, change America back into a nation with an inherent respect for life.

Watch TV:

FOX News on Obama [Stanley Kurtz]

FOX News is going to be airing a special report this weekend on Barack Obama’s background, associations, etc. I did a long taped interview for the show, and I expect that parts of it will be used. The report is scheduled to air today (Saturday) at 9PM ET, Sunday at 5AM ET, and again on Sunday at 2PM ET.

Kurtz, you might recall, is the guy who has been targeted by leftwing, Obamaniac-inspired thuggery for daring to express his opinions. This might be very much worth seeing.

But don’t question their patriotism:

…Not present, or at least not singing the National Anthem at the rally was Londonderry senior Zach Bencal.

Bencal, who sings the anthem for a number of school events and is actively involved in local community theatre, had been contacted by the Obama campaign to sing the anthem. He agreed to do so, then was told later in the evening the anthem had been scratched from the program. Bencal said he was told by the campaign the decision was a simple programming change to make room for another speaker.

“I guess it just wasn’t meant to be,” Bencal said.

Sandra Abrevaya, communications director for the Obama campaign’s Manchester office, confirmed the choice had simply been a last-minute scratch from the rally’s program, which included the Pledge of Allegiance…

“Last minute scratch from the program” would more normally, in America, be excluded – perhaps – some down-ballot candidate. Memo to Team Obama: the Pledge of Allegiance and the Star Spangled Banner are vital parts of any campaign for President of the United States. All the time and everywhere.

Its like we’ve now got a chance of electing the anti-patriots to the White House…