Obama's 2006 Earmarks & the Crown Family

Do you remember the Crown family?  Do you remember the Crown patriarch who sits on the board of Maytag?  Do you recall that Barack Obama, as a U.S. Senate candidate, met with Maytag workers, asked for their donations and promised them he'd help save their jobs, and that he then went to the Crown family and took their large donations, but never said a word to Crown about saving the jobs of the Maytag workers? (Crown confirmed in a newspaper interview that Obama never asked him about saving the Maytag jobs.)

Andy just alerted me to Jeralyn's post at TalkLeft, in which she highlights Obama's earmarks for General Dynamics, one of the largest military contractors in the world, and its ties to Chicago's Crown family.

"Among [Obama's earmarks are] an $8 million request for the 'High Explosive Air Burst Technology Program'. Ultimately, $1.3 million in funding was awarded for the program," writes Jeralyn.

the defense project was overseen by General Dynamics, one of the nation's largest military contractors. Obama's Illinois finance chairman, James S. Crown, serves on the company's board of directors and his family holds a sizable stake in the company.

"Crown and his wife, Paula Crown," Jeralyn adds, "are members of Obama's National Finance Committee and have raised more than $200,000 for the Obama campaign, according to a list of fundraisers posted on Obama's campaign website."

Huh.  I guess not confronting the Crown family about saving those Maytag jobs has worked out well for Sen. Obama.  (If you've never seen the video, check out what Machinists Union president Tom Buffenbarger -- who tried to save those Maytag jobs -- thinks of Barack Obama.)

SO MUCH FOR THE LITTLE PEOPLE. The disappearing middle class, blue-collar workers, sinking into poverty.  They're joining the "forgotten people":

:::::::::

Next, here's Riehl World View's take on the earmark related to Michelle Obama:

First, Riehl notes that Obama obtained this earmark:

Obama Requested $1 Million For Construction Of A New Hospital Pavilion At The University Of Chicago. In 2006, Obama requested that the University of Chicago receive $1 million to support its Construction of New Hospital Pavilion. For more than 75 years, the University of Chicago Hospitals (UCH) has provided state of the art medical care on the South Side of Chicago.

Then Riehl points out:

From the Campaign Spot to NRO's Byron York. Looks like Daddy-O brought home the bacon so Mommy-O could bring home even more bacon, too.

"In 2006, the Chicago Tribune reported that Mrs. Obama's compensation at the University of Chicago Hospital, where she is a vice president for community affairs, jumped from $121,910 in 2004, just before her husband was elected to the Senate, to $316,962 in 2005, just after he took office." Looks like that raise was worth it.

Andy's comment in the thread at TalkLeft says it all:

Exactly the point of this post. It is and has been Obama the one whose raison d'etre as candidate has been his "different kind of politics" (anti-special interests, etc etc etc.).

What this proves is that he is just another politician. There would be nothing wrong with it except that his "urgency" of a Presidential run was based on "changing Washington" and the "politics as usual."

Ahem....

Lynn Sweet, a Chicago Sun-Times columnist, has more on Michelle Obama and Obama's other earmarks:

Obama sought money for the University of Chicago Hospitals. Wife Michelle works for the University of Chicago Hospitals, appointed in spring 2005 as vice president for community and external affairs at the University of Chicago Hospitals. She is now on leave from the job to campaign for her husband. Top campaign adviser and friend Valerie Jarrett is the Chair of the University of Chicago Medical Center Board and also Chair of the Executive Committee of that board. She has also been named Vice-Chair of the University's Board of Trustees. Obama taught at the U. of Chicago law school and the Obama's two daughters attend school there.

:::::::::

Jeralyn has an update:

Update: The AP says Obama has not responded to repeated requests to release his earmark legislation for six of his years in the Illinois Senate.



Display:


Obama and the Crown Family (2.00 / 5)

So much for the forgotten people.  (See the video.)


by susanhu on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 10:29:54 PM EST

Re: Obama and the Crown Family (2.00 / 7)

Maybe Brian Ross will take an interest in Mrs. Obama's extraordinarily generous employer and the remarkably beneficial timing of her massive raise!


by newhorizon on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 10:35:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama and the Crown Family (2.00 / 1)

None of this matters Obama fans can't see strait.  They don't care if this guy can add it'll be another 4 years of crap and on and on it goes.  No health care, no leaving iraq (powers said so)


by bradydundee on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:43:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Impressive! (2.00 / 1)

Your post is full of insinuation, suppositions and assumptions.  Running with the jist of the post, Obama is as dirty as your candidate.  Ok, let's play.  1 candidate who is dirty and the other is dirty as well.  So your argument is what?  Evaluate who has less dirt?  HRC still looses.  We've seen this play before.  It was called the 1990s and the actors were Newt, Bill, Rush,  Dick Army, Hillary.  The play was ok then but there's a new play now and the American ppl are choosing it over the old one.  Don't be sore about it :)


by Chavez100 on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 08:02:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Great Diary (2.00 / 4)

Another great diary. Thanks for doing the work that our national media should be doing. Ignore the flake you get, it's part of their condition - deny, deny, deny, then blame Hillary. I think they all have turrets syndrome.


by grlpatriot on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:45:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

As usual, deception from you (2.00 / 6)

"In 2006, the Chicago Tribune reported that Mrs. Obama's compensation at the University of Chicago Hospital, where she is a vice president for community affairs, jumped from $121,910 in 2004, just before her husband was elected to the Senate, to $316,962 in 2005, just after he took office." Looks like that raise was worth it.

Wouldn't it be appropriate to mention that she was promoted to a Vice President position in May 2005? I'm sure it's  impossible that someone with such a weak background - magna cum laude at Princeton and a JD from Harvard - could possibly have simply advanced into the executive ranks based on merit. No way. This has to be all Barack's evil doing.

I'll clue you in: that sort of resume is a ticket to an avalanche of cash, and it doesn't matter who your husband is. She could have spent a couple years making 250k+ at McKinsey and then settled into a cushy VP job anywhere in the country making twice that.

While we're disclosing people's finances, though - I observe that basically everything you post links to noquarter. How much do you make off that arrangement? If there's anything weaker than demagoguery for ideology, it's demagoguery for profit.

Ultimately, Obama's earmarks reflect fairly modest requests, and the fact that his wife works at a hospital shouldn't get them penalized. Obama also requested funds for other Chicago hospitals...

Obama Requested $2 Million For The Thorek Memorial Hospital Cancer Treatment Center

Obama Requested $1 Million For Alton Memorial Hospital To Support Its Riverbend Stroke Center.

Obama Requested $4 million For The Children's Memorial Medical Center's Electronic Medical Record Project.  In 2006, Obama requested $4 million for the Children's Memorial Medical Center's Electronic Medical Record Project.  The Children's Memorial Medical Center is Illinois' only freestanding acute care hospital dedicated exclusively to children, serving 102,000 children throughout Illinois in the past year.

Obama Requested $800,000 For A Training And Resource Center Of The Swedish Covenant Hospital.  In 2006, Obama requested that that Swedish Covenant Hospital receive $800,000 to support its Training and Resource Center.  Covenant Hospital is a 320-bed urban community hospital, the only independent non-profit hospital serving the culturally diverse north side of Chicago.

Obama Requested $2.5 Million For The Children's Hospital Of Illinois' Replacement Project.

Obama Requested $5 Million For Northwestern Memorial Hospital's Prentice Woman's Hospital.

Obama Requested $500,000 For The Children's Health Fund's Chicago Children's Health Project.

Obama Requested $10 Million Over Four Years, Beginning With $2.5 Million In FY 2006, For The Children's Hospital of Illinois (CHOI) Replacement Project;

We could go on.

But obviously, Obama requested earmarks for almost every hospital in Chicago merely as a smokescreen to cover a raise for his underqualified wife.


by mattw on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:56:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: As usual, deception from you (2.00 / 1)

Yeah, this is all so innocuous. Yep, that's easy to see. With a blindfold on!


by Fleaflicker on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:08:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: As usual, deception from you (2.00 / 1)

Huh?  He catches you red-handed cherry-picking Obama's earmarks to present a misleading impression of corruption on Obama's part and begging the question is the best you can do in response?  


by knutsondc on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:34:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama/Rezko '08 (2.00 / 1)

You conveniently forget that Obama is embroiled in Chicago style politics and that those kind of politics extends to the hospitals as well. Obama reeks of the Tony Rezko stench. The inappropriate use of money for the Chicago hospitals is part of the ongoing trial against Rezko. Obama's role in helping funnel taxpayers' money into Rezko's diverse corruption schemes is not something you'd necessarily would want to highlight if you're working on Obama's behalf.


Grumpy, reluctant, sore-losing, unhappy, irritable Hillary supporter for Barack Obama 2008
by DemAC on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 09:02:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: As usual, deception from you (none / 0)

Where are his earmarks for 2005-2006?  Why won't he release them?  He seems pretty interested in the Clintons' tax returns, yet can't release earmarks that are public, rather than private information.


by cmugirl90 on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:23:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: As usual, deception from you (2.00 / 1)

He has. Obama has released his earmarks from all years he has been in the US senate... and his tax returns. Hillary has released no earmarks and no tax returns.


by mattw on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:05:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: As usual, deception from you (2.00 / 1)

Your ignorance shows when you don't even know that Sen. Clinton has NOT released her own earmarks, for whatever reason - but probably because she is afraid of such disgusting bile as is presented in this diary and probably has to expect much more of it than Obama, given that she requested much more money for earmarks than him.

But keep on smearing and hating, if that makes your miserable soul happy.


by marcotom on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:41:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama and the Crown Family (2.00 / 4)

You what's interesting? Hillary won't even release her earmarks. But then again considering one of them is for open government and the other is for Bush style secrecy (see: No earmarks, no taxes, no whitehouse records, no whitehouse phone logs, etc) its not to suprising-- I guess the little people don't deserve to know what Hillary's been up to.


by Socraticsilence on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:42:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks (2.00 / 4)

So, instead of Obama, who has a handful of earmarks, we should support...Hillary Clinton, who has more earmarks than anyone else running for president?

Here's what The Nation had to say about Hillary's earmarks last year:

The Hill reported yesterday that Hillary Clinton inserted more earmarks into the latest defense spending bill than any other Senator except for Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin. The 26 earmarks, totaling $148.4 million, mostly went to the New York-based defense industry. (For more on Hillary's ties to military contractors, see the Village Voice article "Mama Warbucks.")

These earmarks appear to be legitimate and above board. But that didn't stop the RNC from calling Hillary the "President of Pork" or John McCain from noting that the Pentagon did not request them.

And Hillary is vulnerable on the issue. When the Senate debated lobbying and ethics reforms in January, Clinton voted against requiring public disclosure of earmark sponsors and earmark recipients, and to change the definition of an earmark to include both federal and non-federal projects.

And yes, we know that Hillary doesn't even try to be an advocate of clean and open government, as Obama does. But, really, susan, is that a reason to support her?


by animated on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 10:38:29 PM EST

So what... (2.00 / 6)

Hillary's not a hypocrite. She's not pretending to be "pure and holy" like Barack is. She's actually been working hard to bring money home for projects benefitting ALL HER CONSTITUENTS, not just her spouse & her well-connected donors. That's how she responds to McCain's bogus allegations. She's not a hypocrite.


Help Clintonistas for Obama help Democrats win! :-)
by atdleft on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 10:57:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So what... (2.00 / 1)

Atdleft:  She's bringing the bacon home to her constituents?  With which projects exactly?


"Behold, I send you out as sheep amidst the wolves! Therefore, be as wise as a serpent, And as harmless as a dove."
by Setrak on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 10:59:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So what... (2.00 / 1)

Hahaha

That's what I thought the answer would be. "Hillary isn't even trying."

In other words, don't vote for Barack because he's almost as bad as Hillary.

Well, that's great, but what's the rationale for being against even DISCLOSING earmarks? Spin that one for me, please.


by animated on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:01:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So what... (2.00 / 2)

I agree with you.  Being from New York State, Hillary has done a great job taking care of her constituents, including helping to prevent the closings of three military bases in economically depressed areas of the State.


by cjbardy on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:33:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So what... (2.00 / 1)

Really? She can be amazing.


by HillaryKnight08 on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:38:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So what... (2.00 / 3)

She has done an excellent job.


by Fleaflicker on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:14:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So what... (2.00 / 3)

Sure would be nice if she would release her earmarks so the voters could judge this for themselves.


by Socraticsilence on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:44:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So what... (2.00 / 1)

Excellent points!


by Fleaflicker on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:13:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

AND HOW DO YOU KNOW (2.00 / 1)

who she's bringing the bacon to? That's the point Einstein - at least Obama is producing this material. The idea that a Senator from Illinois is not going to try to get government contracts for institutions as large/influential and important to the state, such as the U of Chicago or the U of Illinois, is ridiculous.


by highgrade on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:47:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AND HOW DO YOU KNOW (2.00 / 1)

No - he really isn't.  The Chicago Sun Times requested his 2005-2006 earmarks multiple times and he has yet to release them. So much for "transparency"....


by cmugirl90 on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:26:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks (2.00 / 2)

Hillary's constituents happen to be in one of the most densely populated states, with some of the most valuable and vulnerable landmarks and infrastructures in the world.  

 Wonder how many of those earmarks benefitted Rezko and his cronies?  Hmmmmm....


by Catriley sez on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:47:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks (2.00 / 2)

Gee, Catriley, I do wonder how many went to Rezko cronies. Hey, you know what? You can check! Cause Obama RELEASED HIS EARMARKS. But we have no way of knowing where Hillary's went to, even though she had MORE EARMARKS THAN ANY OTHER SENATOR. Seriously, take a step back a breathe. If there were dirt there to find, Obama would have just pulled a Hillary and kept all his files hush-hush, state secrets and all that. This line of argument is specious at best. Don't just accuse with NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER. By the by, Rezko and his "cronies" contributed to the Clinton campaign too, in fact three are co-defendants in his trial. Does that make the Clintons implicit in his crimes as well? Of course, the fact that Obama is blameless in this thing, and NO ONE accuses him of any criminal link whatsoever other than veiled inferences doesn't mean much to you, eh? I guess Hillary Clinton is the only person who can be subject to decades of scandal and be completely innocent, since she's the sole victim of the, "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy." Please.


by TheSilverMonkey on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 03:13:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks (none / 0)

If the earmarks are so bad how about naming them and then offering an explanation as to why they aren't necessary other than the Pentagon didn't request them.


by Fleaflicker on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:10:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks (none / 0)

Did you even read what you posted? The quoted part says that everything was above board. And yet you have the nerve to claim that "Hillary doesn't even try to be an advocate of clean and open government."


by Fleaflicker on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:12:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

So.. (2.00 / 3)

..when does Clinton release her earmarks and her tax returns?


"Behold, I send you out as sheep amidst the wolves! Therefore, be as wise as a serpent, And as harmless as a dove."
by Setrak on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 10:38:47 PM EST

Wow...I mean, wow! (2.00 / 3)

I sure wish I could get a 160% pay raise.


Never let the bullies win.
by SluggoJD on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 10:39:37 PM EST

What is Hillary hiding? (2.00 / 1)

She refuses to disclose her Senate earmarks, and her taxes.


by CarolinaNumber23 on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 10:44:02 PM EST

Re: What is Hillary hiding? (2.00 / 1)

That's not true.  She said she will file her tax return in the normal tax season which is April.  


by JoeySky18 on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:07:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What about her 2006 and 2005 taxes? (2.00 / 3)

And what about those earmarks?

Please, supporters of the pork queen and high Priestess of the Military Industrial Complex, keep pushing this story.


by CarolinaNumber23 on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:26:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What about her 2006 and 2005 taxes? (2.00 / 1)

Hillary Clinton, as the Jr. Senator for New York has done a great deal to help the people in all parts of New York, which has suffered from the 9/11 attack and a poor economy.  The projects she has championed have been to meet the needs of her constituents, which is what she was elected to do.

She has earned over her years in the Senate the respect of the more conservative voters in Central and Western New York, even though they did not like her at first.

I am proud that she is my Senator, and she is a worthy holder of that seat and she would be a great President.


by cjbardy on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:45:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What about her 2006 and 2005 taxes? (2.00 / 1)

Ummm if your candidate has been shown, as Obama has, to earmark a huge amount to General Dynamics (part of that military industrial complex), and whose large donor sits on the Board of said military contractor.  How does that make him the Saint of Peaceful Poverty?  


by Catriley sez on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:48:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What about her 2006 and 2005 taxes? (none / 0)

He is a regular Brother Teresa.


by Fleaflicker on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:19:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What about her 2006 and 2005 taxes? (none / 0)

 Tax returns and earmarks is that really all you got to complain about?

 Be glad I'm not running for President- I was agianst the war and refused to do/pay my taxes since 2005 so as to not pay for the war.
  Obama voted to continue spending on the war-how does continuing to spend on the war stop it? Hell, now he's not so sure about bringing the troops home as per his campaign season rheto-er; plan. Then to find out MR. ANti-war has ties to the largest defense co. in the world? Damn...

Here's an article that might interest you:
http://www.blackcommentator.com/263/263_ cover_1_keeping_it_real_obama_euphoria.h tml

take care.


by artsyker on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 05:43:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What is Hillary hiding? (none / 0)

Don't hold your breath.


by victoryfordems on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 01:25:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What is Hillary hiding? (none / 0)

Refuses?

Where do you come up with that nonsense?


by Fleaflicker on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:15:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

So.. (none / 0)

..the earmarks described seem to be for military technology and a hospital.

You admit in this diary that the military-industry in question is one of the largest in the country and the world.

Are any of you surprised that she had an easier time with work when she was married to a U.S. Senator?   Seriously, of course it's easier to find a job!


"Behold, I send you out as sheep amidst the wolves! Therefore, be as wise as a serpent, And as harmless as a dove."
by Setrak on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 10:45:23 PM EST

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks (2.00 / 3)

More on Clinton and earmarks...

Hillary Clinton is hands-down one of the worst offenders in the Senate. According to Taxpayers for Common Sense, Hillary placed $2.2 billion worth of earmarks in spending bills from 2002-2006.

The LA Times writes:

"Her record stands in contrast with others in the Senate seeking the presidency, particularly John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.). McCain, who has long opposed earmarks, does not write them. Obama has used the device, but now declines to earmark funds for private companies; he uses earmarks only to secure funds for government projects such as road building and hospital construction."

The military industry has been a particular beneficiary of Clinton's largess. Because of her place on the Senate Armed Services Committee, Clinton has been able to earmark $1.4 billion for defense contractors since she arrived in the Senate, including $140 million this year, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense.

She has collected in excess of $1 million from earmark beneficiaries and their associates, including more than $270,000 for her campaigns from defense contractors.

Bizarrely, given his reputation as a hawk, McCain has done far more to curb wasteful defense spending than Hillary Clinton.

Clinton's 2.2 billion total includes items that may be particularly problematic for moderate swing voters, including $303,000 for a group that lobbies for needle exchanges, for allowing more immigrants with HIV/AIDS to legally enter the country, as well as funds for condom distribution in prisons.

Even more damning, Clinton voted against a proposal by Obama requiring public disclosure of earmark sponsors and earmark recipients, and to change the definition of an earmark to include both federal and non-federal projects.

Ironic that, if Clinton had her way, you wouldn't even be writing this diary on earmarks.


by animated on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 10:46:54 PM EST

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks (2.00 / 2)

Yes.  You'd think her state had been devestated by a terrorist attack or something.  Wait....


by Mike Pridmore on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:03:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks (none / 0)

Yep, that's a great reason to vote against anyone disclosing any earmarks they ever made. 9-11 is clearly the answer.


by animated on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:15:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Clinton supporters = Giuliani supporters. (none / 0)

Right down to endorsing John McCain.


by CarolinaNumber23 on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:27:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary clinton supporters are acting very Bushy (none / 0)

lately.

9/11 justifies any pork barrel project.


by highgrade on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:48:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks (none / 0)

9/11 is the answer to everything - says a certain Mayor of New York.


by marcotom on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:46:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks (none / 0)

Yeah, that campaign worked rather well, didn't it?


by victoryfordems on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 01:27:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks (none / 0)

He's only been in the Senate two years and has been campaigning or getting ready to campaign for President most of that time.  He hasn't had much of a chance to do much constituent work.  

Lets see what his record would be if his actual motivation for the job was to serve the people of Illinois and to get reelected as Senator.  

Hmmm.... something to think about.


by cjbardy on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:53:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks (2.00 / 2)

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iK-Ao nJ7KrNoGaEUdj6xsc3_8fmwD8VCTQR00
Public records reveal some of the projects he sponsored as a state senator, from literacy programs and park improvements to drill team uniforms and jazz-appreciation events. They add up to more than $6 million.
But that covers just two of Obama's nearly eight years in the Illinois Senate. State records don't detail his projects from other years, and his presidential campaign has not responded to repeated requests from The Associated Press for information.

So, when is Obama going to come clean about those first 6 years? Maybe there is something in there for Tony Rezko?


by gomer on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 10:57:00 PM EST

Earmarks & the Crown Family (none / 0)

I like that he released this information.  For one, it follows his theme of transparency, but also it gives us more background and possibly some dirt.


This administration is not sinking. This administration is soaring! If anything, they are rearranging the deck chairs on the Hindenburg!
by venavena on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 10:59:09 PM EST

Re: Earmarks & the Crown Family (none / 0)

Umm he hasn't released them.


by Catriley sez on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:49:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Earmarks & the Crown Family (none / 0)

Umm, yeah he has. http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0 308/Obamas_earmarks.html


Senator Obama will be formally nominated on August 28, 2008 - the 45th Anniversary of Dr. King's "I Have A Dream Speech."
by brimur on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 01:43:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Try looking at her Senate record... (2.00 / 1)

It's not that hard. Oh yes, and regarding tax returns... She's already said those will come on April 15. But hey, nice try in distracting us from more Obama duplicity!


Help Clintonistas for Obama help Democrats win! :-)
by atdleft on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 10:59:33 PM EST

Re: Try looking at her Senate record... (none / 0)

Why then? Why not now?


by grover738 on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:05:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Try looking at her Senate record... (2.00 / 1)

Would you submit your tax file in Jan if your dateline is in Mar?


by JoeySky18 on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:09:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Try looking at her Senate record... (none / 0)

She's too busy running for president.

Well, it worked for Obama...


by newhorizon on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:18:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Try looking at her Senate record... (none / 0)

I'm trying to imagine Hillary sitting in front of a computer doing Turbotax...like a couple worth $50 million can't afford to hire an accountant to do their tax returns while they're on the trail.


by animated on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:20:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Try looking at her Senate record... (none / 0)

Yep. She could Xerox them easily.


by animated on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 04:42:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Try looking at her Senate record... (none / 0)

Just as Axelrod xeroxed Deval Patrick's message of change.


by truthteller2007 on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 04:44:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Try looking at her Senate record... (2.00 / 0)

Maybe she's waiting on the rest of Obama's full disclosure about the Rezko deal. He has not released those papers.


"The Bumble Bee flies because it thinks it can."
by LadyEagle on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:13:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Try looking at her Senate record... (none / 0)

Is that true? Has she said that? Has she ever said why she's holding them until 4-15?

From what I've read, she didn't actually say 4-15, she of course parsed it, saying "around" 4-15, which will probably mean after the 4-22 PA primary.


by grover738 on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:23:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Try looking at her Senate record... (none / 0)

Ok, we'll be waiting patiently on April 16.


by victoryfordems on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 01:28:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The Forgotten People (2.00 / 2)

I feel sorry for those poor people in district 13 in Chicago.  If he really want to help his people, he should tend to their need in the past and present  

He doesn't have to wait until he become POTUS before he help the people.  He just ditched them after he got their votes.  

There is no new politician ideology in the way he conducted his business.  He just campaign with a new ideology, new talking point, new kind of speech.


by JoeySky18 on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:14:55 PM EST

Re: The Forgotten People (none / 0)

Funny.  They didn't seem to think so.

http://www.elections.il.gov/ElectionInfo rmation/VoteTotalsList.aspx?officeid=426 5


John McCain wants you to be poor!
by nklein on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 02:58:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Forgotten People (2.00 / 1)

Just like Hillary is ditching the people of New York to run for president?  Do you see how crappy that argument is?


by NewOaklandDem on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:47:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

That special MyDD spin (2.00 / 2)

This diary is by way of addressing the fact that Obama has both released a full list of his earmarks and voted to make such disclosure mandatory, while Clinton refuses to disclose her earmarks and voted against the reform.


by EMTP democrat on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:20:01 PM EST

kudos for Barack for releasing his earmarks (2.00 / 4)

Sunshine is the best disenfectant.

As for the diary, what a pathetic grab bag of weak innuendo. Is this really the best you can do, Susanhu? $1.3 million for a defense contractor and a new hospital wing? Throw more crap, hope something sticks. Have any proof MO's salary went up as a result of the earmark? Could it be that it went up for other reasons? Want to compare Obama's earmarks to HRC's?

You'd think Clinton supporters would be sensitive to innuendo based "scandals" like this and Rezko after the Whitewater farce. All you seem to have learned is how to stoke Starr-quality scandals.

The sad part is that I bet this diary will be on the recommended list in under an hour.

Absolutely pathetic.


by grover738 on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:20:23 PM EST

Re: kudos for Barack for releasing his earmarks (none / 0)

8 million for a defense contractor...  guess he IS part of that military industrial complex you obama fans are so fond of talking about.


by Catriley sez on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:54:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: kudos for Barack for releasing his earmarks (2.00 / 1)

Yes, I love that military industrial complex. I've stated that many times, as have all us Obama supporters.

Let's take a look at HRC's earmarks, shall we? Care to bet who shoveled more money to defense contractors?

Let's not lose sight of the big picture here - Obama released his earmarks. Obama has released all his tax returns. Clinton - not so much.


by grover738 on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:34:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama and Transparency (none / 0)

Obama has hampered Clinton to release her tax returns, yet he won't even release his earmarks? He talks of transparency?


by HillaryKnight08 on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:23:40 PM EST

Re: Obama and Transparency (none / 0)

....he did release his ear marks, that's how this diary was made possible.


"Behold, I send you out as sheep amidst the wolves! Therefore, be as wise as a serpent, And as harmless as a dove."
by Setrak on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:56:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama and Transparency (none / 0)

No he did not. The diarist put this:

Update: The AP says Obama has not responded to repeated requests to release his earmark legislation for six of his years in the Illinois Senate.


by HillaryKnight08 on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:56:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama and Transparency (none / 0)

BTW, I'm not talking about the one year that the diarist posted.


by HillaryKnight08 on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:58:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama and Transparency (none / 0)

He released his earmarks for all his years in the US Senate. Hillary has released none.


by mattw on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:58:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama and Transparency (none / 0)

Yes she has:

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton helped secure more than $340 million worth of home-state projects in last year's spending bills, placing her among the top 10 Senate recipients of what are commonly known as earmarks, according to a new study by a nonpartisan budget watchdog group.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/story/2008/02/14/ST2008021401593.ht ml


by HillaryKnight08 on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:03:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama and Transparency (none / 0)

No, I made a mistake. She hasn't. Obama just released his today.


by HillaryKnight08 on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:33:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama and Transparency (none / 0)

THANK YOU.


by victoryfordems on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 01:31:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama and Transparency (2.00 / 2)

The logic of the argument is weak.   Obama releases his federal ear marks(which are arguably more substantial in size..) and calls on Hillary to do the same.   She does not, but her supporters jump on parts of the information that Obama releases.   They claim "he's not being transparent."   THEIR CANDIDATE HAS RELEASED NOTHING.  Not her tax returns, not her WH schedule, not her ear marks.  No disclosure.


"Behold, I send you out as sheep amidst the wolves! Therefore, be as wise as a serpent, And as harmless as a dove."
by Setrak on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:01:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama and Transparency (none / 0)

Here is the charts of comparison:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/graphic/2008/02/14/GR2008021400384. html?sid=ST2008021401593
by HillaryKnight08 on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:06:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama and Transparency (none / 0)

Doh..!!!


Hillary Clinton is not a monster,....as far as I know.. We are all Hussein JUNIOR.. ///.. FEINGOLD/BOXER 2016
by Its Like Herding Cats on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 04:10:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama and Transparency (none / 0)

Hampered?  


by interestedbystander on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 04:16:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks & the Crown Family (2.00 / 1)

The link between Michelle's pay raise and that earmark is troubling.  I've never seen a credible explanation, or any explanation really, for a raise of that magnitude.

People try to make an issue out of Hillary's earmarks, but what they're missing is that there's no showing of a personal benefit to Hillary as a result of directing those earmarks.  If someone gave Hillary $200,000 in cash (not even a campaign contribution, but cold hard cash), and then she directed an earmark to them, that would be a heck of a story!!!  But it's a story I haven't actually seen.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:36:07 PM EST

Re: the Crown Family (2.00 / 1)

Not to mention what the Crown family has probably helped raise amongst friends and employees, etc.  I just don't think these revelations reflect a political outsider and someone who rejects corporate money, as he claims. David Axelrod can only fool people for so long -- he was just hoping all this would stay undercovers until it was too late for people to back out of the Obama lovefest.


by Catriley sez on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:53:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks & the Crown F (2.00 / 2)

If someone gave Hillary $200,000 in cash (not even a campaign contribution, but cold hard cash), and then she directed an earmark to them, that would be a heck of a story!!!  But it's a story I haven't actually seen.

That might be because Hillary has refused to release her earmarks, at all.

I'm sure Hillary would never do anything like that - say, like pardoning someone indicted on federal tax evasion and charges of illegal trade with Iran. No, Bill did, but she wouldn't.


by mattw on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:03:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks (none / 0)

Try to imagine that the people involved are named Bill and Hillary Clinton so you can develop an idea of how sketchy it looks to other people.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:12:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks (none / 0)

Try to imagine Hillary as the nominee, then imagine the lawsuits, the FOIA requests and the hearings that the Republicans will file just to link Library doners to Hillary.

I seem to recall that When the whole Whitewater investigation began, the Democrats were in charge of the Senate.  Do you really want to take that chance again?


Hillary Clinton is not a monster,....as far as I know.. We are all Hussein JUNIOR.. ///.. FEINGOLD/BOXER 2016
by Its Like Herding Cats on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 04:08:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks (none / 0)

What's troubling is that our "completely vetted" candidate has not released her earmarks and has not released the records of the Clinton library donations.

Are you really willing to take the chance that there are no 1,2,3 million Dollar donors that might find their names turning up on Hillary's earmarks or legislation?

Our "completely vetted" candidate is far from it and I wonder how long before the Republicans start filing FOIA requests?


Hillary Clinton is not a monster,....as far as I know.. We are all Hussein JUNIOR.. ///.. FEINGOLD/BOXER 2016
by Its Like Herding Cats on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 04:00:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

wink wink (2.00 / 3)

God, Susan. This diary, god. I can't believe you. (fake outrage). Don't you realize that Obama just wouldn't do anything like what you are suggesting. He just wouldn't. (more fake outrage) It would mean, it would mean (lip pout now) that I've been hoodwinked. That, that, he isn't special...I'm not special. (sniffles)


by grlpatriot on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:40:16 PM EST

Re: transparency (none / 0)

The Clinton Library is Bill's deal.  If this is what you are relying on, you've got nothing.

When is Barack going to come clean on his affiliation with Rezko?  


by cjbardy on Thu Mar 13, 2008 at 11:47:16 PM EST

Re: transparency (none / 0)

The Clinton Library is Bill's deal.....

That is a remarkably naive statement.  Were you alive in the 1990's?  Does Vince Foster ring a bell?  The Rose law firm? Commodities earnings?  

If you think that the Republicans will not milk the Clinton Library donor list to within an inch of it's life, you are out of touch with reality my friend.


Hillary Clinton is not a monster,....as far as I know.. We are all Hussein JUNIOR.. ///.. FEINGOLD/BOXER 2016
by Its Like Herding Cats on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 04:28:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: transparency (none / 0)

Believe me I was alive long before the 1990s!  Were you?

The Republicans can milk those issues all they want.  There is nothing there because the have been explored to death.

 But they do have a lot of new points to milk with Obama, such is Wright, Rezko, Farrakhan, Ayers, Dohrn and others.


by cjbardy on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 12:13:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: transparency (none / 0)

Born in 1942,

Bills Library has not been explored to death, let alone explored at all.  Trust me if the Republicans can turn whitewater into  a 6 year, 40 million Dollar investigation, they will turn librarygate into one as well.

There are so many skeletons the Republicans can pull out of their Clinton quiver, Hillary is far from vetted.  

Hsu, Peter Paul, earmarks, library.....

Facts are just facts, the Clinton's spent 8 years being crucified, do you want 8 more, because there are plenty of remaining closet doors to open.


Hillary Clinton is not a monster,....as far as I know.. We are all Hussein JUNIOR.. ///.. FEINGOLD/BOXER 2016
by Its Like Herding Cats on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 02:22:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks & the Crown Family (2.00 / 1)

There is so much about all of this that has yet to see the light of day. When people start connecting the dots between who Obama gets his campaign contributions from and who benefits from Obama's legislative activities, the picture will start to become very clear. And then just maybe people will see that indeed they have been hoodwinked by that master bamboozler himself, Barack Obama.


by Fleaflicker on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:00:09 AM EST

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks & the Crown Fam (2.00 / 1)

Obama requested earmarks for dozens and dozens of hospitals, many in much larger amounts. His wife was promoted to a VP position she was eminently qualified for. There's no story here - if there was, Obama would have just kept his earmarks to himself.

Now, ask if he's letting this out - what is Hillary hiding that she won't release hers?


by mattw on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:05:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

She has already released them (2.00 / 0)

She has:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/story/2008/02/14/ST2008021401593.ht ml
by HillaryKnight08 on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:12:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She has already released them (2.00 / 2)

HillaryKnight08.
Your comments is patently false. She has NOT released the earmarks of her US senate career. Why else would every news organization be running the story that McCain (and now Obama) are requesting them.
Support your candidate, but maintain perspective.
We don't need a thinker. We need a doer: someone who'll act without considering the consequences. (H.J. Simpson)
by Newcomer on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 02:46:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She has already released them (2.00 / 2)

You're right. It wasn't intentional to be false. I just now figured out that she hasn't released them.


by HillaryKnight08 on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 07:01:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She has already released them (2.00 / 1)

Good, I hope this gives you some perspective on how wrong the whole conception of this diary is.


by marcotom on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:48:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She has already released them (none / 0)

Fair enough.


We don't need a thinker. We need a doer: someone who'll act without considering the consequences. (H.J. Simpson)
by Newcomer on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:22:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She has already released them (none / 0)

THANK YOU, AGAIN. Let's see the records from BOTH sides so everyone can make an INFORMED DECISION.


by victoryfordems on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 01:37:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks, the Crown Family (none / 0)

I recommend everyone see this Buffenbarger video and read this post:

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/02/20/ machinists-union-tells-it-like-it-is/#co mment-158262


by Nobama on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:21:51 AM EST

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks (1.50 / 4)

It's interesting that on his own, Obama was responsible for $3.3m in earmarks while Hillary was responsible for only $98k.

It's also interesting that Hillary wanted to fund a Woodstock museum. The funding request was turned down. I was at Woodstock in 1969. Too bad about the museum. At least I still have my tickets.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/article/2008/02/13/AR2008021303635_ 2.html?sid=ST2008021401593


by Nobama on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:37:02 AM EST

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks (2.00 / 1)

You are either committing intellectual dishonesty or stupidity.  Hillary Clinton has a lot more than 98k worth of ear marks.


"Behold, I send you out as sheep amidst the wolves! Therefore, be as wise as a serpent, And as harmless as a dove."
by Setrak on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 06:22:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks (2.00 / 1)

Do you actually look at the facts before stating lies?


by marcotom on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:49:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks (none / 0)

Only $98,000? What have you been smoking? Time to come off that 40 year Woodstock high.


by victoryfordems on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 01:39:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: HRC's Earmarks- 2.3billion. (2.00 / 3)

It is so laughable..HRC has 2.3 billion in earmarks that she keeps hidden from 02-06 and Obama releases all his earmark info for the years in the senate and he gets picked on for having 5% of her total... yikes the double standard around her is frightening.


by hawkjt on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:47:12 AM EST

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks (none / 0)

McCain hits Obama hard on earmarks, lack of specifics

http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/02/ 14/mccain-hits-obama-hard-on-earmarks-la ck-of-specifics/


by Nobama on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 01:40:08 AM EST

Some Perspective (2.00 / 1)

As my name suggests, I am a newcomer. I am also a supporter of Obama. This discussion requires a little perspective. Obama released his tax returns for 2006 some time ago. HRC has not. Obama has now released the full disclosure of his US Senate earmarks from 2005-2007. HRC has not.

We may debate the earmarks - and even suggest some funny business. But how can this discussion even begin to be fair without knowing the details of Hillary's earmarks?

Finally, to the individual that can say (with a straight face/blog) that Bill Clinton's library and foundation are not relevant to the HRC campaign...are you kidding me? HRC sits on both Boards and to be fair, if you are going to suggest that Michelle Obama received perks for something her husband did - why cant someone consider what HRC gains from what her husband is doing?

We can duke this out all night...but please, a little perspective.


We don't need a thinker. We need a doer: someone who'll act without considering the consequences. (H.J. Simpson)
by Newcomer on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 02:43:33 AM EST

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks (none / 0)

Now I understand why Michelle Obama is finally proud of her country.


by truthteller2007 on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 04:29:42 AM EST

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks (none / 0)

Do explain...and try...if you can...to not use Republican talking points.


We don't need a thinker. We need a doer: someone who'll act without considering the consequences. (H.J. Simpson)
by Newcomer on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:54:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Wondering... (2.00 / 1)

how it is we know about Sen. Obama's earmarks?

What do we know about Sen. Clinton's earmarks, if any?


"We live entangled of webs of endless deceit, often self-deceit, but with a little honest effort, it is possible to extricate ourselves from them". -- NC
by Trond Jacobsen on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:23:52 AM EST

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks & (none / 0)

Hey Susan,

Is your candidate so crappy that you don't have the ability to write a poorly written diary about her?  Your writing is garbage, but its amazing that you can't find anything positive to say about Clinton... only distortions and fiction about Obama.  


http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!
by yitbos96bb on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:37:22 AM EST

Re: Obama's 2006 Earmarks (2.00 / 1)

Let's continue this discussion after Senator Clinton releases her earmarks (and tax returns).  

For now let me say that I am shocked, shocked, that Obama asked for money for University of Chicago Hospitals and for a weapons system that will be used in Iraq and beyond.  Can you imagine an Illinois Senator of either party who would not have made the same reque