March 4th, 2008
02:16 PM ET

Obama under scrutiny?


FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

The days leading up to the crucial Texas and Ohio primaries have been full of questions and scrutiny for Barack Obama.

First, there are his ties to Chicago businessman Tony Rezko who's now on trial for political corruption. Obama isn't implicated in the case at all, but Rezko contributed 150-thousand dollars over the years to Obama's campaigns, money Obama says has since been donated to charity. Rezko also helped him buy a home and sold a strip of land to Obama – a purchase the candidate characterizes as "boneheaded."

Obama is also denying a report that a senior campaign official assured Canada that the candidate's tough talk on NAFTA is more about "political positioning."

The Canadian Embassy has backed up Obama's version of the meeting, saying that there was no intention to convey that Obama and his campaign were taking different positions on NAFTA in public and private.

But politics is a contact sport, and Hillary Clinton has jumped all over Barack Obama – challenging his credibility and accusing him of deception. It's interesting when you consider that Obama hasn't brought up any of the past Clinton scandals during the campaign… you know, all of the stuff that's part of Clinton's experience like: Whitewater, Travelgate, Monica Lewinsky and impeachment, renting out the Lincoln bedroom, the loss of the Rose Law Firm billing records for nearly 2 years until they were miraculously found in the White House living quarters, removing files from Vince Foster's office following his suicide and before investigators could get there.

Maybe it's been a mistake for Obama to run a campaign about hope and change and not to touch any of this.

Here’s my question to you: How much will Barack Obama's relationship with Tony Rezko and his adviser's meeting with a Canadian official about NAFTA hurt his chances today?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Al from Palmdale, California writes:
I think some people will turn away from Obama because of these 'scandals'. But in the end, scandal didn't hurt Slick Willy, I doubt it will hurt Obama enough to matter. He would do better to stay away from the mudslinging at Hillary, although he has very fertile ground to do so, because that appears to be some of his appeal. Turning the other cheek is wise right now, but he better be prepared to take on McCain in November.

Marion writes:
Jack, Yes, buying property from Rezko's wife was a bone-headed mistake given that Rezko was under a cloud of suspicion at the time. It raised doubts in the public’s mind only because of its inappropriateness. In no way has Obama been accused of ILLEGAL dealings, however. Also, he rightly gave the thousands from Rezko to charity. Of course, we should see through the Clintons' rabid desire to cast doubt on Obama's honesty. But I see no reason we should believe this was anything other than the bone-headed mistake Obama admitted.

Gigi from Alabama writes:
It probably won't hurt him too much in today's primaries, but if he cannot answer it to suit the Republicans, they'll have a heyday with him if he is the Democratic nominee in the general election. He won't be able to grin and say the Clintons are at it again.

Debby writes:
The younger generation will still vote for him, but I bet he will lose some older votes.

Jenny from Nanuet, New York writes:
I'm afraid it will allow Clinton to win the popular vote in both Texas and Ohio, giving her the ability to spin any marginal delegate gain she may or may not receive. But it won't stop him from winning the nomination.

Tom from Avon, Maine writes:
Voters aren't as easily fooled as the Clintons would like us to be. Bill tried these shenanigans in South Carolina and gave Hillary a bigger loss there than she would have had if they had played it straight. Desperation is a poor choice of ensemble to wear to Waterloo.

Filed under: Barack Obama
soundoff (209 Responses)
  1. Richard, Washington State

    How much will Barack Obama’s relationship with Tony Rezko and his adviser’s meeting with a Canadian official about NAFTA hurt his chances today?

    If people were for Senator Obama, it won't make a difference in the world.

    If people were for but not fully dedicated to Hillary, I think some of these might see through the smokescreen her campaign threw up and vote for Obama.

    If they're republican, they'll vote Hillary just to keep the democrats fighting while McCain builds momentum towards to final election.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:20 pm |

    I hope none at all. Isn't it odd that all of the bombs that the Clinton campaign machine have dropped have been either at a debate or right before a primary ? I guess she didn't think Obama would be a threat , and now that he is she's throwing MUD!

    March 4, 2008 at 2:21 pm |
  3. Eric

    Those relations won't hurt Obama much at all today. That pain and baggage will hurt most and cause the most damage in the general election....especially if any wrongful doing facts exist.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:21 pm |
  4. Mark - Asheville, NC

    Very little. His supporters seem to be so completely programmed now, mostly be the year long media driven pro-Obama blitz, that this won't even show up on the radar.

    This new 'scrutiny' is just for show, to combat the correct accusations that the media has been brutally unfair to Mrs Clinton. But compared to what will happen to him during the Fall campaign this is just a Spring day at the beach. By October, using the word, scrutiny, will be wallowing in understatement!!

    March 4, 2008 at 2:22 pm |
  5. Dwayne K from Springfield, MA

    This makes Obama look like every other Washington politician with closed doors, secrecy, deception, questionable actions, etc. Obama's message has been about change; however, this will hurt his chances today because these situations highlight that he is a typical Washington insider and politician.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:23 pm |

    Jack: FINALLY a question about Obama's dealings. The media has given this man a free ticket for far too long. I hate to say it but... does the American media fear a backlash against them if they report negatively on an African-American candidate? Hillary has taken a beating from all of you for far too long!

    March 4, 2008 at 2:24 pm |
  7. Jim Galvin

    He may lose about 0.05% of the votes he would have received, that accounts for all the voters that are aware of Canada.

    On the other hand, Tony Soprano (you mispelled his name) is a very popular guy and he might pick up 0.05% of the votes he otherwise would have gotten.

    Jim in Brittish Columbia, Canada.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:25 pm |
  8. Rachelle

    I don't care about is relationship with Rezco, it doesn't tarnish his character, or put me in the "birds of a feather flock together" mind frame. I did care about Bush's relationship with the Bin Laden family, but nobody really cared about my opinion then either.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:25 pm |
  9. s Emily

    hopefully everyone will step back and take a real look at all these issues. a second oppion never hurt. unless it proves the first one wrong.

    scott missouri

    March 4, 2008 at 2:26 pm |
  10. Rich McKinney,Texas

    It didn't effect might vote one way or the other and I suspect it won't anyone else's if they watched the news and know that was said was false. That is politics Jack. It does not have to be true or have any substance it just has to be said and the candidate it is said about has to defend themselves. What the hell ever happened with innocent until proven guilty? The media should be asking important questions of the candidates like what is your plan for the economy or how are you really going to get us out of Iraq or how the hell are you going to pay for all this healthcare your promising.
    This petty he said she said stuff is for elementary school children Jack not the office of president.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:27 pm |
  11. Harry

    I am sure that it will hurt him a little, as the press tries to correct the mythology of biased reporting. I have a question for you...why is Hillary allowed to make plagiarism charges against Obama, then use a 3AM ad, which is a clear ripoff of an ad John McCain had in early January.
    The press has and will be biased to the Clintons. The press loves dirty politics.


    March 4, 2008 at 2:27 pm |
  12. Michelle

    I'm betting on the American people being a bit smarter than the political machine thinks they are. The kitchen sink method of sinking a campaign is old politics and I thought America was over this and needing a change....so vote for real change everyone.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:27 pm |
  13. Brett Milam

    Not sure Jack. But he deserves scrutiny. He's been cuddled by the Media for far too long.

    Cincinnati, Ohio

    March 4, 2008 at 2:27 pm |
  14. Tito Coleman, Santo Domingo, Dominican Rep.

    It is a sign of desperation that such a big fuss is being made about a third party source memorandum from a Canadian official talking to a staffer on a campaign. I think voters understand this to be a non-issue. The Rezko issue has a bit bark at this eleventh hour, but not very much bite. No wrongdoing or inappropriate relationship is at stake.

    Obama is the TIGER WOODS of politics, and even Tiger misses a a shot now and then. Obama has both the experience and the judgment to beat all of the older players on this campaign tour.....and now the two MAJORS tonight.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:28 pm |
  15. Bill Phelps

    Why is CNN defining the Ohio unemployment problems as "NAFTA related," when, in fact, the job losses are primarily due to outsourcing to places like India and the Philippines?

    It might be newsworthy to mention that Canada is the largest source of imported oil and gas to the United States. In fact, Alberta alone has 7 times more proven oil reserves than Saudi Arabia. Also, between Hydro Quebec and Ontario Hydro, Canada lights up the majority of the Northeast United States.

    If you are going to make NAFTA a part of the campaign, maybe you should tell more of the story.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:28 pm |
  16. mikeytherhino

    Most of Obama's Followers wear Obama Blinders, and can only see what he wants them to see. The Obama Cult won't be swayed.

    The Actual Democrats however, might look at this like and see that The message he sends and the Reality he wants are far removed from each other and that will hurt him, both short and long term.

    Mike From Staten Island, New York

    March 4, 2008 at 2:30 pm |
  17. Peter Whiteley

    I think the public is smart enough to know trade agreements with Canada are a lot different than agreements with Mexico. There are very few jobs lost to Canada compared to your southern neighbor so I don't think that part will affect him. As far as the other Obama has already said that it was not the best idea he has had.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:30 pm |
  18. Mike Smith, New Orleans, Louisiana

    These two semi-scandals alone won't hurt Obama in today's primaries. But the Swift Boat Party will surely add them to their arsenal in the general election.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:31 pm |
  19. beartrack Truckee,CA

    In the long run not much of anything. This is nothing compared to what awaits him from the old Karl Rove gang. Hang on to your boots, the rodeo is just beginning.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:31 pm |
  20. Dave Brooklyn, NY

    It seems he can do no wrong for the time being. But just give the talking heads some time and they may well be able to destroy yet another legitimate bid for the nomination.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:31 pm |
  21. debbie mccoy

    These questions have been asked and answered . . move on!! Are you responsible for the actions of every person you've had business dealings with? Are you responsible for the actions and comments of every person who has given you advice? The Canadian government said this is a non-issue. Why is the media trying to make it more important than it is?

    March 4, 2008 at 2:32 pm |
  22. Ms. Emily

    It won't hurt him at all, unless Oprah calls him on it.... otherwise, as long as she's still the pied piper, her sheep will follow. It's that simple.
    There are but 3 real factors in the Democratic race, Sexism, Oprah, & mean-spirited media types (you lead), none of which bodes well for Hillary Clinton. But then, as Lou so often points out, are the American people that stupid? YES!! And they will get what they paid for.. the memory of a sold-out stadium tour, and NOTHING else. Go Hillary, don't worry about men who are scared of strong women. Whether she wins or not, she will still be Hillary and she will still be a strong, awesome female.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:32 pm |
  23. Brian From Fort Mill, S.C.

    In a perfect world it shouldn't matter, since Rezko donated money to both Hillary and Obama.

    However, since this is politics, it will make a dent.

    But keep in mind that there has been a lot of early voting, so it might not have as much impact as Hillary would like.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:33 pm |
  24. Rex in Portland, Ore.

    It probably cost him a few votes, Jack. People will believe what they want to believe, however. I believe that Obama wasn't aware of the "deal" between his advisor and the Canadian official. I also believe that Obama cannot be held entirely responsible for his backers' actions (see also Farrakhan).

    I also believe that NAFTA should be thoroughly discussed by all three candidates' camps with the Canadian government, and that the Canadians be left with absolutely no doubt that Obama or Clinton would abrogate or re-write the treaty as soon as possible.

    Is this what they call 'faith-based' politics?

    March 4, 2008 at 2:33 pm |
  25. Marie (Massachusetts)

    If his relationship and dealings with Rezco had been really scrutinized when voters had a chance to weigh the information, it would probably have had a bigger impact than it will have now....according to the media, the "deciding" primaries are today...yet this info is really just starting to get the coverage it deserved. Those people who voted in the earlier primaries didn't have any detail of this information...and the outcomes may have differed if they had. In making this "mistake", Obama has shown us the kind of judgement he has, or rather, the lack of judgement that he has. And all Democrats are supposed to unite behind whoever gets the nomination? As more scrutiny is put on Obama, and we can see that he is for change if it applies to everyone else, just not himself...., I for one don't know if I can support him. And John McCain will be laughing all the way to the White House.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:34 pm |
  26. Jeremy New Orleans

    Jack, the momentum is changing in this race. Rezko is just the first snowball in the avalanche about to hit Mr. Obama. Hillary will pull this out somehow, another "Comeback Kid."

    March 4, 2008 at 2:36 pm |
  27. Brian, Tampa, Fl


    The answer is NONE, Teflon Sen Obama. The rolling stone that
    gathers no moss. My question is who is going to stop this media # one box office hit.?

    Mrs & Mr Clinton can only wish.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:36 pm |
  28. Keith

    It shouldn't, Jack,if voters are informed and not manipulated... But, we'll find out in about 5 hours anyway, won't we?

    March 4, 2008 at 2:36 pm |
  29. Diana Ballew

    Jack– Would you please tell John McCain I am not his " dear friend?" Thanks.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:36 pm |
  30. Terry from North Carolina

    I dont believe his relationship with Tony Rezko or the issue with NAFTA, will make a difference today, I think the voters in Texas and Ohio made up their minds before these stories broke. If anything the voters will lean towards Obama due to Hillarys seething comments against him. There are many skeletons in Hillarys closet and Obama hasnt used them.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:37 pm |
  31. Karen

    It shouldn't hurt him if people take the time to look at the facts. Gee, Canada has denied this allegation twice this week. With the busy schedule these candidates are on, I'm not surprisedObama didn't know anything about the meeting. The meeting doesn't change his view on NAFTA.
    As far as the Rezko issure, I don't think anytihing is wrong with a person seeking a professional opinion on a real estate purchase. As far as purchasing an adjoining parcel of land to Obamas property owned by Rezko's wife doesn't imply anything was done illegaly.

    It's sad that the Clinton campaign is putting this out so forcibly, perhaps someone should take attack on the Clinton's past doings.
    Dirty politics, I am sick of it.


    March 4, 2008 at 2:37 pm |
  32. Julie VanDusky

    Who knows Jack. Everyone will probably just blame Hillary for this one too. Apparently challenging your opponent's record is now a taboo in American politics.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:37 pm |
  33. misty

    These "questions" raised within the final 24 hours of the deciding primaries at Ohio and Texas are aimed to expose the devious nature of Obama. A fifth grader would understand the underlying reason for this brazen attack on Obama. This is the same, old, obnoxious Washington politics. The Obamamania emerged across the country primarily to express ordinary people's disgust against these dirty politics of seasoned Washington leaders. Little wonder these attacks are hurled at this fag end of the race – this is their desparate attemtp to throttle the Obamamania so that the movement for "change" can be changed and Washington is continued to be ruled by the lobbists who run the campaigns of lifetime Washington leaders like McCain and Hillary.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:37 pm |
  34. Jayne

    It's a shame the media has fallen into Hillary's "poor-me-the-victimized-woman" trap. As for the NAFTA story, for some reason the media doesn't believe the response given by the Obama campaign, despite video evidence from the Prime Minister of Canada. As for Rezko, I'd think the last thing the Clintons might want to bring up is a matter involving a real estate transaction. There were 15 convictions, give or take, associated with Whitewater. There are zero convictions involving Rezko. Hillary should consider joining the McCain campaign – she's writing their ads for them.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:38 pm |
  35. David in Raleigh, NC

    The dealings with the Canadian official concerning NAFTA and his former business associate Tony Rezko shows that Barack Hussein Obama is proposing business as usual in politics instead of the empty platitudes about Change that his campaign has been pushing in the media.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:38 pm |
  36. David T., Toronto Canada

    Unfortunately, Obama has been running on a platform that promises transparency, integrity, etc. Even when the facts bear little resemblance to perception, the rank and file of the electorate will not go beyond the superficial. So what we are typically presented with is someone's opinion, of someone else's opinion of the facts.

    Bottom line: it MAY very well hurt him by bursting the 'bubble'.

    It is, however, difficult to believe that a fair comparison will condemn him and NOT Clinton, what with with her current and many other legal issues, arguably much more damning.

    It always puzzles me that so many ignore Clinton's questionable past. Have they been so successful in spinning it all as a huge right-wing conspiracy?

    March 4, 2008 at 2:39 pm |
  37. Brian Reed

    Maybe this will burst Obama's bubble, then the media can go back to a balanced report of how each candidate is faring. I am burned-out on all the Obama hoopla, his speeches are great but his substance is nill.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:39 pm |
  38. charles cunningham


    If Obama doesn't win the primary election as a Democrat then there are going to be awhole of African-Americans not voting for her! The Clintions will say anything or do anything to get elected! We want change in Washington and the Clintons doesn't represents NEW change!


    March 4, 2008 at 2:40 pm |
  39. Jed from Chico, CA

    Obama has garnered himself enough scrutiny to lose most of today's contests and keep Hillary in the race for at least the next seven weeks when Pennsylvania becomes the next "must-win-do-or-die" contest. The undecideds will break towards Clinton today, and that is because the 'media bias' has turned towards Clinton over the week since the MSNBC debate. Most if not all of the news organizations seem to worry about being viewed as 'soft' and Obama and 'hard' on Clinton.

    In addition, most of the stories regarding the election have focused on questioning Obama and his policies. Mr. 'Open Goverment' making back room deals with foreign nations. Mr. Integrity having questionable land deals with a known slumlord. And Mr. 'Let's focus on Afghanistan' never having a single hearing about it in his NATO commitee.

    But I haven't seen a single news story about any one of Clinton's questionable dealings of her own. Whitewater. Norman Hsu. Her years with WalMart. The problem, I guess, is that those are all old stories.

    Obama's problem today is that his frontrunner status has made him soft and comfortable. He is too lax. He needs to go on the attack first thing Wednesday morning – and hard. Pennsylvania will be Obama's last stand. Should he lose that, it will be very hard for him to justify winning the nomination by super delegates come August.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:40 pm |
  40. Cheryl, Upstate, NY

    Hi Jack,
    I honestly do not believe it will hurt him at all. Most of us know that this is dirt that the Clinton campaign is drudging up, trying to make more out of it than there really is. This is just another desperate attempt from Hillary to try and take heat off of her support for NAFTA. It seems she will stop at nothing to try and destroy the Democratic Party. It is time for Hillary to pull out before there is no chance of ever uniting the party. It would be a crying shame if McCain got into the white house because of a tattered Democratic Party. Hillary it is time to pull out!

    March 4, 2008 at 2:40 pm |
  41. Joe in DE

    If others don't give more credit than I do, it will mean nothing. Maybe he iwa been ambivalent in the past , but seems clear now. It is something to remember for future reference.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:41 pm |
  42. John

    The NAFTA scandal will hurt Obama in the fall election. His obvious lie that the meeting did not occur and the contents of the discussion will provide the country with an idea of Obama's definition of "Change". All of the Dems. claim that Bush has lied, well I guess Obama has as well and is not "Change".

    March 4, 2008 at 2:41 pm |
  43. Shaun Amherst, MA

    It won't hurt Obama at all. He could probably kill a man and the media would still love him. He's the "teflon candidate"

    March 4, 2008 at 2:42 pm |
  44. tco

    Today? Probably not much. In the future, maybe a lot. Maybe if the media had spent more time vetting Mr. Obama instead of anointing him and less time bashing Ms. Clinton, maybe we'd already have the answers. You know the Republicans aren't going to let these issues die.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:43 pm |
  45. Randy Porter Mo.

    I don`t think it`s going to hurt his chances at all. A few undecided voters might go for Clinton at the last minute, but I don`t think that will make a big impact. Barack Obama went for so long with little or no heat on him and that gave him the cusion he needed to gain steam in this race. The people he has backing him don`t care what he does at this point. Most of his voters are going to stick with him through thick and thin, because they want an African-American President. If Hillary Clinton Drops out of the race the majority or her supporters will back Obama. If Obama were to get smeared by some new story,and withdraw from the race, most of his supporters would simply not vote in the general election. There cause would be over, and the air would be let out of the democratic race. The best thing for the Democrates would be for Obama to keep winning, or the crusade will be over.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:44 pm |
  46. Ann

    I think Rezko is the one on trial and we should wait till the trial is over. Correct me if I am wrong but Obama has not been indited for anything. I am way more concerned with who got pardoned in the Clinton administration. That is something I can hang my decision on.

    With the Canadian meeting I would be far more swayed that there was a fire storm if the Obama campaign was the one that made the contact instead it was the other way around. Obviously NAFTA is very important to Canada and probably would prefer if McCain were the next president.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:44 pm |
  47. Jerry Wilson

    The media is enchanted by Barack, and find it dificult to report his bad news. The press regards the NAFTA story as a non issue, and offer the Rezo relations as innocent. There was a time when the press was a rampart for truth, but now it's a group of gossips, breathless to tell the bad news about Hillary.

    Jerry Wilson
    Broken Arrow, OK

    March 4, 2008 at 2:44 pm |
  48. Allen L Wenger

    I'm sure it will hurt a lot and it is a shame, because we know very little about the facts at this time. We only have speculation and this speculation may change the course of our country.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:44 pm |
  49. Gretchen

    None. I believe the Clinton strategy will be seen for what it is and if anything, will provide even more incentive to Obama supporters. This stuff is what the country is trying to get past. Obama has taken the high road all the way – too bad Ms. Clinton finds it necessary to focus on negatives. I for one am sick of it and plan on supporting Obama regardless of what mud she slings.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:45 pm |
  50. Tjuania in Desoto, Texas

    I am very upset with Hillary Clinton about trying to call Obama out for bad business deals. Hillary Clinton must have forgotten about "Whitewater". The american people have not, it is so hypocritical of her to go after Barack Obama when she was under investigation for Whitewater and it my opinion , the issue has never been resolved.


    March 4, 2008 at 2:46 pm |
  51. Phil

    As a Canadian, I am embarrassed by our country's involvement in the U.S. Election and on behalf of many Candians I am sure, I apologize to Sen. Obama. One must remember we have a right wing government here who would love to see the Republicans keep the White House. I would not put it beneath them to have orchestrated this whole affair as Sen. Obama is the one likely to beat Sen. McCain.
    To all Americans, I apologize.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:46 pm |
  52. PAUL, Pennington Gap, VA

    The clinton campaign and the MSM is trying to "get" Obama in order to "vet" him; it is all a 'witch-hunt' out sheer DESPERATION.
    May be after today's election results, Hillary can once again focus on trying to divulge her tax returns and W/H records, for a change – –

    March 4, 2008 at 2:47 pm |
  53. Michael

    i don't think his relationship with Rezko count for anything, but his adviser's meeting with a Canadian official is the bombshell of the present situation. Clinton has been attacking this man like he is a GOP member, and good for her, the attacks exploded at the right time. The possible outcome of today might be that those unsure voters would dance to her tune.

    Covina, CA

    March 4, 2008 at 2:47 pm |
  54. Gina Racine, Wisconsin


    March 4, 2008 at 2:48 pm |
  55. Kevin- Webster, MA

    Zip, Zero, Nada.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:48 pm |
  56. Emily

    rezko = obama = republican field day in november.
    nafta = obama = don't worry canada .
    voters = obama = god help us


    March 4, 2008 at 2:49 pm |
  57. Leonard H. Beck

    Senator Obama, will lose Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island, and possibly Vermont tonight. Americans still do not know him well enough yet. He needs to sell himself. He was doing great, until the last debate in Ohio, and his recent gaffs, about NAFTA.
    His biggest gaff, was when he tiptoed around the Louis Farrakhan endorsement. Americans, are watching everything this election, because they do not want to make the mistakes, that they made, in the past two Presidential elections.

    Estero, Florida

    March 4, 2008 at 2:50 pm |
  58. Rob G.

    ...His relationship with Tony Rezko ? – no affect.

    ...adviser’s meeting with a Canadian official about NAFTA? Huge affect! Canada has to stop exporting cold weather & snow to the US.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:50 pm |
  59. Brian

    I'm surprised the media isn't praising Obama as being "open-minded and fair" for having overlooked Tony Rezko's very questionable criminal past.

    Of course as Mr. Obama likes to say, a president needs "good judgement" more than experience. You'd think that Mr. Obama's experience with Tony Rezko would suggest that his judgement isn't always good.

    In the end, it matters little-not many of his supporters will look below the surface to determine his true character.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:53 pm |
  60. Julie VanDusky

    He'll just lose this as an excuse as to why he lost Texas and Ohio today... even though he was behind or tied in the polls before these incidents occurred. He'll try to avoid discussing that even after winning 11 states in a row and outspending Hillary 4 to 1 and 2 to 1 in Texas and Ohio respectively, he still couldn't win these two big delegate rich states.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:53 pm |
  61. Corbin -Denver, CO

    Unfortunately i think they will hurt his chances today, especially the Canada affair since the media coverage on it has been poor. there are solid facts that discredits Obama's involvement in this issue which includes a video of an angry Canadian parliament arguing who "interfered" in the Us campaign with false accusations. Many people will not know this in time and will loose their trust in Obama.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:54 pm |
  62. Grace

    The Rezko relationship is ole news...and once Obama found out about him – he distance/renounced/rejected his ties...so lets drop this foolishness – Rezko is going to get his judgement and there is no presidential pardon in his future (unless Bush gives it to him).

    As for the Canadian official and NAFTA...well it seems like the right winged Canadian government is getting involved in US politics. It was not with Obama and the Obama camp did initiate the meeting. So how did the press find out about the private meeting – we should really be asking ourselves for what purposes was the meeting information 'leaked'.

    Frankly all the hoopla is deflecting the fact that 'oh yea my husband when he was president was the one initiating NAFTA' -with a faint hope that people will have fogotten that history. There will always be some economic dealings with our neighbors to the North and South – that is part of being who we are – the extent of that relationships warrants however re-evaluation and re-negotiation in the face of our current crises...I am confident Obama has the brains and courage to make sound decisions for the American middle class once he is commander-in-chief. Clinton may have the abiliites too if she gets the job (but only if the former President Clinton – is tossed out of the decision making meetings).

    March 4, 2008 at 2:54 pm |
  63. Andy in Portland, Maine

    I don't think those already supporting Obama will be swayed. They support him because his message is anti-Washington politics and by trying to make an issue out of Rezko and the NAFTA meeting that's playing Washington politics. That might even rally them. For those old school voters who are on the fence, that's another story. It could sway some a few of them, but I don't think it will be enough to change the direction of these primary elections.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:55 pm |
  64. Ralph from NYC

    Jack, up until now, Obama has been squeeky clean with the voters. True, Clinton has declared she wants to change NAFTA as well and the NAFTA issue is more important in Ohio where Clinton leads than in Texas where Obama leads.Still, for the first time Obama is coming under more scrutiny and if many voters panic realizing they do not know him as well as they thought the race for the Democratic Presidential Candidacy may become a real horse race.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:56 pm |
  65. Josh

    Nothing more than poppycock Jack, unfortunely this type of smear tactics is commonplace. I think it won't have any effect at all. Besides this sounds a lot either an "Snow job" or another play right out of the Karl Rove playbook of sleaze. Either way, it won't stick and Obama will go on to become our next President.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:57 pm |
  66. Marcus mt.olive

    No effect ;Obama's supporters are for hope not reality;

    March 4, 2008 at 2:57 pm |
  67. Mark D. Oklahoma City

    Obama will be hurt by those two things just like a Mac Truck is hurt when it's windshield hits a grasshopper at 70mph on a lonely Texas country road.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:59 pm |
  68. Michael "C" in Lorton, Virginia

    I don't think that it will have an impact nor will it effect his chances. Hillary has a lot more skeletons in her closet than shoes. If Obama or his advisors have done nothing inappropriately, then they should not be worrying about devils knocking at their doors.

    March 4, 2008 at 2:59 pm |
  69. Rick


    It won't hurt him at all. When you think of what the Clinton's have been accused of, he comes out as a winner. This is good for Obama as it shows Clinton's desperation. She's throws the kitchen sink and he's not shaken by it. Obam shows great judgment, character and strength to take on John McCain in November.

    Rick from Huntington Beach, California

    March 4, 2008 at 2:59 pm |
  70. Julie VanDusky

    Jack, if people already drank the Kool-Aid, this will not have an effect on them. If people avoided drinking it, they'll realize that what Obama says isn't necessarily what Obama does, and they'll vote for Hillary. At least with Hillary, they know what they're getting. This Canada incident only demonstrates further that with Obama, we don't know what we're getting. He's promising voters one thing and the Canadians another. He did this in 2004- he changed his position on Iraq and now has changed it again. How can we be sure of anything he promises?

    March 4, 2008 at 3:01 pm |
  71. Jan Brunton

    I don't think it will matter very much since most Americans don't care about Canada or what happens north of the border. They would rather overlook these things, as they are more interested in 'making history' with this candidate. We in Canada and the rest of the world find this amusing. Your founding fathers designed the White House to be run by a man only, referring to the first couple as 'The President and the First Lady'. Hillary makes history by breaking the misogynist language in that phrase and thinking. We hope for 'change' too.

    Jan Brunton
    Toronto, Canada

    March 4, 2008 at 3:01 pm |
  72. Greg

    By the morning of the vote, I'd expect many voters to have their minds made up. I doubt petty stories simply being overblown is response from accusations of "Obama's free ride" will change too many people's minds at the last moment.
    If it does seem like it's going to hurt his chances, he could always just cry on TV so everyone can see how much the campaign is "just getting" to him...

    Bucks County, PA

    March 4, 2008 at 3:01 pm |
  73. Daniel From Tempe AZ

    I would hope that everyone would think twice about voting for him. Yes, Hillary has her problems too, but I believe we all know about her skeletons that are no longer hiding in the closet. How much do we really know about Barack since the media is tending to give him a free pass and put him on the ballot in November?

    March 4, 2008 at 3:01 pm |
  74. Dave from Exeter

    May I also point out that barack has not touched any of the Clinto scandals...but that is why many of us want him as President...that is the character that fits the President of the United States of America... one that is human and admits his mistakes, knows he need to answer the questions within time but doesn't crumble when the mobs are chanting with pitchforks.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:01 pm |
  75. Greg from Mechanicsburg, PA

    Obama should have addressed his relationship with Tony Rezko long ago. He should never have bought the house he now owns through the help of Rezko and, instead of simply acknowledging that this was a mistake, he should have sold it ASAP. I guaranty you that this will come back to bite him in the butt come November 5th. As for Canadagate, that's just smoke and mirrors thrown up by Clinton and won't hold any water.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:02 pm |
  76. John

    It's about 1:00 PM here in the Rockies and the poll on CNN have Hillary ahead in Texas by two points. I give the time because it changes every minute. This indicates to most of us that what ever Hillary and Bill did is less important than what Obama has done or is doing that none of us know or read about.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:02 pm |
  77. Chanel from Boston

    I think it may sway undecided voters over to Hillary but I think if you have already selected your candidate there is no turning back.

    Jack, I have a question for you? Has Hillary "rejected" Mr. Limbaugh's support?

    March 4, 2008 at 3:03 pm |
  78. Tony in NY

    Not nearly as much as they would if it were a friend of Hillary going on trial..

    Its quite apparent that many of Obama's Supporters can't articulate why they support him other than they like him, and would pay this no mind..

    March 4, 2008 at 3:04 pm |
  79. Jeri Idaho

    It seems that this is the only issues of substance about Obama. It's his only experience and it doesn't amount to "Change"! Really, even on the "I was against the War",rhetoric, he wasn't even in a position to vote on it! He wasn't in the Senate then and wasn't privy to the onslaught of lies from the White House in the security briefings! And you have to remember they were lies, so Hillary Clinton did her job and voted to protect the United States! Now we and she knows the fuzzy truth! That wasn't a mistake, it was an honest attempt at security. Bush was the culprit making up the false evidence. Based in that security briefing anyone would have and should have voted to attack Iraq!

    If the only ties to any substantive history is shady, why would anyone vote for Obama? Just because he is Black and would make history and uses the word "Change" a lot is not good enough!

    March 4, 2008 at 3:05 pm |
  80. Diane/Allentown, PA

    Actually if this is the best they can come up with, I think he'll be okay.

    They've tried alot of mud, it doesn't seem to be sticking...........

    March 4, 2008 at 3:05 pm |
  81. Teri - Leesburg VA

    This 'golden child' will not come under the scrutiny that he should as long as he is running in the primary. The real test will be if he makes it to the general election. Perhaps, by then, his bubble facade will have broken and we will see that he is as human as the rest of them and as much of a politician as the rest of them......

    March 4, 2008 at 3:05 pm |
  82. Jodi

    I think that this recent news will damage Obama's reputation for a while but i dont think it is longl-asting. This Obama fever or phenomenon is too powerful and too vast to cool with some allegations.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:05 pm |
  83. Marie


    It is about time the media took a closer look at this guy. This Obamamania must stop until we know exactly who he is and how he will behave as president. Republicans will have a field day with his association with Farrakhan, Rezko, and the Canadian WinkWink scandals. It is is time for people to quit picking on Hillary who is honest, hard working, and intelligent – and get tougher on Obama. GO Hillary!

    Cincinnati, OH

    March 4, 2008 at 3:06 pm |
  84. Diana from San Francisco California

    It is the same old,same old for the media- and I expected better from CNN- the job of the media is to report the truth. The antics of the Clinton campaign are simply deceitful and disgraceful, if Hillary wins the nomination via these dirty gutter politics I will stay home in November, and I assure there are countless others that share my sentiments. This is a shame-When Hillary is on TV I do something radical and unexpected either mute it or turn it off.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:06 pm |
  85. Gretchen from Indiana

    Brian, Rezko did not donate to any of the Clinton campaigns. That got covered a month ago when the media was trying really hard to pin the scandal on her instead of Obama using an old photograph. You may have missed it since they ran the picture in prime time over, and over, and then ran the financial part at 2 in the afternoon one time only.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:06 pm |
  86. DeQuency

    Sen Clinton has ran such an ugly campaign, if she was to win the democratic nomination, I would not vote for her, I would vote for the person with the most experience. I think she is a liar, a cheat and behaves like a broken down ex wife. She is poor representation for the women voters, and has no clue as to what it is like to be at a disadvantage. It would be a mistake to elect her as the first woman president.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:07 pm |
  87. Richard Moore

    None. It's just another Clinton ploy to secure votes. What won't she do to appear to have the upper road when her hands and feet are covered with mud?

    March 4, 2008 at 3:08 pm |
  88. Joy-Morrisville, NC

    It's refreshing to know we have somebody running for the most important office our nation has to offer and we have a candidate that doesn't lower himself to the standards of those who will do anything, say anything to boost their slim chances of winning. Funny, since Clinton is saying she's ready from day one. Seems her desperation and willingness to slam Obama, plus run a shoddy campaign using shoddy tactics, running out of money reminds me of someone running in the Republican party. She has proven she's no more capable of running our country than John McCain is from day one or any other day!!!!! Tacky Hillary, Tacky!!!!!!

    March 4, 2008 at 3:08 pm |
  89. Luke

    My guess is that if the voters suspected that a right wing foreign government allied with Bush was trying to manipulate their votes through an entrapment scheme, so that McCain would get to run against Clinton and have a better chance of winning the election, it would backfire badly.

    The problem is, the media are not investigating how this plot was hatched and perpetrated, but presenting the story one-dimensionally.

    You can be darn sure, though, that that story WILL be written in the days to come. CNN: don't be duped and don't be scooped!

    Love your segments, Jack!

    March 4, 2008 at 3:09 pm |
  90. Big Bill from Brooklyn

    Give me a break. There are real issues to be addressed:
    The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; the stock market crisis; the housing and sub-prime mess; the continued failure to rebuild New Orleans.
    Do the Clintons really think that shady land deals and political double talk will preclude a successful presidential bid? They didn't for them.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:09 pm |
  91. Richard Sternagel

    This should not hurt Obama too much since he's explained these issues! Clinton is desperate and will use any issue real or otherwise in an effort to derail the Obama freight train! Yes We Can!

    March 4, 2008 at 3:09 pm |
  92. Deborah-Grant, Michigan

    Jack I do not believe it will have any effect on Obama at all seeing who it is that is throwing the mud. The Clintons are dilusional if they believe that everyone has forgotten their past antics. There has been an email circulating recently about just that telling voters to remember some of Hillary's not so finer moments in regard to the Paula Jones affair among other things. It just shows that Obama is trying to run a different kind of campaign and even though he could bring up a lot of dirt on the Clintons, he prefers to try and stay with the issues. Too bad for Hillary and Bill that Obama supporters are not the stupid zombies they think we are.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:09 pm |
  93. rjb

    As a Canadian I'm sorry Hillary stooped so low as to us this in her kitchen sink attack. Obama will be sorry he didn't us all the bombs that were left behind by her against her. She knew you wouldn't and you kept it kleen, and for that I thank you on behalf of my relatives living in the USA. I hope this will work for you as the world needs reasonable politicians who look to help others first

    Ray Manitoba

    March 4, 2008 at 3:10 pm |
  94. Stephen


    It will not hurt Obama at all, in fact, it probably has strengthen his image with the undecided voters. This is but a long line of smear tactics by the Clinton's to discredit Obama knowing full well that they will loose today, and if they can sway one voter by this garbage, then they will do it.

    I am tired of the "old boys" in Clinton's back room smoking cigars and trying to decide how to derail the most popular presidential candidate in a long time. Time will tell if the "old boys" broker the convention, but for now, Obama is taking the correct road....the high road with voters.

    I'm a very red republican but I will vote for Obama. This is the correct change in government that this country desperately needs.


    Merrill, Wisconsin

    March 4, 2008 at 3:10 pm |
  95. Phyllis Hancock

    The Rezko trial will go on for over a month. Obama's name will keep coming up because his relationship with Rezko is long term, 19 years. I have come across 52 articles in the Chicago Sun Times about the Obama/Rezko connection. Based on this I can see the republicans having a field day.

    Obama is either guilty by association or extremely naive. If nothing else there are 52 good examples of having very poor judgement.

    As of now, Obama better tighten his seat belt as the road to the white house is about to become bumpy.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:10 pm |
  96. R S in Ohio

    On a scale of 1 to 10 only about a 2.Not enought real information on them for it to be much worse than that .

    March 4, 2008 at 3:10 pm |
  97. Ken

    In regards to Obama, NAFTA and Canada, isn't it a Federal Crime for anybody, without the approval of the President or Congress, to discuss Treaties with a Foreign Country? Then there is how Obama bought the parcel of land across the street from his home from Mrs. Rezko at a very below market price. More troubling is Obama's admitted friendhip with the man who bombed our Capitol, Penatgon and a NY City Police Building in the 1970's.

    Ken Moulton
    Moultonboro, NH

    March 4, 2008 at 3:11 pm |
  98. Nadine Bolden

    There is always going to be some type of publicity for any candidate no matter who runs; in the past or the future, it's called "LIFE". We need a breath of fresh air, a new beginning... TURN THE PAGE. Let's stop criticiting those who lack experience and commending those who have experience. Isn't it more about what is being applied to help the nation. Every one had to start somewhere. Give OBAMA a chance. Clinton had your chance. When Bill Clinton was President Hillary was behind the curtains. Just as Michele would behind OBAMA. Pass the Platoon!

    March 4, 2008 at 3:11 pm |
  99. Paulette Dallas,PA

    It's about time Obama gets scrutinized. He thought he'd just waltz into the nomination by pretending to be this generation's JFK. He's not. Obama never brought up any of Clinton's dirt because he knew that he had skeleton's in his own closet. His wife Michelle also has some problems. Look into her Princton Dissertation. Let the American people know potentially what they will get.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:11 pm |

    I have always thought that Barak Obama was too slick,smooth and glib. All those put together spells distrust. With regards to NAFTA was all the talk about renegotiations--JUST WORDS ???

    March 4, 2008 at 3:12 pm |
  101. John

    It shouldn't, but it will. If people still believe that Barack is Muslim then trying to explain the relationship to some voters is an exercise in futility. It just provides more fuel for the misguided that outsource thinking for themselves to the latest headline and reaffirms the opinions of those that wouldn't have voted for him anyway.

    Sacramento, CA

    March 4, 2008 at 3:12 pm |
  102. Patti from Lansdowne, PA

    The problem with Obama is that he held himself out there as a different type of politician. He put himself above the fray. Now it turns out that he may not be so different afterall.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:12 pm |
  103. Heidi from Iona, ID

    Candidates always do what gets votes. And mudslinging has always gotten lots of votes. But this year, we Americans are sick of dirty politics so this time around it will only make a small dent and it will not be enough to overcome Obama in the delegate count, regardless of who wins today.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:12 pm |
  104. Chris

    This might have some impact on undecided voters in Ohio, but it might work the other way in Texas which has benefitted more than Ohio certainly from the Free Trade agreement.

    Obama is relatively new to the trappings of politics and he is going to stumble at times. I'm still not sure this one was a stumble though. The political banter during the Primary and Election does tend to throw a lot of quotes around that, out of context, could be worrisome to our allies and/or neighbors, and I think it is responsible for politicians to be working to make sure true misunderstandings do not result. I think both Obama and Clinton want to look at NAFTA from the perspective of American workers, but they certainly don't want to unintentionally give the impression that they are going isolationist on our neighbors either.

    I know the Clinton followers continue to blame all their failings on the "unfair Media" but they might want to recognize the personal attacks on her history, as mentioned above, that Obama has NOT taken. He may be new, but it is his integrity that his followers are attracted to (the same for McCain followers, I would argue). Clinton may run on experience, but too many people know her to allow her to run on a message of integrity.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:13 pm |
  105. Roland

    Tax returns Jack, were are the tax returns???

    March 4, 2008 at 3:14 pm |
  106. Taye

    this is more politics as usual from the clintons. throwing the proverbal kitchen sink. she's gone negative and urgly. all those who support her should open their eyes and see the damage its going to the party eventual nominee.

    Plymouth, Mn

    March 4, 2008 at 3:14 pm |
  107. Gino

    Is O'Bama going to be hurt by the items you mention? I don't know, but it may make some of the voters reflect before casting their ballot today and in the months to come... he is a politician and as far as I am concerned politicians tell the people they address what they want to hear! I did not see a halo on top of his head... then I don’t see any halo on top of the other presidential candidates. I think that 99% of all politicos are like Pinocchio except that their nose does not grow! I think that O’Bama is in that 99%!
    What bugs me even more is that voters want to be in the winning side, so they will vote for a politico they feel will win and then they can tap themselves on the shoulder if their candidate wins and feel that they have helped the candidate win! I just wish that voters would use their OWN GREY MATTER and not be influenced by who supports whom ,e.g., a union boss states that the union supports such and such a candidate, does that mean that members of the union vote for that particular candidate? Can't members use their own grey matter when it comes to voting? Or are they like sheep following their "leader?" This is what it looks like to me.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:15 pm |
  108. Nadine Bolden from Queens New York

    There is always going to be some type of publicity for any candidate no matter who runs; in the past or the future, it’s called “LIFE”. We need a breath of fresh air, a new beginning… TURN THE PAGE. Let’s stop criticiting those who lack experience and commending those who have experience. Isn’t it more about what is being applied to help the nation. Every one had to start somewhere. Give OBAMA a chance. Clinton had your chance. When Bill Clinton was President Hillary was behind the curtains. Just as Michele would be behind OBAMA. Pass the Platoon!

    March 4, 2008 at 3:15 pm |
  109. Louis

    Not much at all because I think everything about these issues has already come to light. I find it curious why Hillary would run a campaing based on negative campaign toward Obama. All she is doing is making it easier for John McCain and other Republicans to attack him in the fall. THIS is the reason why I think Obama refrained from using negative attacks (Whitewater, Lewinsky, Lincoln bedroom, etc) on Hillary is because he's mindful of the general prospects of winning in November and thinks its repugnant to attack a fellow Democrat. If McCain wins the general election I will hold Hillary Clinton personally responsible for it.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:16 pm |
  110. Leon

    I think the timing of the relationship hurts Obarma, but for the long hall
    I believe it will disapear and the issues will come back to light. That is the reason I am voting for Obama, because Hillary and Bill keep bringing up the same old Political mess. We do not want the same old scrape that the american people has been reciving for years.

    It's time for a change and it's time a leader to talk to the american people and tell the truth. If Macain or Clinton gets the White House, then we will really be in mess. Obama will win, but it want be easy!

    FT Hood Texas

    March 4, 2008 at 3:16 pm |
  111. MIKE in Arizona

    Jack -

    Obama never has to mention any of the Clinton Scandals because, just like you did in your intro, the media mentions them all for him, while always seeming to forget to mention that Hillary was never found 'guilty' of anything.

    The Rezko deal is very important for a number of reasons, none more important than the whole 'Judgment' debate.

    I don't think you should brag about your judgment when you're dumb enough to get into any kind of deal with a guy who is under criminal investigation.

    Mike in AZ

    March 4, 2008 at 3:16 pm |
  112. Vickie

    Yes it does make alot of difference ,for Obama who is running on honesty and his words.This is what his campaign is all about. He is not Mr. Clean after all.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:17 pm |
  113. Nadine from Queens New York

    There is always going to be some type of publicity for any candidate no matter who runs; in the past or the future, it’s called “LIFE”. We need a breath of fresh air, a new beginning… TURN THE PAGE. Let’s stop criticiting those who lack experience and commending those who have experience. Isn’t it more about what is being applied to help the nation. Every one had to start somewhere. Give OBAMA a chance. Clinton had your chance. When Bill Clinton was President Hillary was behind the curtains. Just as Michele would be behind OBAMA. Pass the Platoon!

    March 4, 2008 at 3:17 pm |

    When even Jay Leno jokes about Obama being born in a manager–it's definitely time for a second look at the "golden" boy. No one is as perfect as the media has lead us to believe ....
    Tulsa, OK

    March 4, 2008 at 3:17 pm |
  115. Sky


    Are you kidding? That is the best Clinton came up with to throw the kitchen sink at him? The Clinton Administration would not even consider that a scandal. Obama is the diet-Coke of scandals when running against Hillary.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:17 pm |
  116. Mary Carroll

    I just hope that Obama is prepared for all that lies ahead. I love his message, but I am also old enough to remember how vicious presidential politics can be.

    With a bit of luck people will look to the future and not to the past when they cast their votes.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:18 pm |
  117. JS


    What a biased question on election day!

    How about discussing Hillary's relationship with Vince Foster, Whitewater, her ransacking of the White House when she moved out and not reading the NIE report before deciding to send our family members off to war – and the nerve to use the excuse that being from NY and the events of 9/11 caused her to vote to go to war with Iraq – smart voters should understand she is making the same inferred lie as the White House – Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11.

    Be fair with your questions, Jack especially as voters are going to the polls.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:18 pm |
  118. Burt

    When someone claims to be pure and he is not, the tendency is to fall from the ivory tower he's built. Senator Obama has managed to escape scrutiny through clever speeches and charisma. With time, the "smoke and mirrors" wash away, then the truth comes out.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:18 pm |
  119. Bill Lewis

    Heres a question for you Jack, can this guy Obama do anything wrong? It seems like everytime some sort of Obama issue comes out, it's follwed by a b.s. response from his camp, just to be brushed off as some sort of innocent mistake. Of coarse this isnt going to hurt him, nothing it seems will. That is because this election isnt about Obama its about President Bush and the great disdain that half of this country seems to have for him.

    Bill, Chicago

    March 4, 2008 at 3:19 pm |
  120. sk

    I think by Obama not speculating on Hillary's shady past just goes to prove his claim that he is for "change" and not the dirty political tactics that the Clintons are employing just to have their way. She is all for dishing it out, but everyone can see that she is famous for throwing the rock and then hiding her hand. "She-Cat" is what she is!

    Grantsboro, North Carolina

    March 4, 2008 at 3:19 pm |
  121. Nadine from Queens New York

    There is always going to be some type of publicity for any candidate no matter who runs; in the past or the future, it’s called “LIFE”. We need a breath of fresh air, a new beginning… TURN THE PAGE IN HISTORY. Let’s stop criticiting those who lack experience and commending those who have experience. Isn’t it more about what is being applied to help the nation. Everyone has to start somewhere. Give "OBAMA" a chance. Clinton had your chance. When Bill Clinton was President Hillary was behind the curtains. Just as Michele would be behind OBAMA. Pass the Platoon!

    March 4, 2008 at 3:19 pm |
  122. james hoffman


    In Reno, I once saw a shop owner shoot himself in the foot when he pulled out a gun to shoot a robber. I cannot think of a more similar situation than Obama did to lose the primary. He shot himself in the foot. Most people know that NAFTA, GAFTA, and free trade deals that at not free had destroyed America and I am old enough to realize this fact and I am not doing a Wink, Wink, Wink.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:19 pm |

    WAKE UP PEOPLE ! Barack Obama is not good for America nor the world ..as is evident by the Canadian officials "Leaking" the contents of a letter from the Obama camp.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:19 pm |
  124. shan

    I believe these issue will only hurt Obama's chances mildly. Only due to the fact that we, the voters, don't make an effort to follow up on the facts.

    Politicians thrive on voter empathy...they count on it.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:20 pm |
  125. George, Columbia SC

    I believe it is a little too late to make a difference, except in Ohio. I believe that it's going too hurt him. So much for the squeaking clean candidate. Come on and join the rest of the gang!!!

    March 4, 2008 at 3:20 pm |
  126. Sue, Preston MD

    Like Debbie McCoy said, these items have already been in the media for a long time. I have heard them mentioned in passing on almost every network. All of a sudden it's a BIG deal! Mr Obama purposely vetted himself over the last few years so that everyone would know that there are no secrets. But unfortunately for Mr Obama, no body was paying attention then.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:20 pm |
  127. June Rynkewicz

    Jack – I could care less if his association with a mobster will hurt his chances, I think that the only thing he has going for him is he did not vote for the War. (Wow) His biggest deal is that he is a man of color. I don't think that his wife is going to be a very good first lady, if he makesit to the end.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:20 pm |
  128. Jim Thomas

    Too little, too late. If the issues being raised now by Clinton and the media had surfaced prior to Iowa, Obama would have been out of the race by now. However, he was not considered a serious threat to Clinton until Super Tuesday and by then there was just too much noise for these issues to get any traction in the campaign news. The problem is there will be plenty of time to explore these stories plus others that the Republicans can make up between the time Obama wraps up the nomination and the Fall election. I see this as 1988 and 2004 all over again!

    March 4, 2008 at 3:21 pm |
  129. Timothy Westbrook

    It won't hurt his chances at all. I remember, not too long ago, Travel-gate, Lewinsky-Gate, Whitewater, McDougal-Gate, Vince Foster, Gennifer Flowers, Impeachment Hearings........

    March 4, 2008 at 3:23 pm |
  130. ThinkBeforeYouVote

    If you take the time to dig/research a little, you'll find that, without a doubt, Obama just isn't ready. His run for presidency has been forced...it's not a natural process. His very short list of legislative and senatorial accomplishments is contrived; he was given credit for the work of others in order to cram some experience into 1 year of service. He has shown lack of judgement in the people he's associated himself with in both business and personal levels.

    In short, he is a politician and nothing more. He gives great speeches which is a major change from our current President. However, he is just too green for the job.
    This country is at a crossroads, and it is not the time to gamble on Obama. Please THINK before you vote...don't just HOPE Obama will mature while in office into the person
    we all want him to be.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:23 pm |
  131. lmv1106

    It could make a difference with voters who were on the fence, but not those firmly in wither camp. But keep in mind, the Clinton campaign did not raise these issues – as it happens the Rezko trial started yesterday, and the Canadian government released the memo. The media FINALLY are doing their job, which is to question the candidates about questionable things, and for a candidate running on transparency, these are damning allegations. We don't know Obama. I suspect, if he gets the nomination, this is going to look like a walk in the park. Fasten your seatbelts, folks, the mudslinging has just begun, and those of you supporting Obama will be responsible for the Democrats losing in November. Congratulations.

    Lisa in Kailua-Kona, HI

    March 4, 2008 at 3:25 pm |
  132. Heather

    I believe that the American people as a whole and those that are voting today can see that what has been released in the past few days is nothing more than "old politics" at it's best. A smoke screen if you will, for a scared woman to hide behind and hope that her gender will get her the votes. What would happen if you heard Obama say "Hey I'm black, vote for me!" ? I am a woman and it grates on my nerves to hear another woman use her gender that way.

    Farmington Missouri

    March 4, 2008 at 3:25 pm |
  133. Rachelle

    I really do not see Obama as being cuddled by the media. I actually think the media is unjustifiably under attack for a change. When the process first started Obama didn't get that much attention because he was relatively unknown. Maybe there are just less negative things to report, so now people go digging for things or making up things, or stretching the truth because he poses a threat to some, and offers hope to others. Rezco has a lot of money, and owns a lot of property, Barack utilized his resources and used them to benefit other's. Bush utilized the Bin Laden family's resources, and used them to Benefit his self. Obama is criticized for not holding a sub-commitee meeting on foreign affaris (although he was in attendance for several) and then bashed for allegedly holding back door meetings with Canada. The nature of which was proven not to be of ill intent, but it's almost as if the Clinton camp is suggesting that he shouldn't be holding meeting with Canada at all since they make him appear to be so anit-Nafta. When he's repeatdly stated he's not anti-Nafta, he's pro Nafta reform. There's huge difference. I'm not a Clinton basher, I think Hillary is well informed, tough, brilliant, resiliant, able to listen to her constiuents, but this well televised race showed me she doesn't have all the leadership qualities that I believe a President should have, and we have a candidate who does. That's why I now support Obama, and I have for a couple months now. While Hillary is very articulate, and very knowledgeable, she doesn't posses the "language of communication" under pressure, a President should have, and she is a bit polarizing. If this country is going to crawl it's way out of this economical, envrionmental, fear driven debacle we're in, we are going to have to come together, comprimise, and elect the leadership we need to get us there.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:25 pm |
  134. Mem

    None at all if people use their brain instead of listening to the Clinton muck rackers! Who'd have thought that the ones who accused a left wing conspirancy would now play the same ole' politics. The main reason we as a country need to get rid of the Clintons and their arrogance of thinking this was a walk in the park. Wake up folks and see them for what they are, vote for Obama.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:25 pm |
  135. Raphael Houston Texas

    This is going to hurt Barrack badly. If you look at the polls their are still a lot of undecided voters. The fact that Barrack has had business relationships with Mr. Rezko raises a lot of questions. Especially for a candidate running a campaign on judgement and ethics.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:25 pm |
  136. Vee Robillard

    Regading NAFTA, It's in Canada's interest to see Hillary Clinton nominated. You think the information, true or not, fell into the Clinton camp accidentally?

    March 4, 2008 at 3:26 pm |
  137. Vinnie Vino

    O' my god, on a scale from 1 to 10, with 1 being the worst thing and 10 being the best thing that could happen, it's a 2. These two events have reduced the once sainted Barack Obama back into an ordinary American politician, who will do or say anything to get elected.

    C.I., New York

    March 4, 2008 at 3:26 pm |
  138. Kristi from Indiana

    Well, unfortunately some voters do buy into negative smear tactics but I think that if these so-called accusations are all that the Clinton campaign can come up with then Obama should come out of this relatively unscathed. But I would like to comment on the statement that Hillary made about Obama dislosing all documentation pertaining to these accusations; in Tit-for-Tat games one should also disclose her documentation from the Clinton Library which might confirm her so-called experience with Foreign Policy and her Tax Return to make sure that all her finances are above board as well. Just a friendly reminder Hillary!

    March 4, 2008 at 3:27 pm |
  139. Tom, Raleigh NC

    Obama will lose both Ohio and Texas because the media is finally looking behind the facade for whatever substance they can find, and much of what they are finding is negative. By the way, it was the media, not Hillary, that revealed the Rezko and Canada situations and also Obama's amazing failure to vote yes or no on over 130 issues while in state government. Don't blame her for starting this, just be glad that the truth about this shell of a leader is coming out now, before it is too late. Maybe now CNN will stop cheerleading for Obama and start analyzing his resume and his relationships. Hillary has gone thru this scrutiny her whole life, time for Obama to take the test.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:27 pm |
  140. Ted Tx

    Who cares. Look at all the insiders that have been in bed with the Clintons, Bushs and all the other presidents who have come before them. Look at the lobbyists who have been in bed with McCain. This is just one of the seedy side of politics that we all know that occur and until you start out with a fresh slate from bottom to top it will continue. Set term limits. One term, pack your bag and head towards the sunset and don't look back.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:27 pm |
  141. Jeff, Galena, MO

    It shouldn't hurt him at all. Like you said to begin with, " Obama isn’t implicated in the case at all ". Only people looking for dirt will be able to make anything out of this.

    I agree with Diana Ballew, I've never met John McCain, so how could I be one of his friends? I know he's not one of mine.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:27 pm |
  142. B.J.

    Democrats who have followed this race know Hillary is desperate and won't be fooled by her antics. It might hurt him a little, but not much. I don't believe he has done anything illegal with regard to Tony Rezko and I can't believe how Hillary has tried turn the table to make Obama seem like the NAFTA bad guy and she's the only one to repair the damage (caused by her husband). Give me a break!

    I've always been a fan of the Clinton's, however, I'm about to lose all respect for Hillary and her husband, the former President. This attack plan of theirs' smells like old style politics as usual and I'm sick of it. Obama has run a fair campaign. He hasn't been mud slinging, nor has he mentioned any of the skeleton's she and Bill have tucked away in their closet. I think she's decided that since he's being a gentleman, she's going to be the b-- that she is!

    March 4, 2008 at 3:27 pm |
  143. Al, Kansas

    I hope...sincerely hope, that the voters are paying more attention this time around. And I think they are. There is a tremendous amout of interest in this race, and just maybe, this time the voters will see through all of the mud and spin. One can always hope.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:28 pm |
  144. Jim from California

    It will hurt and should. His state is ranked 44 "best overall" state to live in th country. He hasn't done anything. He'll end the war, ok now what. His health care plan stinks, he's going to use war money ti finance stuff. Who does he think is footing the bill for the war, his friend Tony Rezko.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:28 pm |
  145. shan

    I meant...voter APATHY. then again, empathy plays a big part to voters that are passionate in their own self serving beliefs...

    March 4, 2008 at 3:28 pm |
  146. Annie, Atlanta GA

    If the media was pounding it into our brains it may have an efffect, but they're not, so it won't. This man has us convinced he can change the status quo in Washington. If he wins, I hope he can, because we're in serious trouble, and we know it. Thank you George W. Bush.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:28 pm |
  147. Mike

    I don't think it matters how much garbage the Clintons try to dig (or make) up. Her campaign doesn't get that the biggest attraction people have to Obama is that it is not her. She is a sleaze. It is obvious to the majority of Americans what she and her husband represent, what their motives are and how they operates. If she wins the nomination, she will lose the general election in a landslide. And it will destroy the Democratic party - not just for this election but for decades to come.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:28 pm |
  148. Cindy from San Dimas

    In the big picture of politics this is mice nuts.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:28 pm |
  149. Patrice E.

    I'm not sure. It is amazing how all of this comes out the day before "Super Tuesday". It is no surprise to me that the Clinton camp is pouring this on way to thick. As far as the Canadian issue, Forbes Magazine has confirmed that there were no discussions regarding NAFTA. And the Rezko thing has nothing to do with Obama. Also, did you know that the Clintons are friends with Rezko?

    If Hillary won 11 states straight and Obama won the so called "Major States" that Hillary has won, the DNC would have quickly demanded that he drop out of the race for the "Good of the party". But the media has sympathy for Hillary and racist, bigot, and bias hatred for Obama....because he was winning.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:29 pm |
  150. Jerry

    It's funny that CNN is just now putting this out, one would think that they were backing Obama and waited until he just about had the nomination before spilling the beams about all the things that he was guilty of. I'm beginning to think CNN is playing dirty pool with the way they are putting out news stories

    March 4, 2008 at 3:30 pm |
  151. Rachelle

    And thank you Bill Phelps

    March 4, 2008 at 3:30 pm |
  152. Cathy, Los Angeles, CA

    Hillary had best be careful about throwing stones... she has way more to hide than Obama does. He is trying to run an issues based campaign, so I don't believe he will resort to these last minute salvos. I think he can and will withstand all the mud being thrown his way. The question is: will Hillary come out clean? What about Norman Hsu? Bill's business deals with Dubai? The list goes on and on......

    March 4, 2008 at 3:30 pm |
  153. Terrance Craion

    Hopefully nothing, Sen Obama has not being implicated in any criminal wrong doing with Mr. Rezko and both the Obama campaign and Canadian embassy have stated no deception was evident.

    As far as scrutiny, that come with the job and is expected, my problem with the scrutiny is when it is not legitimate. If it's debate over whose policies are stronger or more feasible, that's fine. The weak guilty by association antics have grown tiresome very quickly and we are only 8 months away from the general election! God help us all!

    Detroit, MI

    March 4, 2008 at 3:31 pm |
  154. Cheree in Canada

    I doubt it will have much of an impact at all.
    Now if the press had decided to dig a little bit deeper and a little bit earlier on the Rezko land deal, then maybe we'd have seen some different results in the earlier races. One can only imagine the field day that the media would have had with that part of the Rezko story, had it involved Hillary instead of Obama!

    March 4, 2008 at 3:31 pm |
  155. Tom from Boston

    It will hurt Obama's chances mightily, Jack! Just look at the final poll (Reuters/ZOGBY) that actually showed Clinton ahead in Texas! Momentum was all Clinton's in the last few days, aided by some smart tactical moves and a media finally stung by assertions they were playing favorites. If Clinton fares better than expected today (and I think she will), expect her to stay in the contest and for these kind of blasts from her campaign to continue because they are working. As much as I hate this stuff, I have to say she is hitting her stride. Now the question is, will Obama have the guts to do the same or is he going to try and skate above it all as the "savior" he wants us all to believe him to be and pray that we don't look under the covers? I for one think he'd better go after Hillary and soon. And even if he does and wins the nomination, he'd better get ready because McCain is going to make Clinton look like she hits like a, well, little girl.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:32 pm |
  156. Paul from Michigan

    If Rezko is fair and square then let's also talk about Hillary's brother's Hugh and Tony or the New York Senate election fraud case currently being successfully held up by the Clinton's in the court system. Or how about the magical box if key documents that appeared in the closet by a Clinton secretary during the Whitewater case after it disapeared from the Clinton's lawyer's office after his supicious suicide. Let's talk about Rezko along with all these other cases that have magically went away without clear resolution. They are still open to scrutiny but for some reason the media is afraid to air Clinton's dirty but legimate laundry. And it's not just about Bill, Hillary has been just as much involved if not more in many of these scandals. She getting away with throwing all the mud it and you are letting her.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:32 pm |
  157. Renee

    Well I for one hope that the Tony Rezko and NAFTA scandals open some eyes and start to deflate this overrated man's run for the White House. I have never really understood all the hype over Obama , I prefer substance over speeches and action over words. Frankly I think his speeches have too many umm and ahh's and stuttering and stammering in them to be considered great speeches . So hopefully the media will cover these scandals and let the chips fall where they may..... Right into Hillary's lap.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:32 pm |
  158. George Wilson

    Now you jerks ask these questions. Where were you when it really counted? Just like the rest of the media, trying to keep a Cinderella story going to benifit your rating, but not telling the whole story. This story has been in the news before, but none of you would chew into it, but now that it has started to open a few eyes, and raising a few eyebrows, you all won't a piece of the pie.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:33 pm |
  159. John from Chicago

    Obama's little land deal is nothing compared to how corrupt John McCain is.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:34 pm |
  160. Legal Immigrant, OH

    where was Hilly-Billy aggression, they display now before super Tuesday.
    Was it over confidence or oversight?

    Her campaign management itself raises serious doubts on her ability to run our country.

    Now only if OBAMA delivers what he promises huh!

    VIVA americano.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:34 pm |
  161. iron duke scott


    stop giving the hill dog a free ride. can you even begin to imagine the clinton stance if the tables were turned and she had won 11 states in a row. the clinton whinning for obama to get out of the race would be heard all the way here to "fly over land". Shrill shrill shrill

    dent, minnesota

    March 4, 2008 at 3:34 pm |
  162. Chris

    I just wonder how come anything negative comes out about Obama that the Clinton campaign is always responsible. It is always "old politics" according to Obama and his supporters. While I agree that we need to look to the future and change is the dire need, does this guy never have to answer for his views, choices, etc? Even if the Clinton's were behind it (I am sure they were in some but, not all cases) does that mean Obama should get a free pass and not even be questioned about it? It seems to me that his campaign uses their "change" slogan as a way to deflect any negative accusations about him and/or his campaign. I am not sure how that shows great leadership...

    March 4, 2008 at 3:35 pm |
  163. Andrew

    I'm an Obama supporter, and I'm pretty sure that I disagree with his stand on NAFTA (his position strikes me as protectionist), but given the recent statement from the Canadian government, I don't see where he (or even his economic advisor) has been inconsistent on the issue. I also don't see where this notion of Obama's supporters as a "programmed" brainwashed cult comes from. Okay, so some Obama supporters can't name a single accomplishment of his as a senator. Is that really so revealing? Obama is saying that the problems we face won't be fixed without active involvement by large numbers of people. That's why his campaign looks the way it does. Unfortunately, many of Clinton's supporters who I overhear talking about Obama's support sound bewildered by the whole thing. "Wake up and wipe the drool off your chins" is their attitude towards support for Obama. The idea that he might be building a movement to last beyond election day, and that such a movement is necessary to bring about change, seems like something they have forgot. It was revealing when Clinton pointed to LBJ as the prime mover for civil rights. Umm, does anyone think that would have happened without a mass movement?

    March 4, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  164. Mary Spencer

    I think this a red herring. Lets get real. Hillary cannot beat McCain.Why has the medea gone all out for her these last few days? I'm a independent and voted for Oboma. As for her knowledge and experience, she didnt even know what Bill was up to in the whitehouse for8 yrs. This is serious and I'm sure no one wll bring it up.Have you all thought about 2 dynastys in a row.Whoever controls the next term will make or break this country.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  165. Lenny from Delray Beach Florida

    Unfortunately Jack, it will hurt him, not because any of the negative press is true, but simply because the questions are raised. People tend not to hear the answers or the truth. Like sheep, they are led by the nose by slick campaign rhetoric such as what the Clinton camp is spewing forth. If they had any sense of judgment or had any ability for critical thinking, they'd understand the mission is to torpedo the opposition any way it can. Funny how everyone says they dislike negative campaigning, yet time after time, they fall for it. It's why polls change so quickly; the public, frankly, is just plain stupid. Then again, Jack, don't listen to me, I live in Florida. Talk about stupidity, we voted even though it will not count toward selecting our party's nominee – unless Clinton loses Texas and Ohio, then our votes might count if she's able to change the rules. One thing is for certain, if there are any shenanigans in this race toward the White House – epsecially on the Democratic side – I will never vote again. And I don't think I am alone in that sentiment.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  166. Lilia from MD

    Zero, Silch, NADA. Every body know that all of this are political games, the last strike you wish will kill your oponent.

    I am very confortable that at the end of the day. Obama will have the uperhand and the marging of delegates even wider.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  167. Denise

    I don't think his relationship with Mr. Rezko or the Canada Nafta issue will make a difference. Clinton's camp likes to ignore the Peter Paul, taxes, and I am sure other issues, she has need involved in. So, if you look at Sen. Obama comapred to Sen. Clinton, he still looks like a jewel.

    P.S. Please tell Sen. Clinton she is about 20 years older than Sen. Obama, so she should have more experience. But, it doesn't mean she is the better candidate. That would be like saying President Bush (Jr) because of his experience would be a better candidate. It's has some to with experience, but more about judgement.

    Obama '08

    March 4, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  168. Brittany In Pa

    Well! Its about time he got some tough questions!
    Lets see how he does under pressure., He avoids anything he dont want to talk about and he claims transparentcy ?

    Britt in PA

    March 4, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  169. Elise

    If the media was covering Clinton's inability to produce her White House papers and tax records as much Obama knowing Tony Resko I'd care.Obama hasn't been charged with any misdeed.If you know anything about Chicago politics,you would know if there was any there,there Obama would be in court today.Move on,nothing to see here.Better luck next time to all who feel a need to take Obama down a few pegs.

    Sister Bay,Wi

    March 4, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  170. Bethenna

    I am a HUCKABELIEVER but I do not believe that these issues will affect Obama much at all. I originally thought that the more obvious issues would affect him and nothing has seemed to pull him down. The thing about Obama is that he is a "people pleaser" and he appears to be genuinely interested in "the people" something that his competitor lacks (in my opinion). I just pray that he is genuine.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  171. F. Taylor

    As a Canadian I am very disappointed in our Governement interfering in your elections. We have a right wing government right now who want the same extreme style government in the U.S. for their own shared corporate & elite greed. They are only held in check by a minority government or we would be in the same mess as you are at present. We might have a small advantage with free trade over the U.S. at present but both our countries have lost our manufactoring base to Mexico and other 3rd world countries. There is no way any conservative government will help the middle class or working poor and their philosophies have gone the way of the dodo bird!

    March 4, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  172. Chris

    You know, I'm really tired of everyone saying the media has been easy on Obama and has been biased against Hillary. I think it's absurd. The fact is. there's very little to attack Obama on! This is the first story they've had anything real to report that is not good for him. Just face it.. Hillary deserves the negative press she gets.. she does it to herself!

    I don't think this story will effect Obama at all. Even with this, there are far less secrets and deception than with the Clinton family... I just plain don't believe Hillary... at all.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  173. Dennis G form FL

    All politicians should be ready to be smeared, it's part of the job. During this election more people are interested in the "he said /she said" than the actual facts and policies. Quite literally there are no canidates for any party that are at all pleasing or at least satisfying when it comes to actual policy. However all the canidates have peaked the interests of the country by using over dramatized gossip and rhetoric, so at least people are aware who the canidates are. Can the people see the trees thru the forrest is what concerns me.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:40 pm |
  174. AJ

    Obama's decision to run a campaign that supposedly was on "higher ground" will be his downfall. He allowed Hillary Clinton to slam him at every turn. While she threw Rezko at him, he should have retaliated with Norman Hsu, her financier who is in prison for the same sleazy deals that Rezko is presently on trial. Not once has Obama mentioned Hsu's name to Clinton. Being "nice" makes Obama appear weak and one can just "feel" his head being tossed by Clinton upon a brick wall.
    Gotta give it to Hillary, she knows how to get down and dirty and that's what it takes to win an election!

    March 4, 2008 at 3:40 pm |
  175. kb from Iowa

    It may hurt his chances with voters who only take in the sensational headlines but don't bother to read the rest of the story. Or with people who don't understand that mud slinging is part of politics. Truth is, Obama would have to admit to something super bad, like killing Mr. Rogers before I would change my vote for him. One of the things I admire about him the most is how he hasn't brought up the bazillion things Clinton has done to get where she is. To me, that is a sign of a true leader. Build yourself up, without tearing others down.
    PS Before all the clintonites start calling foul, I think it is well within his right to defend himself against her attacks. He just hasn't made it a habit to draw first blood.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:40 pm |
  176. alicia

    why is no one talking about hillary and the fact that she refuse to put up her tax file to show who is sponcering her campaign? and why she is waiting to do so after ohio and texas people, should talk about that she jumps on every oppurtunity to bash obama .most of the negativity is coming out of her campaign.they can scrutinize obama all they want but i will still be supporting him. i think i would be more worried if he appears to be all perfect.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:40 pm |
  177. Marjorie

    If that's all there is, we will be lucky if he wins the nomination. The question for me is why is the Canadian embassy trying to influence and American election. But that's another story. Somehow I am still very jittery about Hillary. The Clintons have never seen a scandal they did not like. And I also believe they have something to hide about their tax returns..Rezco and that idiot at the Canadian consulate we can deal with...but another Clinton/October surprise...hell no.
    Texas,Ohio, the floor is yours you need to close this deal.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:41 pm |
  178. Elaine

    The Tony Rezko connection probably won't hurt Obama much - it's too late in the game. Actually, it’s nice to know he isn't perfect as perfect as he would like us to believe. But comments like yours that "Hillary Clinton has jumped all over Barack Obama" are so typical of the way you show the media shows bias against Senator Clinton. You make light of his flaws and don't seem to think it's an attack when he sends out political fliers that are outright lies. But negative comments from the Clinton camp are tagged as attacks and dirty politics. I still find it incredible that when he was 100 delegates behind you guys called the race "neck-in-neck" but now that he's 100 points ahead you seem to think she should drop out of the race. God forbid that Teflon Man should end up running this country.....

    March 4, 2008 at 3:41 pm |
  179. Patrice E.

    If Hillary gets the nomination, the Democrats will be divided because most of the Obama supporters do not like Hillary. She has shown how low she can go to get a vote. The only reason the right wing nuts are singing her praises to defeat Obama is because the Republicans know that they can beat her, and they will. She will not get the independent voters, none of the "Reagan Dems", and nearly none of the Obama supporters, which will more than likely go to Ralph Nader (whom I'm not particularly fond of).

    But, all of the drama that Hillary has started now, will be the defeat of her in the general election....and it will be well deserved.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:42 pm |
  180. Sam, Lutz, FL

    I don't think it will matter significantly, Jack. However, many Americans do have short attention spans and don't see past the headlines, so I'm not entirely convinced that those things won't matter to some. But keep in mind that Barack Obama brings something to the table which both John McCain and Hillary Clinton only wish they had: straight talk. Senator Obama speaks on behalf of the average American who is sick and tired of the same old politics, the same old rhetoric, and the same old empty promises. Secondly, I bet if we search in any American's past there will be "something." If we expect politicians to be superhuman, perfect, or somehow immune from the normal "hiccups" of life, then we need a serious reality check. Isn't it ironic that we expect politicians to be corrupt by default, and yet expect them not to have engaged in presumably shady, past affairs? What's important is the substance of his speeches, and the fact that he is unlike any politician we've ever seen. America needs someone like Senator Obama. What we don't need is another presidency riddled with the same garbage that we're all tired of living through.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:42 pm |
  181. Tim

    The Canadien memo and the Rezko trial are nothing more than bad timing in my opinion. It merely gave Hillary Clinton a bit more ammunition for her "kitchen sink" attacks against Sen. Obama. It really is unfortunate that the Clinton campaign has chosen to go down this road. I applaud Sen. Obama for not sinking to her campaign's level. Her mud-slinging tactics are exactly the sort of business as usual politics the people of this country are sick of witnessing. Maybe if you spent a little more time talking about what you can do, Sen. Clinton, rather than what Sen. Obama is doing or not doing, you wouldn't be losing this race.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:42 pm |
  182. Jimmy Johnson

    Barack's afilliation should not make a difference and really no different than Hillary's Chinese bundlers. Let's not forget Hillary's wanting more H1B visas to companies from India. How can she with a straight face claim to want to bring jobs back the the U.S. when infact she supports exporting them?

    March 4, 2008 at 3:43 pm |
  183. Sue M British Columbia, Canada

    Obama is anything BUT your typlical political candidate. All you have to do is read his first book, written 12 years ago to know the kind of man he has become – honest, true to himself and full of more character in his pinky that any other candidate has all together. He will not stoop to Clinton's bashing because of his integrity. ( lord knows he could.) Canadians and Americans alike would benefit from a President such as he. Hilary Clinton is not the antidote for the George Bush Republicans. "It's 3 am" ad nauseum. The implication to me is "Don't worry – Bill's here too!" I'd rather have a man of integrity-Barack Obama.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:43 pm |
  184. Brian G

    Name one politician who has not attracted soundrels of some nature. Where there is a ship of power and money there are wharf rats ready to board her. Even the Mayflower had 'em.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:43 pm |
  185. J.C. from Raleigh, NC

    Voters develop a Star Wars Defense against scandal missiles hurled during campaigns.
    Who remembers corrupt Clinton supporters such as Norman Hsu and Mayor Smuel Rivera who were in the headlines a few months ago?
    Who remembers the charges thrown at McCain about surrounding himself with lobbyists a week or so ago?
    For Obama, this too shall pass.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:44 pm |
  186. Damien

    When ever there is a disagreement on something (in this case NAFTA) it will always create cause for concern. The saying is that any publicity is good publicity, but in this case Obama should of left it alone. Barrack has opened Pandora's Box and who knows what this could lead too. However Hilliary Clinton wasted no time to jump all over Obama's mistake. The only thing Obama can do is claim his innocence to the issue.

    Alberta, Canada

    March 4, 2008 at 3:44 pm |
  187. john in Columbus

    As a die-hard Obama supporter I am less worried about his ties to Rezco in the rough and tumble world of Chicago politics as I am about his still-yet-to-be confirmed involvement with the Canadian consulate, especially in light of Senator Clinton's ties with Whitewater, her still unreleased tax returns and activities as the former First Lady, unwavering support of NAFTA until recently, allegations of vandalizing and pinching furniture from the White House and her husband's questionable last minute pardons. I live in Ohio, and with all that said, today I proudly and without second thought cast my vote for Senator Obama.

    John-Columbus, Ohio

    March 4, 2008 at 3:45 pm |
  188. Syam Unnithan

    'Back door approach' to the Canadian govt. is the 'Clinton way'.
    After election,second term, Bill Clinton said; "I make too many promises,
    that are not meant to keep." "I make many promises, to sound good;
    and makes a lot of people feel good too."

    March 4, 2008 at 3:45 pm |
  189. Vickie

    YES and the fact that he doesnt say he has donated the rescos money to charity ask him straight out and then contact the charities to see if this is another MIS SPEAK

    March 4, 2008 at 3:45 pm |
  190. Kathie, Ontario Canda

    Under what authority does Mr. Obama have to contact the Canadian
    government about anything let alone NAFTA. Isn't he overstepping
    his bounds? The man hasn't won anything yet as far as I know.
    For two elections people voted for the "scare the pants off you"
    platform. Let's hope they don't fall for the "wing and a prayer" platform
    of Mr. Obama. Afterall, look where the other two election results got
    you. I'll give him this the man is a smooth talker, but then again so
    is a used car salesman. Perhaps the theme song for his campaign
    should be "Jive Talkin".

    March 4, 2008 at 3:46 pm |
  191. Kirk (Apple Valley, MN)

    It probably won't matter much since you news types waited until the weekend to even think about asking Obama some pointed questions and just about demanding answers for a change. People are blinded by Obama and don't see that he is nothing more than a paper candidate, unable to carry through on any of his vague promises of "change" in the country. Obama is so wrong for this country that is scary as hell.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:47 pm |
  192. Bob from Traverse city Michigan

    Jack anything that tarnishes Mr Obamas efforts to present himself as the new look, out in the open, you can trust me candidate will hurt him a lot because that is all he has to sell. I desperately want to believe that as president this man will be a partner with the American people and set a new standard for openess and trust between us and our government. I want him to surround himself with the best and most able advisers and with our help show the world how democracy works when it's done right. If I wanted scandel about contributors I'd vote for Hillary. If I wanted stupid subordinates and inept actions I'd work to get bush (no caps/not worthy) another term. Mr. Obama needs to keep his armor shiny and convince me the mud the opposition is slinging isn't gonna stick!

    March 4, 2008 at 3:48 pm |
  193. Al Hilton Palmdale, California

    I think some people will turn away from Obama because of these 'scandals'. But in the end, scandal didn't hurt Slick Willy, I doubt it will hurt Obama enough to matter. He would do better to stay away from the mudslinging at Hillary, although he has very fertile ground to do so, because that appears to be some of his appeal. Turning the other cheek is wise right now, but he better be prepared to take on McCain in November. Maybe the McCain/Obama matchup will show us an election that has minimal mud, and more meat.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:49 pm |
  194. sebastian shiflet from Grand Rapids,MI

    It shows what Obama really is just talk he does not mean it. Hillary Clinton for weeks have been trying to prove that he is just talk. This will not hurt him thou since many people have early voted. I bet they wish they could take there vote back.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:49 pm |
  195. Mary Spencer Cleburne,Tx.

    I feel that the last few days the press has slammed Oboma. I do not think that any of these accusations are valid. As for Hillary's experience and knowledge, she didn't even know about Bill's escapades in the whitehouse in 8 yrs.Haven't we had enough of the Bush and Clinton dynastys in control.Hillary cannot beat McCain and one more term of the Republicans will finish us off for good.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:50 pm |
  196. Dee


    Clinton has gone so negative lately that even if these stories are true about Obama, people think it is just another negative attack from Clintons.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:51 pm |
  197. Corin

    None!!!! Its crazy how the media has been covering these issues with no solid wrong-doing on Obama behalf. His supporters will remain loyal to him!!! If thats the case what about the Clintons relationship with Peter Paul and the clintons actually legislation on NAFTA!!!! Ummmmm if it should effect anybody it should be the Clintons !!!!

    March 4, 2008 at 3:52 pm |
  198. Renolds

    This is just another politicial style.

    they will do anything to stop OBAMA.

    As for me, I projected OBAMA as the next America president.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:52 pm |
  199. Patrick

    Who knows Jack. Everyone will probably just blame Hillary for this one too. Apparently challenging your opponent’s record is now a taboo in American politics.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:52 pm |
  200. Marion

    Yes, buying property from Rezco's wife was a bone-headed mistake given that Rezco was under a cloud of suspicion at the time. It raised doubts in the publics' mind only because of its inappropriateness. In no way has Obama been accused of ILLEGAL dealings, however. Also, he rightly gave the thousands from Rezco to charity. Of course, we should see through the Clintons' rabid desire to cast doubt on Obama's honesty. But I see no reason we should believe this was anything other than the bone-headed mistake Obama admitted.
    As far as the Canadian meeting about NAFTA with an Obama campaign person is concerned, as long as the Canadian official contends the meeting was truly as Obama characterized it, I believe him. It certainly seems to me, it would n't be in this Canadian official's best interest to lie. Marion from Iowa

    March 4, 2008 at 3:52 pm |
  201. Glenn W., New York

    I think that it will hurt him very much because he runs on a theme of:
    transperity and new style politics.
    when this kind of stuff comes up it shows that he cannot run on that platform so if we have to choose between the 2, Hillary will be a lot better. I think the Nafta issue will hurt him even more because they denied the meeting and in fact it did happened.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:54 pm |
  202. Gigi in Alabama

    It probably won't hurt him too much in today's primaries but if he cannot answer it to suit the Republicans, they'll have a hayday with him IF he is the democratic nominee in the general election. He won't be able to grin and say the Clinton's are at it again.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:55 pm |
  203. BJ Smith

    Rough & tumble Chicago have determined there's nothing there, but Hillary keeps trying.Hopefully it won't do as much damage as she hopes in the primary, but will give republicans fuel in the general.

    Canada has apoligised about nafta. Sad part not everyone bothers to check facts. Can only hope her kitchen sink strategy helps sink her!

    BJ Seminole, FL

    March 4, 2008 at 3:55 pm |
  204. Ryan, Champaign IL

    More than it should have, Jack. Unfortunately, the news has obsessed over involvement that is not even suggested by the case. It's irresponsible journalism if you ask me, and undermines real issues at a critical time.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:56 pm |
  205. TO

    How much will this hurt his chance? Better ask Kerry, Richardson, or Dean. Ask them why they want Hillary out that early?

    March 4, 2008 at 3:56 pm |
  206. Angie, GA

    No effect. Obama is true to his words. Please America give the man some credit for being an ivey league graduate. Isn't it suspicious that Hillary Clinton's team is providing all of this information at the last minute. Give him the benefit of the doubt. What if Obama's team decided to play dirty and contact Monica Lewinsky. I'm sure there's more to her story as to why she just disappeared. Then Hillary would be beaten at her own game.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:57 pm |
  207. Allan H. in columbus

    This one is a softball. It is a combination of 2 things. The first is 8 years of Bush / Cheney incompetency. The second is the youth surge for Obama.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:57 pm |
  208. James Hussein , Houston,TX

    Obama on Scrutiny , For What? Bill Maher showed Obama with his hands on his Crouth, waving his Genitals at the American Flag! Big deal, "Take This Gringos"; Blacks were not included in the Constitution; Don't need ot apply! But, VOTE for ME and see the changes. Fried Chicken and Shu Fly Pie in every Household. Guaranteed !!!!

    March 4, 2008 at 3:58 pm |
  209. Ayman

    It is so sad to see hope die out becuase of personal issues, Let us be frank with eachother no one in washington IS CLEAN but you know what we need the hope we need to know that our commander is well beyound hope and Barak presents that hope that keeps people going and let us not forget everyone voted for regan based on his message of hope. If barak Obama drops out i will be voting for Mccain at least he does not decive people as much as the Clintons.

    March 4, 2008 at 3:58 pm |