Category Archives: Newspapers

Media Matters Orwellian spin for Obama, Daily Caller investigation, Arm of Obama White House, Writing MSNBC prime time, Political agenda violates tax status

Media Matters Orwellian spin for Obama, Daily Caller investigation, Arm of Obama White House, Writing MSNBC prime time, Political agenda violates tax status

“As soon as all the corrections which happened to be necessary in any partiucular number of the Times had been assembled and collated, that number would be reprinted, the original copy destroyed, and the corrected copy placed on the files in it’s stead. This process of continuation alteration was applied not only to newspapers, but to books, periodicals, pamphlets, posters, leaflets, films, sound tracks, cartoons, photographs–to every kind of literature or documentation which might conceivably hold any political or ideological significance. Day by day and almost minute by minute the past was brought up to date. In this way every prediction made by the Party could be shown by documentary evidence to be correct; nor was any item of news, or expression of opinion, which conflicted with the needs of the moment, ever allowed to be on record.”…George Orwell, “1984″

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed –if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it”…Joseph Goebbels

From Sean Hannity at Fox News February 15, 2012 .

“This is a rush transcript from “Hannity,” February 15, 2012. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

SEAN HANNITY, HOST: And finally tonight, the blatant bias of Media Matters has been exposed, thanks to shocking internal memos uncovered by the Daily Caller. And one of the main target of that left-leaning organization is none other than the Fox News Channel.
Now, one memo from 2009 written to the founder and president reads quote, “Simply put, the progressive movement is in need of an enemy. George W. Bush is gone. We really don’t have John McCain to kick around anymore. Filling the lack of leadership on the right, Fox News has emerged as the central enemy and antagonist of the Obama administration, our Congressional majorities and the progressive movement as a whole.”

Now, the same memo also suggested that it would be a good idea to do opposition research on the people that work at this network. It reads, quote, “We should also hire a team of trackers to stake out private and public events with Fox News anchors, hosts, reporters, prominent contributors and senior network corporate staff.”

And now Congress is reportedly planning to question the group’s tax exempt status.

Joining me now with reaction, from the Fox Business Network, Sandra Smith and the co-host of “The Five,” she deals with Beckel five days a week, Andrea Tantaros. She has our undying admiration.

All right. Let’s start with a couple of things here. Before we get to just the tactics of trying to smear and destroy people’s lives, bad enough and enough itself. The collaboration that they talk about on a weekly basis with the White House means — this is a political operation. This is not a 501c3. You know, tax exempt organization. This sounds like a political organization in close collaboration with the White House.

ANDREA TANTAROS, CO-HOST, “THE FIVE”: Yes. Designed to quote, “smear and conduct sabotage and guerrilla warfare,” as its head David Brock told Politico in an interview. And he said many times. There’s nothing charitable or educational about Media Matters. And just because they are labeled a charity folks, doesn’t mean they are doing good work. Their sole existence, Sean, the sole purpose of Media Matters is to take out a for profit company which is News Corp, the parent company of this network.”

“HANNITY: How does NBC get out of this from the point of view, because the next installment, I don’t –they said it publicly, and I’ve spoken to the guys of the Daily Caller — the next installment is going to be, they are going to show you examples. Media Matters wrote this and this was the script on NBC News.”

“HANNITY: Unbelievable. It’s actually scary, if you go to the White House, the interaction on a weekly basis, then you go to filtering to the media, it just reminds me of a propaganda campaign to destroy people.

TANTAROS: Liberal tolerance on display everybody, isn’t it wrong?

HANNITY: You know, politics of personal, real personal destruction because they don’t want other voices, that is frightening.”

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/2012/02/16/inside-media-matters-should-group-lose-tax-exempt-status

From Daily Caller February 12, 2012.

“This is the first in a Daily Caller investigative series on Media Matters For America.”

“Extensive interviews with a number of Brock’s current and former colleagues at Media Matters, as well as with leaders from across the spectrum of Democratic politics, reveal an organization roiled by its leader’s volatile and erratic behavior and struggles with mental illness, and an office where Brock’s executive assistant carried a handgun to public events in order to defend his boss from unseen threats.
Yet those same interviews, as well as a detailed organizational planning memo obtained by The Daily Caller, also suggest that Media Matters has to a great extent achieved its central goal of influencing the national media.

Founded by Brock in 2004 as a liberal counterweight to “conservative misinformation” in the press, Media Matters has in less than a decade become a powerful player in Democratic politics. The group operates in regular coordination with the highest levels of the Obama White House, as well as with members of Congress and progressive groups around the country. Brock, who collected over $250,000 in salary from Media Matters in 2010, has himself become a major fundraiser on the left. According to an internal memo obtained by TheDC, Media Matters intends to spend nearly $20 million in 2012 to influence news coverage.

Donors have every reason to expect success, as the group’s effect on many news organizations has already been profound. “We were pretty much writing their prime time,” a former Media Matters employee said of the cable channel MSNBC. “But then virtually all the mainstream media was using our stuff.”

http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/12/inside-media-matters-sources-memos-reveal-erratic-behavior-close-coordination-with-white-house-and-news-organizations/

I began warning you of the Orwellian tactics of the Obama camp early in 2008 as well as the extreme media bias of such entities as Media Matters.

From Citizen Wells December 3, 2009 in it’s entirety.

Recently on the Citizen Wells blog.

“So we have the Obama camp continually broadcasting that anyone challenging Obama’s eligibility is a fringe birther, right wing extremist and as many of the so called elitists would portray as a sub human low intellect. That Orly Taitz is the leader of the birthers and that all court cases challenging Obama’s eligibility have been thrown out as having no merits. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Most people questioning Obama’s eligibility are normal, hard working Americans who follow the US Constitution as their legal compass. They are people like me who are well educated, well read and non racially motivated. They are current or retired military and some high ranking officers. There are a few in the MSM, such as Lou Dobbs who asked the common sense question of why doesn’t Obama simply provide a legitimate birth certificate.”
The age of Big Brother

Rush Limbaugh has mentioned the Barack Obama eligibility issues. Lou Dobbs, several weeks ago on his CNN show, referred to the Hawaii COLB as a piece of paper that refers to another piece of paper. Mr Dobbs also asked the no brainer, common sense question of why doesn’t Obama just provide a legitimate Birth Certificate. I have requested that Rush Limbaugh, Lou Dobbs, Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity ask the simple question, the question that a fifth grader can understand and draw the obvious conclusion from.

Why?

“1. Barack Obama has employed a legion of private and government attorneys to prevent revealing his country of birth. Innocent and eligible persons seeking the office of president do not do that.”

One of the cadre of Orwellian spin masters, blindly following, obeying and perhaps being remunerated by the Obama camp is Media Matters’, Eric Boehlert. In July 2009, when Lou Dobbs began devoting time to Obama’s eligibility issues, Boehlert wrote the following article on July 27, 2009.

“How Lou Dobbs scared Rush Limbaugh off the birther story”

“I can think of three (inadvertent) positives that came out of Lou Dobbs’ ill-advised embrace of the birther movement:

1) The CNN host has permanently tarnished his reputation
2) The birther movement is officially kaput (like, stick-a-fork-in-it done)
3) Rush Limbaugh is afraid to talk about birthers.

Talk about a win-win-win.

It’s true that Dobbs irresponsibly mainstreamed radical right-fringe players by championing their half-baked claims that Barack Obama isn’t a natural born citizen and is ineligible to serve as president of the United States. Dobbs, at least indirectly, lent the birther movement some fleeting credence as he dragged its misbegotten detective work into the spotlight. And it’s still vitally important to monitor Dobbs and call out CNN management for its dreadful hypocrisy on the birther issue (i.e. The story is “dead” but it’s OK for Dobbs to keep flogging it on national TV).”

Citizen Wells response

Eric Boehlert, prepare to become the “deer in the headlights.” Caution, you are about to be confused by the facts.

Eric Boehlert, I refer you to the question above. Do you have an answer? For a moment you must drop your modus operandi of attack mode and insults. This is not about plaintiff attorneys, court case merits, judge’s decisions or your elitist beliefs that anyone questioning Obama is not educated or informed.

This is about Barack Obama spending lots of somebody’s money and employing legions of private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records.

Mr. Boehlert, I have read other articles you have written. You clearly have a pro Obama agenda.

Here are some more exerpts from the Boehlert article, written in typical Obama camp fashion, heavy on attacks and light on facts. Place these paragraphs in Orwell’s book “1984″ and they would seamlesly fit in. Instead of the two minute hate directed at OBrien in “1984″ Boehlert goes after Limbaugh, Dobbs and concerned Americans.

“Of course, it’s always dangerous when hateful and cuckoo conspiracy theories are ushered into the mainstream and right-wing critics are given a platform to peddle their hateful whodunits about Obama’s nationality the way Dobbs did. But, in this case, I almost think it was worth running that risk in order to watch the tidal wave of media disapproval that Dobbs’ fearmongering unleashed.

Because in retrospect, the birthers, who had spent months lurking on the sidelines, needed to be called out on national TV; they needed to be ridiculed mercilessly and have their cheerleaders thoroughly mocked. They needed to be turned into the butt of a joke, and thanks to Lou Dobbs, last week they were.”

“Think about it, without Dobbs suddenly out front leading the stragglers who make the birther parade, do you think NBC would have devoted four minutes of its Nightly News to thoroughly debunk the story? I doubt it. And that’s why I think everyone now owes Dobbs a hearty round of applause. Because let’s face it, he did in one week what nobody else had been able to do during the previous 51: put an end to the birther movement.

And while we’re patting Dobbs on the back, I’m pretty sure Dobbs scared Limbaugh off the birther story — or, more precisely, the pummeling Dobbs received scared Limbaugh off the birther story. And that’s a big deal within the Republican Noise Machine. Birthers had been courting Limbaugh for months and cheered in June when the turbo talker at least made a birther joke on the air: “Barack Obama has one thing in common with God. Do you know what it is? God does not have a birth certificate either.””

Read more (if you can stomach it)

http://mediamatters.org/columns/200907270015

Were Rush Limbaugh, Lou Dobbs and others threatened by this “Thought Police” article?

I am not.

Once again, Eric Boehlert, I challenge you to answer the simple question above.

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2009/12/03/media-matters-aka-big-brother-editor-orwellian-lies-rush-limbaugh-lou-dobbs-citizen-wells-challenges-eric-boehlert-orwellian-birther-spin-simple-question-why-has-obama-employed-private-and-gove/

 

UNC tuition hikes, University of NC System raises tuition costs in dismal economy, Working students and families pay other’s tuition, Income redistribution

UNC tuition hikes, University of NC System raises tuition costs in dismal economy, Working students and families pay other’s tuition, Income redistribution

“Guilford (Large NC County) appears on it’s way to a third consecutive year with annual jobless rates in double digits. Economists say that likely hasn’t happened since the Great Depression.”…Greensboro News Record December 2, 2011

“…and Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They [socialists] always run out of other people’s money. It’s quite a characteristic of them.”…Margaret Thatcher

A teachable moment.

Once again the Greensboro News Record has placed articles about the dismal jobs situation and economy in Guilford county and NC on the front page with  UNC, University of North Carolina University System tuition hikes. I congratulate them for that.

From the Greensboro News record February 11, 2012.

“Amid chants of protest from about 100 students, the UNC Board of Governors this morning approved President Tom Ross’ proposal for tuition and
fee hikes over the next two years.

Ross’ plan would raise tuition by an average of 8.8 percent across the system and keeps increases below 10 percent on every campus.

UNCG’s in-state undergraduates would see a $423, or 7.5 percent, increase in tuition and fees under Ross’ plan. Trustees had sought an increase of 7.8
percent.

N.C. A&T undergraduates from North Carolina would see an 8.4 percent, or $385, increase.

Ross’ plan also sets tuition increases for 2013-14. Tuition for UNCG resident undergraduates would increase $153, or 2.5 percent. Those at A&T would see an
increase of $200, or 4 percent.

Students from campuses across the state packed the lobby of the General Administration Building, showing their discontent over the hikes by carrying signs that, drawing on the Occupy movement, declared the board of governors as the one percent; beating drums and chanting throughout the entire meeting. They marched from the UNC-Chapel Hill campus and were met by police officers, who explained there was no capacity for all of them in the meeting room.

“We’re trying to take part in the governance of the university!” they yelled in response.

“Our university!”

“No justice! No peace!”

When David Young, chairman of the board’s budget and finance committee, sought a motion to vote, a group of students inside the meeting room interrupted, chanting in part, “Your tuition hikes will shackle students with years of debt and force many to drop out of UNC system schools!”

When board members turned to discussing what percentage of tuition dollars should support needy college students, protesters in the lobby could be heard
shouting, “We want financial aid!”

Today’s vote caps months of intense debate over tuition, which the system has used in recent years to help make up for legislative cuts to its budget. The
hikes have forced more students to take on extra jobs to pay for school, or drop out altogether.”

http://www.news-record.com/content/2012/02/10/article/amid_protests_unc_system_approves_tuition_fees_hikes

From the print edition:

“The state mandates that at least 25 percent of the money from the tuition dollars go toward financial aid for needy students. Some board members recently have spoken out about that requirement, saying it essentially calls for students, who themselves may be struggling, to subsidize the education of other students.”

The teachable moment.

To the students, working families struggling to pay tuition:

Most people do not fit neatly into boxes that define Republican, Democrat, Independent, Conservative, Liberal, etc. The only tag I accept for myself is
fiscal conservative. I also believe in the US Constitution as the rule of law. At the end of the day it is all that we have to protect you and me.

I promise you, as a fiscal conservative that I am more concerned about your condition in life than the many politicians or liberals spewing platitudes about
educational concerns.

Some observations about the UNC tuition hikes:

I have watched some of these schools spending like drunken sailors for years, apparently not anticipating or properly reacting to the downturn in the
economy.

Colleges in NC and elsewhere spend other people’s money. As Margaret Thatcher stated: “They [socialists] always run out of other people’s money.”

These “educators” are supposed to be educating our young people. What kind of message does this send?

Welcome to the world of socialism, redistribution of wealth. In a way I am glad this is happening. A real world example of taking from the “rich” and giving to the “poor.”

I am on the side of the students. Not because they have a right to a college education, but because as responsible citizens we should endeavor to keep costs down and subsequently teach the ultimate lesson about survival and what bad government and socialist policys yield.

NC job growth dismal, Greensboro News Record, February 11, 2012, Guilford County and North Carolina 9.9 percent unemployent, 446000 jobless statewide

NC job growth dismal, Greensboro News Record, February 11, 2012, Guilford County and North Carolina 9.9 percent unemployent, 446000 jobless statewide

“the Times of the nineteenth of December had published the official forecasts of the output of various classes of consumption goods in the fourth quarter of 1983, which was also the sixth quarter of the Ninth Three-Year Plan. Today’s issue contained a statement of the actual output, from which it appeared that the forecasts were in every instance grossly wrong. Winston’s job was to rectify the original figures by making them agree with the later ones.”…George Orwell, “1984″

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

Charlotte, NC is hosting the Democrat Convention in NC this year. The North Carolina State Motto is “Esse quam videri”, to be rather than to seem. The
Greensboro News Record presented the article below, once again on the same front page as a UNC University System tuition hike article, just as they did a few
weeks ago. I was pleased to see the News Record reporting on the negative jobs situation in NC but this was not presented by them on the internet, therefore
I was compelled to pick up the slack. I didnt want to “Videri quam esse”, you know, seem rather than be. For some reason the News Record does not make all of their print articles readily available on the internet. They must have a good reason, although I cannot discern it.

More Obama good news.
From the Greensboro News Record February 11, 2012.
“Outlook for job growth muted”

“Guilford County and North Carolina share a dubious distinction. Over the past 12 years, neither has logged any job growth.

Put another way, there were fewer people working statewide and countywide in December 2011 than in December 1999.”

“And the suffering continues.

While the job market showed signs of growth last year, both Guilford and the state ended 2011 with more people unemployed than was the case the previous
December.

In Guilford , nearly 24,500 didn’t have jobs; statewide, the number surpassed 446,000.

And both the county and the state ended the year with jobless rates of 9.9 percent. That’s equal to or higher than the rates a year earlier.”

“At the current rate of growth–adding 8,300 annually–it will take 3.5 years–or until 2016–to regain the positions lost during and after the Great recession.

“Looking ahead, Quinterno said he expects more of the same this year.

“Absent robust job growth, joblessness and associated hardships will remain widespread,” he wrote. “2012 could well be the fifth consecutive year of negative or minimal job growth in North Carolina.”

http://www.news-record.com/

Rick Santorum surges in Des Moines Register Iowa Poll, Santorum passes Paul at 21 percent, Romney 24 percent, December 31, 2011

Rick Santorum surges in Des Moines Register Iowa Poll, Santorum passes Paul at 21 percent, Romney 24 percent, December 31, 2011

From the Des Moines Register December 31, 2011.

“Romney leads Paul in new Des Moines Register Iowa Poll; Santorum surges”

“Mitt Romney tops the latest Des Moines Register Iowa Poll in the closing days before the Iowa caucuses, but Ron Paul and Rick Santorum are poised within striking distance.

The poll, conducted Tuesday through Friday, shows support at 24 percent for Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts; 22 percent for Paul, a Texas congressman; and 15 percent for the surging Rick Santorum, a former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania.

But the four-day results don’t reflect just how quickly momentum is shifting in a race that has remained highly fluid for months. If the final two days of polling are considered separately, Santorum rises to second place, with 21 percent, pushing Paul to third, at 18 percent. Romney remains the same, at 24 percent.

“Momentum’s name is Rick Santorum,” said the Register’s pollster, J. Ann Selzer.

Another sign of the race’s volatility: 41 percent of likely caucusgoers say they could still be persuaded to change their minds.

Selzer & Co. of Des Moines conducted the poll of 602 likely Republican caucusgoers, which has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points. In the final two days of polling, 302 likely caucusgoers were interviewed, with a margin of error of plus or minus 5.6 percentage points.

Rounding out the field, in results from the full, four-day poll: former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich, 12 percent, Texas Gov. Rick Perry, 11 percent, and Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, 7 percent.

The first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses, which take place Tuesday evening, kick off voting in the presidential nominating process. The Iowa Poll, a Register exclusive since 1943, is a much-watched indicator of how candidates are faring in the leadoff caucus state.

The first three Iowa Polls of the 2012 caucus cycle, conducted in June, October and November, featured a different leader each time: first Romney, then retired business executive Herman Cain, then Gingrich. Other candidates took turns in the top tier, too. Bachmann was in second place to Romney in the June poll and won the Iowa straw poll in August. But her support plummeted this fall.

Gingrich surged to the lead with 25 percent support in the late November poll, but slid to 12 percent in the new poll.

Now, it’s Santorum’s time to rocket to the top tier. He has campaigned in Iowa more than any other candidate, stumping the state more than 100 days and conducting more than 300 events since the last presidential election. Next closest is Bachmann, at 80 days.

But until recent weeks, Santorum has struggled to escape single digits in state and national polls. He has campaigned as both a strong fiscal and social conservative, but social conservative voters had remained undecided or split among several candidates.”

Read more:

http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/12/31/romney-leads-paul-in-new-des-moines-register-iowa-poll-santorum-surging/

Orson Welles Citizen Kane oscar sold, William Randolph Hearst portrayed, Yellow journalism, You can crush a man with journalism, Protect a man with journalism

Orson Welles Citizen Kane oscar sold, William Randolph Hearst portrayed, Yellow journalism, You can crush a man with journalism, Protect a man with
journalism

“The (American) press, which is mostly controlled by vested
interests, has an excessive influence on public opinion.”… Albert Einstein

“Not every item of news should be published: rather must
those who control news policies endeavor to make every item
of news serve a certain purpose.”… Joseph Goebbels

“Why has the American Press protected Barack Obama?”…Citizen Wells

Orson Welles’ oscar for Citizen Kane has just been sold.

From The LA Times December 22, 2011.

“The Academy Award statuette that Orson Welles won for the original screenplay of “Citizen Kane” was auctioned for more than $861,000 in Los Angeles.

The 1942 Oscar was thought to be lost for decades. It surfaced in 1994 when cinematographer Gary Graver tried to sell it. The sale was stopped by Beatrice Welles, Orson’s youngest daughter and sole heir.

Welles, who wrote the screenplay for “Citizen Kane” with Herman Mankiewicz, also directed and starred in the film, considered by most critics to be one of the best of all time.

Nate D. Sanders Auctions declined to release the name of the winning bidder.”

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-et-quick-20111222,0,7267631.story
But that is not the big story.

Hearst was quoted as saying “you can crush a man with journalism.”

We now know that you can protect a man with journalism.

From PBS.
“It was a clash of the titans. William Randolph Hearst, the lord and ruler of San Simeon. And Orson Welles, the ambitious young man with a golden touch, who
set out to dethrone him. It was a fight from which neither man ever fully recovered.

Long before Orson Welles’ Citizen Kane was released in 1941, there was a buzz about the movie and the “boy genius” who made it. At a preview screening,
nearly everyone present realized that they had seen a work of brilliance–except Hedda Hopper, the leading gossip columnist of the day. She hated the movie,
calling it “a vicious and irresponsible attack on a great man.”

Citizen Kane was a brutal portrait of newspaper magnate William Randolph Hearst. When Hearst learned through Hopper of Welles’ film, he set out to protect his reputation by shutting the film down. Hollywood executives, led by Louis B. Mayer, rallied around Hearst, attempting to buy Citizen Kane in order to burn the negative. At the same time, Hearst’s defenders moved to intimidate exhibitors into refusing to show the movie. Threats of blackmail, smears in the
newspapers, and FBI investigations were used in the effort.

Hearst’s campaign was largely successful. It would be nearly a quarter-century before Citizen Kane was revived–before Welles would gain popular recognition
for having created one of cinema’s great masterpieces.

“Hearst and Welles were proud, gifted, and destructive–geniuses each in his way,” says producer Thomas Lennon. “The fight that ruined them both was
thoroughly in character with how they’d lived their lives.”

Orson Welles was just twenty-four when he took aim at William Randolph Hearst. The brash upstart was well on his way to claiming Hollywood as his own. A few years earlier, his infamous radio broadcast, War of the Worlds, had terrified listeners and won him the sweetest contract Hollywood had ever seen. With a reputation as a gifted radio and theater director, Welles’ arrogance was founded on a track record of success and a lifetime of encouragement.

“Everybody told me from the moment I could hear that I was absolutely marvelous,” Welles once told an interviewer.

Hearst was a 76-year-old newspaper magnate whose daring and single-mindedness had made him a publishing legend. The son of a wealthy mine owner, he too had been raised to believe he could have everything. He built his empire selling newspapers filled with entertaining stories that were often scandalous and, occasionally, pure fiction.

“We had a crime story that was going to be featured in a 96-point headline on page one,” remembers Vern Whaley, an editor for Hearst’s Herald-Examiner. “When I found the address that was in the story, that address was a vacant lot. So I hollered over at the rewrite desk, I said, ‘You got the wrong address in this
story. This is a vacant lot.’ The copy chief that night was a guy named Vic Barnes. And he says, ‘Sit down, Vern.’ He says, ‘The whole story’s a fake.'”

Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., remembers his father asking Hearst why he preferred concentrating on newspapers, with their limited, regional appeal, rather than
spending more energy on motion pictures and their worldwide audience. Fairbanks recalls Hearst’s reply: “I thought of it, but I decided against it. Because you can crush a man with journalism, and you can’t with motion pictures.”

Hearst began his empire with one small newspaper in San Francisco, then expanded to New York where, with flair and daring, he created the top selling of the city’s fourteen newspapers. But he always wanted more, and eventually he controlled the first nationwide chain–with papers in Chicago, Los Angeles, Boston, and Atlanta. Soon, an estimated one in five Americans was reading a Hearst paper every week.
Hearst’s urge to acquire extended to art objects, mansions, and women. He owned eight homes, each stocked with priceless antiques and works of art, but spent most of his time in his California castle. Called San Simeon, the estate was on a piece of property nearly half the size of Rhode Island. George Bernard Shaw
commented, “San Simeon was the place God would have built–if he had the money.” Hearst’s companion was Marion Davies, a showgirl whom he loved and propelled into Hollywood movies. Together they entertained Hollywood’s biggest, best, and brightest; San Simeon became a social mecca for the stars.

Marion Davies was widely liked in Hollywood: straightforward, full of humor and charm. The battle over Citizen Kane was in large part a fight over her honor:
It was said that Welles’s treatment of Davies riled Hearst more than any other aspect of the film. Even Welles agreed that Susan Alexander, the Davies
character, was unfair:

“We had somebody very different in the place of Marion Davies. And it seemed to me to be something of a dirty trick, and does still strike me as being
something of a dirty trick, what we did to her. And I anticipated the trouble from Hearst for that reason.”

Never one to shy away from trouble, Welles built his career on a streak of controversial productions–the more upset and swirl he could create, the better.
His production of Macbeth was set in Haiti and employed an all-black cast…his Julius Caesar was reimagined as a contemporary drama about facism…and
finally, his radio staging of War of the Worlds, about Martians invading Earth, caused so much terror and uproar it might have ended his career. But his
talent and ferocious energy seemed to lift him above the fray, delivering him unscathed to his next challenge. When he graced the cover of Time magazine, he
was only twenty-three years old.

Welles was the talk of Hollywood when he arrived. His contract demanded two films, but Welles demanded they be revolutionary. He cast about for months for a project, presenting two ideas to the studio, neither of which went into production. With the pressure mounting, Welles was desperate. “He did a lot of
drinking,” says Bill Alland, Welles’ longtime associate. “He did a lot of chasing around. But he also did a lot of work.” When Herman Mankiewicz, a Hollywood
writer and friend of Welles who had been a guest at San Simeon, proposed the story of Hearst, Welles seized on the idea as his last best chance.

Producer John Houseman, who worked with Mankiewicz on the Citizen Kane script, recalls the creation and evolution of Charles Foster Kane, the character
modeled on Hearst, which Welles himself would play. “We were creating a vehicle suited to a man who, at twenty-four, was only slightly less fabulous than the hero he would be portraying. And the deeper we penetrated into the heart of Charles Foster Kane, the closer we seemed to come to the identity of Orson
Welles.”

But in the course of making Citizen Kane, Welles’ huge ego and his youth would blind him to the extent of Hearst’s power and reach; he tragically
underestimated Hearst’s ability to counterattack.

Indeed, Welles proved no match for the old man. Hearst threatened to expose long-buried Hollywood scandals his newspapers had suppressed at the request of the studios. His papers used Welles’ private life against him, making blunt references to communism and questioning Welles’ willingness to fight for his
country. Major theater chains refused to carry Citizen Kane. Hearst’s campaign to discredit Welles was ruthless, skillful, and much aided by Welles himself,
who had never bothered to hide his contempt for Hollywood. When Welles’ name and his film were mentioned at the 1942 Academy Awards, they were booed.
Nominated for nine awards, Citizen Kane lost in every category except one. (Welles shared the award for best screenplay with Herman Mankiewicz.) After the Academy’s repudiation of Citizen Kane, RKO quietly retired the film to its vault.

Citizen Kane was an American saga about a giant who brings ruin to all, including himself. As fate would have it, it is through this film that both men are
remembered today. In telling the tale of these two flawed and fascinating men, The Battle over Citizen Kane also sheds light on the masterpiece over which
they fought, the fiction that fuses them both: the enduring film character of Charles Foster Kane.”

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/kane2/

From a Film Site review.

“The fresh, sophisticated, and classic masterpiece, Citizen Kane (1941), is probably the world’s most famous and highly-rated film, with its many remarkable scenes and performances, cinematic and narrative techniques and experimental innovations (in photography, editing, and sound). Its director, star, and producer were all the same genius individual – Orson Welles (in his film debut at age 25!), who collaborated with Herman J. Mankiewicz on the script (and also with an uncredited John Houseman), and with Gregg Toland as his talented cinematographer. [The amount of each person’s contributions to the screenplay has been the subject of great debate over many decades.] Toland’s camera work on Karl Freund’s expressionistic horror film Mad Love (1935) exerted a profound influence on this film.

The film, budgeted at $800,000, received unanimous critical praise even at the time of its release, although it was not a commercial success (partly due to
its limited distribution and delayed release by RKO due to pressure exerted by famous publisher W.R. Hearst) – until it was re-released after World War II,
found well-deserved (but delayed) recognition in Europe, and then played on television.

The film engendered controversy (and efforts at suppression in early 1941 and efforts at suppression in early 1941 through intimidation, blackmail, newspaper
smears, discrediting and FBI investigations) before it premiered in New York City on May 1, 1941, because it appeared to fictionalize and caricaturize
certain events and individuals in the life of William Randolph Hearst – a powerful newspaper magnate and publisher. The film was accused of drawing
remarkable, unflattering, and uncomplimentary parallels (especially in regards to the Susan Alexander Kane character) to real-life. The notorious battle was
detailed in Thomas Lennon’s and Michael Epstein’s Oscar-nominated documentary The Battle Over Citizen Kane (1996), and it was retold in HBO’s cable-TV film RKO 281 (1999) (the film’s title refers to the project numbering for the film by the studio, before the film was formally titled):”

“In a memorable scene, Kane responds in a manner counter to Thatcher’s wishes, interested in taking charge of only one small part of his holdings:

Sorry but I’m not interested in gold mines, oil wells, shipping or real estate…One item on your list intrigues me, the New York Inquirer, a little newspaper I understand we acquired in a foreclosure proceeding. Please don’t sell it. I’m coming back to America to take charge. I think it would be fun to run a newspaper. I think it would be fun to run a newspaper. Grrr.

Soon, Kane uses the paper to attack trusts, Thatcher and others among America’s financial elite. Headlines of the Inquirer blare out the expose in a montage of early Inquirer newspaper headlines: “TRACTION TRUST EXPOSED,” “TRACTION TRUST BLEEDS PUBLIC WHITE,” and “TRACTION TRUST SMASHED BY INQUIRER.” Other social causes are heralded by the paper: “LANDLORDS REFUSE TO CLEAR SLUMS!!,” and “INQUIRER WINS SLUM FIGHT.” The paper also attacks capitalistic Wall Street itself: “WALL STREET BACKS COPPER SWINDLE!!” and “COPPER ROBBERS INDICTED!”

Thatcher is enraged and indignantly confronts the young publisher in the Inquirer office about his newspaper’s criticism of banks, privilege and corruption.
Kane is seated at his desk facing the camera and sipping coffee as Thatcher stands over him with his back to the camera asking: “Is that really your idea of
how to run a newspaper?” Arrogantly but with a soft-spoken voice, Kane replies:

I don’t know how to run a newspaper, Mr. Thatcher. I just try everything I can think of.

Thatcher explodes at him, accusing him of following a radical policy at the paper of concocting stories: “You know perfectly well there’s not the slightest
proof that this Armada is off the Jersey coast.” Kane is informed by his assistant Bernstein (Everett Sloane) that a correspondent named Wheeler in Cuba has
sent a communique: “Girls delightful in Cuba stop. Could send you prose poems about scenery but don’t feel right spending your money stop. There is no war in
Cuba. Signed, Wheeler.” Kane calmly tells his assistant to answer the war correspondent [a dictation that echoes one of William Randolph Heart’s most famous quotes in the yellow press to artist Frederic Remington regarding the 1896 Spanish-American War]: “…you provide the prose poems, I’ll provide the war.”

Soon, Thatcher sits down and Kane explains how he is really “two people” – he is both a major stockholder in the Public Transit (he owns “eighty-two thousand, three hundred and sixty-four shares of Public Transit Preferred”), a trust he is attacking, and also the dutiful publisher of a newspaper representing the interests of the public against the trust. Kane stands up by the end of the scene, towering over Thatcher, explaining:

The trouble is, you don’t realize you’re talking to two people. As Charles Foster Kane, who has 82,634 shares of Public Transit Preferred. You see, I do have
a general idea of my holdings. I sympathize with you. Charles Foster Kane is a scoundrel. His paper should be run out of town. A committee should be formed
to boycott him. You may, if you can form such a committee, put me down for a contribution of $1,000 dollars. On the other hand, I am the publisher of the
Inquirer! As such, it’s my duty – and I’ll let you in on a little secret, it’s also my pleasure – to see to it that decent, hard-working people in this community aren’t robbed blind by a pack of money-mad pirates just because – they haven’t anybody to look after their interests.”

http://www.filmsite.org/citi.html

Rush Limbaugh, Media, Truth about Obama, Larry Sinclair allegations and book, Are you going to allow the media to continue to fool you and refuse to report the truth about Barack Obama?

Rush Limbaugh, Media, Truth about Obama, Larry Sinclair allegations and book, Are you going to allow the media to continue to fool you and refuse to report the truth about Barack Obama?

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

“Not every item of news should be published: rather must
those who control news policies endeavor to make every item
of news serve a certain purpose.”… Joseph Goebbels

“Live Free or Die”…New Hampshire State Motto

From Larry Sinclair December 8, 2011.

“Rush Limbaugh had a good point in his response to Scott from Dallas this afternoon on his Radio Show. Sinclair has already been portrayed as a “kook, wacko, right wing, and extremist” by the Obama “protective services” aka the “media” yet Larry Sinclair and his allegations of Barack Obama engaging in man on man sex and cocaine use are still standing 4 years later.
The question for all of America today is: Are you going to allow the media to continue to fool you and refuse to report the truth about Barack Obama? If the American people sit back and allow the media and the likes of Moveon, Dailykos, DemocraticUnderground, Politico, et al… scare you into silence and/or submission by calling you racist or attacking you on the Internet, then Rush is point on, Obama will never be vetted.

We however believe the thug tactics and attacks used in the 2008 Presidential Campaign by Obama for America, Dailykos, FireDogLake, Huff-N-Puff Post/AOL, CNN, MSNBC et al… will not work in 2012. We believe that America has decided it will not be silenced by being called a racist.

Larry Sinclair has not been scared into silence or submission in four years and he most certainly is not going to be silent in 2012.”

Read more from Larry Sinclair here:

http://www.larrysinclair.org/2011/12/08/america-awakening-is-rush-right-will-america-continue-to-be-fooled/

One of the strongest reasons for covering the Larry Sinclair allegations and subsequent stories here was because the Obama camp executed a well orchestrated attempt to keep this information from the American people. The mainstream media was part of this effort.

This was not going to happen on my watch.

“Live Free or Die”

NC unemployment worst since Great Depression, UNCG and government spending spree, Other people’s money, Obama supporters predictable

NC unemployment worst since Great Depression, UNCG and government spending spree, Other people’s money, Obama supporters predictable

“Guilford (Large NC County) appears on it’s way to a third consecutive year with annual jobless rates in double digits. Economists say that likely hasn’t happened since the Great Depression.”…Greensboro News Record December 2, 2011

“…and Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They [socialists] always run out of other people’s money. It’s quite a characteristic of them.”…Margaret Thatcher

Spending other People’s Money.

From Citizen Wells November 16, 2011.

“UNCG proposes 10 percent hike in tuition, fees”

“Tuition would rise 10 percent for UNCG students next year according to a proposal the university’s tuition and fee committee presented Tuesday night to the Student Government Association.

In-state undergraduates would see a $660 increase in their bills next year — an extra $345 for tuition and $315 for fees, bringing total tuition and fees to $6,158.

The increase would generate $7.4 million, with half of it used to offset budget reductions. The rest of the money would be used for need-based financial aid and pay increases for faculty, who have gone without raises in recent years.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2011/11/16/uncg-10-percent-tuition-fee-hike-proposal-660-increase-in-state-university-of-nc-at-greensboro-spending-like-drunken-sailors-out-of-control-expansion/

From Citizen Wells December 3, 2011.

From Rush Limbaugh December 2, 2011.

“Regime Manipulates Numbers to Get Unemployment Headline Under 9%”
“Bloomberg News is even reporting this means that more people left the workforce than got jobs.  Now, stop and think of this.  More people left the workforce than got jobs, and the unemployment rate goes down?  We’re dealing here with a serious form of corruption, manipulation of data; but, we all knew it was coming.  After all, we’re talking about the regime.  We knew this was coming.  We know the fact, we know the histoire, that no president’s been reelected with an unemployment rate higher than 8%.  So here we are 11 months away from the next election, voila! Heading into the Christmas, slash, holiday season, and we’re at 8.6%, the 0.6 doesn’t matter, we’re at 8%.  And the media is having orgasms out there, O-gasms.”

 https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2011/12/03/unemployment-rate-lies-exagerations-obama-lies-315000-americans-left-the-labor-force-worst-jobless-figures-since-great-depression-in-nc/

The Greensboro News and Record on December 2, 2011 presented an interesting juxtaposition of insanity on the front page followed by a moment of clarity from an informed citizen.

Left front top.

“UNCG students would see a 10 percent increase in tuition next year under a plan the university’s board of trustees will vote on today.

But they could see additional increases as high as 10 percent annually for three years beyond that under a proposal the trustees are also considering.”

Later in the day we learn.

“Update: UNCG trustees approve tuition, fee hikes”

“UNCG’s trustees this morning unanimously approved a plan to increase tuition 10 percent next year, as well as a proposal that could boost tuition as much as 10 percent for three years beyond.

Following a recommendation from UNCG’s tuition and fee committee, trustees voted to raise tuition by $345 for in-state undergraduates and fees by $315 for 2012-13, bringing total tuition and fees to $6,153.

But they also approved a proposal from Chancellor Linda Brady that would allow her to seek additional increases of up to 3.5 percent for another three years. That supplemental increase would be in addition to any other campus- initiated tuition increase the university seeks.”
http://www.news-record.com/content/2011/12/02/article/uncg_approves_extended_fee_hikes

On the top right front of the December 2 edition we have:

“Jobless figures worst in 80 years”

“data released Thursday by the Employment Security Commission of North Carolina show that Guilford appears on it’s way to a third consecutive year with annual jobless rates in double digits.

Economists say that likely hasn’t happened since the Great Depression.

“I suspect we would have to go back to the 1930’s (to find that),” said Don Jud, professor emeritus at UNCG’s Bryan School of Business and Economics.”

 I would provide a link but when I last checked this site was the only one that I found reporting this on the internet.

Anyone else see the irony, stupidity and connections to the Obama administration in this?

In the same December 2 edition of the News and Record on December 2 on the Opinion page the following astute observation was made:

“Athletic department drains UNCG”
“By Christopher C. Tew

Let’s examine Chancellor Linda Brady’s 10 percent solution to UNCG’s education costs:
Knowing that the new legislative majority wouldn’t sufficiently fund any level of education, UNCG proposed a 2011-12 tuition and fees schedule that has forced out several hundred students whose families couldn’t afford increases of more than $500, about what students must pay, after a 10.6 percent increase, to subsidize an athletic department of 250 athletes and 70 coaches and staff.
With incredibly poor timing, UNCG also limited enrollment “educational opportunities,” and thus income, to raise standards in an economic climate where college graduates have better chances of finding work.
To reconcile these incompatibilities, Brady proposes a 10 percent solution: increases raising $7.5 million; increases redistributing some families’ income to provide loans and grants for others; increases giving to UNCG’s athletic department, which teaches no credit courses, employs no one who addresses UNCG’s educational or research missions, and redistributes mainly North Carolina income to mainly out-of-state athletes because UNCG’s teams don’t generate enough interest and earned revenue to cover costs.
This 10 percent solution is typical of an administration that has botched the mergers of two academic divisions, demoralized and alienated its faculty and staff with heavy-handed arrogance, and plans to force students to pay for extravagant discretionary construction, most of it more suitably funded, accomplished and managed by free-enterprise firms, while the campus library goes without books and journals and is left to raise its own funds for a long-needed media center.
UNCG should simply disband its athletic department. The freed-up resources would exceed Brady’s 10 percent solution with no net increase in student costs. Long-term savings from salaries, benefits and NCAA obligations could fund ample intramural sports and improve neglected faculty compensation.
Brady might also augment the $324,000 compensation she apparently finds too meager.”

http://www.news-record.com/content/2011/12/01/article/athletic_department_drains_uncg

Herman Cain receptionist disputes allegations, Eva Vachal, Godfather’s Pizza, Never once she says did a woman raise an eyebrow about Cain’s conduct

Herman Cain receptionist disputes allegations, Eva Vachal, Godfather’s Pizza, Never once, she says, did a woman raise an eyebrow about Cain’s conduct

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

From the National Review November 22, 2011.

“Cain and Women
A former receptionist comes forward to dispute the allegations.”

“In 1983, Eva Vachal, then 24 years old, was hired by Godfather’s Pizza. She began in the information-technology department. By 1986, when Herman Cain became president of the company, she was the corporate receptionist.

For the next decade — Cain’s entire tenure at the Omaha-based firm — she continued in that position, answering phones and assisting executives with various projects.

Vachal worked closely with Cain. They became friends. When he was profiled by Ebony magazine in April 1988, she was featured in the spread, chatting with Cain from her desk.

She was close with other young women in the office, especially the assistants to Cain and the rest of the Godfather’s brass. They frequently huddled over lunch and coffee, discussing, among other things, their bosses, including the company’s gregarious chief executive.

And never once, she says, did a woman raise an eyebrow about Cain’s conduct. In fact, in an interview with National Review Online, Vachal says that during her entire career at Godfather’s Pizza, she never heard about any improper conduct, harassment, or inappropriate behavior by Cain, even in the form of water-cooler gossip. “Believe me, receptionists know everything,” she says. “They see everything.”

After watching Cain work closely with young women for years, Vachal says she was shocked to learn of the sexual-harassment claims made by former Cain associates at the National Restaurant Association, the organization Cain led after he left Godfather’s Pizza.

The allegations have rocked Cain’s presidential campaign. With numerous allegations hovering over the candidate, many political observers have wondered whether Cain is a viable contender.

Vachal says she is speaking out because she does not believe Cain’s accusers. She also wants to shed a little light on his personality, to help voters understand who he is. She notes that she has not been in communication with the campaign or with Cain.

As she sees it, Cain was likely misinterpreted by the women who received settlements. At Godfather’s Pizza, within the executive suite, he was always a professional, she says. But he did enjoy complimenting staffers, be it on their work or on their sharp outfits.”

““Nobody ever came to me and complained about him,” she says. “And trust me, they would have. We talked. There was nothing like what you see on Sex and the City, or those other shows. We were pretty boring in Omaha, Nebraska.”

“Women, especially then, had a lot to deal with in corporate America,” she says. “I knew of other things that went on, but there was never anything with him.”

“He was a true gentleman, always.””

Read more:

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/print/283838

Thanks to commenter Cabby – AZ who provided this link and wrote:
“Why haven’t we heard this on the news?”

My response:

Because we have a biased, leftist media that follows the mantra “The end justifies the means.”

The same media that promoted and protected Barack Obama.

Obama on Rezko deal: It was a mistake, Chicago SunTimes, November 5, 2006, BY DAVE MCKINNEY AND CHRIS FUSCO, Obama regrets Rezko lot purchase

Obama on Rezko deal: It was a mistake, Chicago SunTimes, November 5, 2006, BY DAVE MCKINNEY AND CHRIS FUSCO, Obama regrets Rezko lot purchase

“Why did Mutual Bank fire whistleblower Kenneth J Connor after he
challenged the appraisal on the land purchased by Rita Rezko, just
prior to the land sale to Obama?”…Citizen Wells

“Where did Rita Rezko get the money to buy the lot she sold to Barack and Michelle Obama?”…Citizen Wells

The following article was presented by the Chicago SunTimes on  November 5, 2006. It has been quoted numerous times since then. The article disappeared from the internet quite some time ago due to what appears to be the standard policy of the SunTimes to not retain articles for any length of time. I cannot guarantee that this is the entire original article.

From the Chicago SunTimes November 5, 2006.

“Obama on Rezko deal: It was a mistake

November 5, 2006

BY DAVE MCKINNEY AND CHRIS FUSCO Staff Reporters Contributing: Mark Brown
U.S. Sen. Barack Obama expressed regret late Friday for his 2005 land
purchase from now-indicted political fundraiser Antoin “Tony” Rezko in
a deal that enlarged the senator’s yard.
“I consider this a mistake on my part and I regret it,” Obama told the
Chicago Sun-Times in an exclusive and revealing question-and-answer
exchange about the transaction.

In June 2005, Obama and Rezko purchased adjoining parcels in Kenwood.
The state’s junior senator paid $1.65 million for a Georgian revival
mansion, while Rezko paid $625,000 for the adjacent, undeveloped lot.
Both closed on their properties on the same day.

Sen. Barack Obama says he regrets purchasing land from politcal
fundraiser Antoin Rezko.

Last January, aiming to increase the size of his sideyard, Obama paid
Rezko $104,500 for a strip of his land.
The transaction occurred at a time when it was widely known Tony Rezko
was under investigation by U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald and as
other Illinois politicians befriended by Rezko distanced themselves
from him.

In the Sun-Times interview, Obama acknowledged approaching Rezko about
the two properties being up for sale and that Rezko developed an
immediate interest. Obama did not explain why he reached out to Rezko
given the developer’s growing problems.

Last month, Rezko was indicted for his role in an alleged pay-to-play
scheme designed to fatten Gov. Blagojevich’s political fund. Rezko
also was accused of bilking a creditor.

“With respect to the purchase of my home, I am confident that
everything was handled ethically and above board. But I regret that
while I tried to pay close attention to the specific requirements of
ethical conduct, I misgauged the appearance presented by my purchase
of the additional land from Mr. Rezko,” Obama said.

“It was simply not good enough that I paid above the appraised value
for the strip of land that he sold me. It was a mistake to have been
engaged with him at all in this or any other personal business dealing
that would allow him, or anyone else, to believe that he had done me a
favor,” the senator said.

The land deal came up in a court hearing Friday that delved into
Rezko’s finances. Obama said he has not been approached by federal
prosecutors about the transaction nor has plans to go to them about
it.

Obama and Rezko have been friends since 1990, and Obama said the
Wilmette businessman raised as much as $60,000 for him during his
political career. After Rezko’s indictment, Obama donated $11,500 to
charity–a total that represents what Rezko contributed to the
senator’s federal campaign fund.

After the controversy surfaced on Wednesday, the Sun-Times presented
Obama’s office with a lengthy set of questions about the land deal,
Obama’s relationship with Rezko and the story’s impact on a potential
2008 bid for the White House.

Here are his responses:
Q: Senator, when did you first meet Tony Rezko? How did you become
friends? How often would you meet with him, and when did you last
speak with him?
A: I had attracted some media attention when I was elected the first
black President of the Harvard Law Review. And while I was in law
school, David Brint, who was a development partner with Tony Rezko
contacted me and asked whether I would be interested in being a
developer. Ultimately, after discussions in which I met Mr. Rezko, I
said no.

I have probably had lunch with Rezko once or twice a year and our
spouses may have gotten together on two to four occasions in the time
that I have known him. I last spoke with Tony Rezko more than six
months ago.
Q:. Have you or your wife participated in any other transactions of
any kind with Rezko or companies he owns? Have you or your wife ever
done any legal work ever for Rezko or his companies?
A: No.
Q: Has Rezko ever given you or your family members gifts of any kind
and, if so, what were they?
A: No.
Q: The seller of your house appears to be a doctor at the University
of Chicago . Do you or your wife know him? If so, did either of you
ever talk to him about subdividing the property? If you ever did
discuss the property with him, when were those conversations?
A: We did not know him personally, though my wife worked in the same
University hospital. The property was subdivided and two lots were
separately listed when we first learned of it. We did not discuss the
property with the owners; the sale was negotiated for us by our agent.
Q: Did you approach Rezko or his wife about the property, or did they
approach you?
A: To the best of my recollection, I told him about the property, and
he developed an interest, knowing both the location and, as I recall,
the developer who had previously purchased it.
Q: Who was your Realtor? Did this Realtor also represent Rita Rezko?
A: Miriam Zeltzerman, who had also represented me in the purchase of
my prior property, a condominium, in Hyde Park. She did not represent
Rita Rezko.
Q: How do you explain the fact your family purchased your home the
same day as Rita Rezko bought the property adjacent to yours? Was this
a coordinated purchase?
A: The sellers required the closing of both properties at the same
time. As they were moving out of town, they wished to conclude the
sale of both properties simultaneously. The lot was purchased first;
with the purchase of the house on the adjacent lot, the closings could
proceed and did, on the same day, pursuant to the condition set by the
sellers.
Q: Why is it that you were able to buy your parcel for $300,000 less
than the asking price, and Rita Rezko paid full price? Who negotiated
this end of the deal? Did whoever negotiated it have any contact with
Rita and Tony Rezko or their Realtor or lawyer?
A: Our agent negotiated only with the seller’s agent. As we understood
it, the house had been listed for some time, for months, and our offer
was one of two and, as we understood it, it was the best offer. The
original listed price was too high for the market at the time, and we
understood that the sellers, who were anxious to move, were prepared
to sell the house for what they paid for it, which is what they did.

We were not involved in the Rezko negotiation of the price for the
adjacent lot. It was our understanding that the owners had received,
from another buyer, an offer for $625,000 and that therefore the
Rezkos could not have offered or purchased that lot for less.
Q: Why did you put the property in a trust?
A: I was advised that a trust holding would afford me some privacy,
which was important to me as I would be commuting from Washington to
Chicago and my family would spend some part of most weeks without me.
Q: A Nov. 21, 1999, Chicago Tribune story indicates the house you
bought “sits on a quarter-acre lot and will share a driveway and
entrance gate with a home next door that has not yet been built.” Is
this shared driveway still in the mix? Will this require further
negotiations with the Rezkos?
A: The driveway is not shared with the adjacent owner. But the
resident in the carriage house in the back does have an easement over
it.
Q: Does it display a lack of judgment on your part to be engaging in
real estate deals with Tony Rezko at a point his connections to state
government had been reported to be under federal investigation?
A: I’ve always held myself to the highest ethical standards. During
the ten years I have been in public office, I believe I have met those
standards and I know that is what people expect of me. I have also
understood the importance of appearances.

With respect to the purchase of my home, I am confident that
everything was handled ethically and above board.

But I regret that while I tried to pay close attention to the specific
requirements of ethical conduct, I misgauged the appearance presented
by my purchase of the additional land from Mr. Rezko. It was simply
not good enough that I paid above the appraised value for the strip of
land that he sold me. It was a mistake to have been engaged with him
at all in this or any other personal business dealing that would allow
him, or anyone else, to believe that he had done me a favor. For that
reason, I consider this a mistake on my part and I regret it.

Throughout my life, I have put faith in confronting experiences
honestly and learning from them. And that is what I will do with this
experience as well.
Q: Why did you not publicly disclose the transaction after Rezko got indicted?
A: At the time, it didn’t strike me as relevant. I did however donate
campaign contributions from Rezko to charity.
Q: Have you been interviewed by federal investigators about this
transaction or about your relationship with Rezko? If not, do you
intend to approach them?
A: I have not been interviewed by federal investigators. I have no
reason to approach them.
Q: Did Rezko or his companies ever solicit your support on any matter
involving state or federal government? Did Al Johnson, who was trying
to get a casino license along with Tony Rezko, or Rezko himself ever
discuss casino matters with you?
A: No, I have never been asked to do anything to advance his business
interests. In 1999, when I was a State Senator, I opposed legislation
to bring a casino to Rosemont and allow casino gambling at docked
riverboats which news reports said Al Johnson and Tony Rezko were
interested in being part of. I never discussed a casino license with
either of them. I was a vocal opponent of the legislation.
(http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/votehistory/srollcalls91/pdf/910SB1017_05251999_001000C.PDF)
Q: Has this disclosure about your relationship with Rezko changed your
thoughts about a White House run?
A: No. As I have said, how I can best serve is something I will think
about after the 2006 election next Tuesday.
Q: Did Rezko ever discuss with you his dealings with Stuart Levine,
Christopher Kelly or William Cellini or the role he was playing in
shaping Gov. Blagojevich’s administration?
A: No.
Q: Are the Obamas the only beneficiaries of the land trust?
A: Yes.
Q: Are you aware of any efforts by previous owners to develop what is
now the Rezko lot, possibly as townhomes?
A: I was not aware of any prior effort by the seller to develop the
property, but always understood the other lot was to be developed upon
sale.
Q: Did Rezko have an appraisal performed for the 10-foot strip?
A: I had an appraisal conducted by Howard B. Richter & Associates on
November 21, 2005.
Q: Was there a negotiation? Did he have an asking price, or did he
just say, whatever you think is fair?
A: I proposed to pay on the basis of proportionality. Since the strip
composed one-sixth of the entire lot, I would pay one-sixth of the
purchase price of the lot. I offered this to Mr. Rezko and he accepted
it.
Q: How many fundraisers has Mr. Rezko hosted for you? Were these all
in his home? How much would you estimate he has raised for your
campaigns?
A: He hosted one event at his home in 2003 for my U.S. Senate
campaign. He participated as a member of a host committee for several
other events. My best estimate was that he raised somewhere between
$50,000 and $60,000.”

Original link.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/124171,CST-NWS-obama05.article

Why Obama should withdraw, Chicago tribune editor Steve Chapman, Sputtering economy,Unemployment high, Foreclosures rampant

Why Obama should withdraw, Chicago tribune editor Steve Chapman, Sputtering economy,Unemployment high, Foreclosures rampant

“Will Obama be thrown under the bus”

From the Chicago Tribune September 18, 2011.

“Why Obama should withdraw”

“When Ronald Reagan ran for re-election in 1984, his slogan was “Morning in America.” For Barack Obama, it’s more like midnight in a coal mine.

The sputtering economy is about to stall out, unemployment is high, his jobs program may not pass, foreclosures are rampant and the poor guy can’t even sneak a cigarette.

His approval rating is at its lowest level ever. His party just lost two House elections — one in a district it had held for 88 consecutive years. He’s staked his future on the jobs bill, which most Americans don’t think would work.

The vultures are starting to circle. Former White House spokesman Bill Burton said that unless Obama can rally the Democratic base, which is disillusioned with him, “it’s going to be impossible for the president to win.” Democratic consultant James Carville had one word of advice for Obama: “Panic.”

But there is good news for the president. I checked the Constitution, and he is under no compulsion to run for re-election. He can scrap the campaign, bag the fundraising calls and never watch another Republican debate as long as he’s willing to vacate the premises by Jan. 20, 2013.

That might be the sensible thing to do. It’s hard for a president to win a second term when unemployment is painfully high. If the economy were in full rebound mode, Obama might win anyway. But it isn’t, and it may fall into a second recession — in which case voters will decide his middle name is Hoover, not Hussein. Why not leave of his own volition instead of waiting to get the ax?

It’s not as though there is much enticement to stick around. Presidents who win re-election have generally found, wrote John Fortier and Norman Ornstein in their 2007 book, “Second-Term Blues,” that “their second terms did not measure up to their first.”

Presidential encores are generally a bog of frustration, exhaustion and embarrassment. They are famous for lowest moments rather than finest hours. Richard Nixon was forced to resign in disgrace, Reagan had the Iran-Contra scandal, and Bill Clinton made the unfortunate acquaintance of Monica Lewinsky.”

“The ideal candidate would be a figure of stature and ability who can’t be blamed for the economy. That person should not be a member of Congress, since it has an even lower approval rating than the president’s.

It would also help to be conspicuously associated with prosperity. Given Obama’s reputation for being too quick to compromise, a reputation for toughness would be an asset.

As it happens, there is someone at hand who fits this description: Hillary Clinton. Her husband presided over a boom, she’s been busy deposing dictators instead of destroying jobs, and she’s never been accused of being a pushover.

Not only that, Clinton is a savvy political veteran who already knows how to run for president. Oh, and a new Bloomberg poll finds her to be merely “the most popular national political figure in America today.”

If he runs for re-election, Obama may find that the only fate worse than losing is winning. But he might arrange things so it will be Clinton who has the unenviable job of reviving the economy, balancing the budget, getting out of Afghanistan and grappling with House Majority Leader Eric Cantor. Obama, meanwhile, will be on a Hawaiian beach, wrestling the cap off a Corona.”

Read more:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/obama/ct-oped-0918-chapman-20110918,0,5039308.story

Remember this from Citizen Wells on June 27, 2011?

“I am not certain if Obama controls the Democrat party and they are concerned about 2012. Will the Democrats throw Obama under the bus?”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2011/06/27/obama-under-the-bus-democrat-party-or-rezko-or-cellini-too-late-for-blagojevich/

And from August 20, 2011.

“The US Justice Department has been protecting Obama before and after the appointment of Eric Holder as Attorney General. Holder is under increased scrutiny and increasingly Obama appears to be unelectable. Will the Democrats throw Obama or allow Obama to be thrown under the bus? Or will Obama exit on his own?”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2011/08/20/obama-thrown-under-bus-by-democrats-or-daniel-frawley-or-tony-rezko-or-rod-blagojevich-or-stuart-levine-or-william-cellini-obama-exits-2012-race/

Thanks to commenters Bill G & Pat 1789.