Illinois election results
Illinois Election Results
Illinois Election Results are still to come out but political pundits have expressed their expert opinion of a low turn over as the weather may bar Chicago voters to play their vital role in Illinoiss primary elections.
365DayNews. Com: Illinois Election Results
Pat Quinn looks as though he will be victorious over his challenger Dan Hynes in the Democratic Primary for Governor in Illinois. Bill Brady and Kirk Dillard.
The Provocateur: Illinois Election Results
Illinois Election Results. The election are still streaming in. The governors race on both sides is too close to call. Meanwhile, Alexi Giannoulias will face off against Mark Kirk for the Illinois Senate seat. As it stands now, …
Illinois Election Results
Latest Updates News About Illinois Election Results 2010, Chicago Tribune, Cook County Election Results, Illinois election results are important to voters…
Illinois Election Results
Alexi Giannoulias (D) and Rep. Mark Kirk (R) won their respective party nominations for the US Senate contest this fall. Both primary races for Illinois…
Illinois Election Results – Alexi Giannoulias Won Election | The…
Democrat Alexi Giannoulias won the Illinois State Senate primary election. The Illinois election results also include the race for Governor. Alexi Giannoulias will fill the seat left vacant by President Obama. …
Illinois Election Results Hoffman concedes to Giannoulias – Tech…
Illinois election results are important to voters in the state of Illiniois. The election results in Illinois will pave the way for the 2010 mid-term election. During the democratic primaries, it was just annoucned that Hoffman conceded…
Illinois Election Results: Democrat Alexi Giannoulias Won Primary…
The election results in Illinois will pave the way for the 2010 mid-term election. During the democratic primaries, it was just annoucned that Hoffman.
Latest Illinois election results (Herald & Review) | Latest Daily…
Latest Illinois election results (Herald & Review). Posted on : 02-02-2010 | By : Yahoo! News Search Results for illinois election results | In : News. 0. U. S. Senate 2010 Dem – Primary. Comments are closed. Recent Posts…
What is really significantly similar about Lincoln & Obama?
Obama Driving Surge in Gun Sales, Firearms Groups Say
End-of-the-year statistics show background checks for firearms purchases rose sharply in the last three months of 2008.
By Judson Berger
FOXNews. com
Friday, January 16, 2009
President-elect Barack Obama meets with his transition team Wednesday in Washington. (AP Photo)
President-elect Barack Obama’s election has spurred a surge in gun sales, firearms retailers and enthusiasts say, as gun owners brace for what they believe will be a new era of gun control in Washington.
An electronic news service that covers outdoor news has even named Obama its “Gun Salesman of the Year.”
Firearms associations began to suspect that political considerations were driving gun sales late last year as the number of background checks increased. But end-of-year figures showed a big spike in background checks for the last three months of 2008, and in November, the month Obama was elected, the number of background checks was 42 percent greater than in November 2007.
“It’s not a hard tea leaf to read,” said Jim Shepherd, publisher of the news service Outdoor Wire, which claims Obama’s election has “frightened consumers into action.”
Obama has repeatedly stated that he supports Second Amendment rights and will not crack down on gun owners, and in June he said he agreed with the Supreme Court when it overturned the District of Columbia handgun ban.
But gun groups are not convinced. They say Obama’s legislative record in support of gun control, and his offhand remark during the primaries that small-town Americans are “bitter” and “cling to their guns,” foretell a strict approach to firearms regulation during his presidency.
A December poll from Southwick Associates found that 80 percent of hunters and shooters expect the new administration and a Democratic Congress will make purchasing firearms more difficult.
“It’s clear that gun owners and prospective gun owners are concerned about the incoming Obama administration and Congress,” said Ted Novin, spokesman for the National Shooting Sports Foundation.
According to FBI statistics, there were 12.7 million background checks on prospective gun buyers last year, compared with 11.2 million the year before. While checks typically increase toward the end of the year, they spiked sharply at the end of 2008. The figures show a 27 percent increase in the last three months of 2008 over 2007.
“We always anticipate a spike…. This year compared to previous years, the last two months there was a significant increase,” said FBI spokesman Paul Bresson.
He said it’s “possible” that fears about the economy and the incoming administration played a role, though he said the FBI cannot track the actual reason behind the background checks. Also, background checks are not a direct reflection of gun sales — but since statistics on national gun sales are not kept the background checks are typically used as an indicator.
“Speculation and conclusions that economic uncertainty or a certain political leadership spurs an increase in firearm sales is anecdotal,” said one source at the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
But the ATF posted a notice recently saying it was running low on the self-disclosure forms needed when firearms purchases are made, “as a result of an unprecedented increase in demand” for the forms.
Firearms associations appear to be stoking the purchasing frenzy.
The National Rifle Association’s Web site recently featured a column titled, “Ready to Defend Our Rights: Are gun owners going to be a high priority target for the Obama administration?”
The Web page linked to another site devoted to Obama’s gun control positions. “Obama would be the most anti-gun president in American history,” the site says.
Obama stated during the final leg of the campaign that he believes in the Second Amendment, and “I will not take your shotgun away. I will not take your rifle away. I won’t take your handgun away.”
But gun rights advocates say one of their principal concerns is that the new administration and Congress will eventually reinstate an assault-weapons ban. Vice president-elect Joe Biden, as a senator, was a strong supporter of the assault-weapons ban, which was signed into law by President Clinton in 1994.
Under the ban, which expired four years ago, domestic gun manufacturers were required to stop making semi-automatic assault weapons and ammunition clips holding more than 10 rounds, except for military or police use.
While in the Illinois legislature, Obama backed a ban on semiautomatic weapons.
Andrew Arulanandam, public affairs director at the NRA, said gun organizations are not urging members to stock up while they still can.
“I think people are doing this on their own accord,” he said.
“We hope that the president keeps his campaign promises. Nothing would make us happier,” he said. “But we think he is going to have a tough time ke
Did you get a gun?
The Dems challenged the Chambliss election in Georgia and they had a runoff.
The Dems in Illinois voted to NOT have a special election to fill Obama’s seat because survey’s showed the Reps would win that seat since Blago was a Dem and voters were mad…so they allowed the appointment…ultimately of Burris…questionable at best in light of his campaign donations ($20K to Blago) and kickback (700,000 to his firm from Illinois government contracts awarded in last 4 years…since Blago has been in)
The Dems in Minn.’s recount actually want to count ballots in twenty-five precincts that would bring the total of votes cast higher than the actual number of people who voted! In Ramsey County, 177 more votes have been counted than people who voted on Election Day. The canvassing board, in effect, is admitting that it is counting fraudulent, duplicate ballots! In some cases absentee ballots, particularly from troops serving overseas, have been counted. In other cases, not. One ballot, on which Franken was crossed out and replaced by “Frankenstein” was counted as a Democratic vote.
Apparently, when a ballot was challenged, a copy was made to facilitate examination. But, in many cases, the canvasser failed to label the ballot as a duplicate. Then, in the recount, all the ballots were counted, ensuring that the challenged vote was not only counted, but counted twice.
What makes all of this suspicious in the extreme is that each of these errors inured to Franken’s advantage and eroded Coleman’s election night lead until the Democrat could claim victory. The people of that state care and so do the candidates…I don’t determiine what I care about as any barometer of what is important or right.
In the initial results, there were no signs of election results fraud, now there are…a good reason for any law-abiding candidate of any party to protest and fight to the end…if only to seek justice for the winners and expose the perps.
I would have supported Franken had he actually won…my black mayor (republican) lost his bid for California Assembly by just a few votes, and even though his opponent is a corrupt union-funded dem, I didn’t reject her win…even though I hated the smear she launched in the campaign…there were no signs of election fraud.
We should fight all election fraud, regardless of the “winner” and we should not “cry wolf” (fraud) when it is just a close election, but not close enough for a recount.
Why is it considered petty of the Republicans to challenge the Coleman/Frank election results?
No. I’m not talking about YA.
“President-elect Barack Obama’s Transition today launched “Open for Questions,” a Digg-style feature allowing citizens to submit questions, and to vote on one another’s questions, bringing favored inquiries to the top of the list.
It was suggested when it launched that the tool would bring uncomfortable questions to the fore, but the results so far are the opposite: Obama’s supporters appear to be using — and abusing — a tool allowing them to “flag” questions as “inappropriate” to remove all questions mentioning Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich from the main pages of Obama’s website.
The Blagojevich questions — many of them polite and reasonable — can be found only by searching words in them, like “Blagojevich,” which produces 35 questions missing from the main page of the site.
“Given the current corruption charges involving Blagojevich, will ’serious’ campaign finance reform that takes money completely out of politics through publicly funded elections be a priority in the first term?” asked Metteyya of Santa Cruz, California.
“This submission was removed because people believe it is inappropriate,” reads the text underneath it.
Also removed as “inappropriate”:
“In light of the recent corruption scandals (Blagojevich, Rangel, Jefferson, Stevens, etc) that have dominated the political scene, is there any ethics legislation being crafted to actually curb corruption and prevent another wave of nixonian cynicism?”, a question from “lupercal,” of Gainesville.
And: “Is Barack Obama aware of any communications in the last six weeks between Rod Blagojevich or anyone representing Rod Blagojevich and any of Obama’s top aides?”, a question from Phil from Pennsylvania.
Declaring a question “inappropriate” is different from merely voting it down; it’s calling foul on a question, not just disapproving of it.
Community reporting systems like this are often vulnerable to abuse from committed partisans — YouTube has wrestled with a parallel problem — and the only solution is conscious efforts to remedy it.
So far, Obama’s team does not seem to have stepped in to allow uncomfortable questions to rise to the top, and instead is allowing his supporters to sanitize the site.”
What do you guys think?
What would you think of people that censor reasonable and polite questions?
what do you suppose his thoughts are:
A – Wow, Americans are really easy to fool.
B – Wow, I can’t believe how many whites voted for me. Could Rev. Wright be wrong?
C – This was a piece of cake. No wonder my home state of Illinois gets away with so much crap. Par-tay!
D – Oh, crap. Now I’ve gone and done it. Hillary, heeelp!!!
E – None of the above. Obama is my co-pilot. I know he already read the results. But, I bet he reads them over and over. You know, in disbelief.
When Obama reads the ELECTION RESULTS and realizes how many Americans voted for him….?
Here’s a list ranking the states based on 2008 election results, shown in percent voting for Obama/Mc Cain:
2008 State Rankings
Obama /McCain
1. Washington DC 93/7%
2. Hawaii 72/27
3. Vermont 67/32
4. Rhode Island 64/31
5. Massachusetts 62/36
6. New York 62/37
7. Illinois 62/37
8. California61/37
9. Maryland61/38
10. Delaware61/38
11. Connecticut60/39
12. Maine58/40
13. Washington58/41
14. Michigan57/41
15. New Jersey57/42
16. New Mexico57/42
17. Wisconsin56/43
18. Oregon55/43
19. Nevada55/43
20. Pennsylvania 55/44
21. New Hampshire 55/44
22. Minnesota54/44
23. Iowa 54/45
24. Colorado53/46
25. Virginia52/47
26. Ohio51/47
27. Florida51/49
28. Indiana50/49
29. North Carolina 50/49
30. Missouri 49/50
31. Montana47/50
32. Georgia47/52
33/34. N.& S. Dakota45/53
35. Arizona45/54
36. So. Carolina45/54
37. Texas44/55
38. W. Virginia43/56
39. Mississippi43/57
40. Tennessee42/57
41. Kansas41/57
42. Nebraska41/57
43. Kentucky41/58
44. Louisiana40/59
45. Arkansas39/59
46. Alabama39/61
47. Idaho36/61
48. Alaska36/62
49. Utah34/63
50. Oklahoma34/66
51. Wyoming33/65
What kind of facts/opinions do you have on these results, for example: States that voted for Obama tended to be on or near large bodies of water.
or, States with higher SAT scores tended to vote for……???
What’s your analysis?
What patterns do u see in the ratio of states’ D to R election results, Obama/McCain, like IQ, literacy etc.?
Obama won the election 11/4/08
on ‘The Day After’—–666 won the Illinois pick 3 evening lottery.
http://www. illinoislottery. com/subsections/History/Win2008.txt
to make this even eerier:
‘On The 3rd Day”—-666 won in Joe Bidens state of Delaware
http://www. worldcasinodirectory. com/delaware-lottery-results. htm
what are your thoughts?
Lottery Results—-strange but true—what do You think of this?
http://www. wsws. org/articles/2008/nov2008/pers-n06.shtml
Barack Obama won the US presidential election Tuesday riding a wave of popular opposition to the Bush administration and the Republican Party. Tens of millions of voters delivered a massive repudiation of the politics of social reaction that have dominated America for decades.
The “Obama coalition,” however, is fraught with contradictions. The majority of those who voted for Obama want an end to social inequality, the erosion of democratic rights and militarism. Yet, despite Obama’s rhetoric about uniting “Main Street and Wall Street” and “the rich and the poor,” he is committed to defending the interests of the most powerful sections of the American corporate elite.
The Democratic Party is already seeking to dampen popular expectations about the incoming administration. Obama suggested this himself in his victory speech in Chicago, when he said, “The road ahead will be long…We may not get there in one year or even one term…There are many who won’t agree with every decision or policy I make as president, and we know that government can’t solve every problem.”
Leading Democrats have lined up to insist that it would be wrong to interpret the election as a mandate for substantial changes in policy. Instead, they are saying the next administration will have to rule from the “center” and rely on a bipartisan alliance with the Republicans.
In an article Wednesday entitled, “Hard Choices and Challenges Follow Triumph,” the Washington Post cited several unnamed Obama advisors who said “they were well aware of the dangers of interpreting the results as a mandate for unabashed liberal government.”
In other words, the Democrats must reject the will of the American peoplewho just handed them control of the White House and a greater majority in Congressand shape policy in conjunction with the most right-wing and pro-business sections of the political establishment, who were overwhelmingly rejected at the polls.
One only has to contrast this with Bush’s insistence that he had a mandate for his right-wing agenda despite losing the popular vote in 2000 and failing to win a majority in 2004.
While collaborating with the Republicans, the Democrats are preparing to defy popular expectations that the next administration will provide relief from the growing economic catastrophe. As the Post noted, Obama advisors “are ready for potential conflict with some Democratic constituencies or with some liberal Democrats in Congress, whose pent-up demand for action may clash with Obama’s priorities, and are prepared to say no.”
The cost of the Wall Street bailout, expanded military operations and a ballooning budget deficit will preclude any expansion in social spending. On the contrary, the Democrats intend to make the working class pay for the breakdown of American capitalism and the government bailout of the financial aristocracy.
Leon Panetta, the former White House chief of staff who has been advising Obama’s transition team, told the New York Times, referring to the new president, “You better damn well do the tough stuff up front, because if you think you can delay the tough decisions and tiptoe past the graveyard, you’re in for a lot of trouble,” Mr. Panetta said. “Make the decisions that involve pain and sacrifice up front.”
Obama’s selection for White House chief of staffRahm Emanuel, the chairman of the Democratic Caucus in the House of Representativesgives an indication of the reactionary social types he is assembling for his administration. As a senior advisor to former President Bill Clinton, he championed law-and-order, “welfare reform” and other reactionary measures aimed at disassociating the Democrats from the liberal reforms of the past.
After leaving the Clinton administration, Emanuel reportedly earned $18 million while employed by the global investment banking firm of Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein in Chicago, where he worked from 1999 to 2002.
During his run for Congress in 2002, Emanuel broke ranks with the Democratic congressional delegation from Illinois and supported the authorization of the war against Iraq, explicitly backing President Bush. Rising to the fourth-highest position in the House Democratic leadership, Emanuel played a key role in the passage of the $700 billion Wall Street bailout.
Emanuel has close ties to Israel and is a leading member of the right-wing Democratic Leadership Council, which includes figures such as the Clintons and Senator Joseph Lieberman. He is expected to play a key role in the selection of cabinet appointees, including the Treasury and defense secretaries. These posts are expected to be announced quickly, in order to reassure the markets and the foreign policy and military establishment.
Among those being considered for the Treasury are former Clinton Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers; Timothy Geithner, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York; and former F
Will there really be ‘change’ or actually more of the same?
FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE, SOCIALLY TOLERANT, PRO-DEFENSE!
November 2, 2008
I have been a lifetime Libertarian Party activist, for over 25 years. Ive served in numerous capacities, including on the Libertarian National Committee, as a Libertarian State Rep. candidate, and as Ron Pauls Personal Travel Aide in his 1988 Libertarian Presidential campaign. Ive also served as Ron Pauls Congressional Campaign Coordinator and as his Senior Congressional Aide for 7 years, 1997-2004.
This election year, Ive been supporting Libertarian Presidential candidate Bob Barr. As a matter of fact, Im the very guy who recruited his running mate Wayne Root into the race. Since the Spring, Ive been the Partys lead petitioner around the Nation. Ive collected tens of thousands of signatures to get Barr/Root on the ballot in Illinois, Ohio, Kentucky, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Maine and Rhode Island.
However, I was greatly encouraged by McCains pick of Sarah Palin for his VP. Palin has a solid libertarian background. In 2005/06 she was the guest speaker at two Libertarian Party meetings in Anchorage. She
Up until now, Ive encouraged my fellow Libertarians to follow their conscience and vote for either McCain/Palin or for Barr/Root, if it suits them better.
I now believe, two days before Election Day, that this campaign is just too critical to risk on such a strategy, and if Libertarians wont put the liberty of our country ahead of our party ambitions, who else in this country will?
Obama is fundamentally opposed to virtually all libertarian stances on all issues. From taxes, to freedom of speech, to protecting property rights, to putting a halt to the ever-encroaching Nanny-state, and 4 years of an Obama Presidency will have disastrous results for liberty, and supporters of the limited government view.
As evidence of this, Obama has taken to lodge a full frontal assault on the libertarian movement within the last couple days. In two separate speeches Obama accused McCain/Palin of supporting tax cuts because they believed in the Virtue of Selfishness.” ABC News confirmed that the phrase was most likely a direct hit at libertarian icon Philosopher Ayn Rand.
By attacking Individualist philosophy, in essence, Obama has declared war on libertarians and the libertarian movement in these closing days of Election 08.
How should libertarians respond?
It is now my strong feeling that libertarians nationwide, and most assuredly my fellow Libertarian Party members, should strongly consider casting their votes for Republicans John McCain and Sarah Palin.
The libertarian movement would be best served with an Obama defeat.
Bob Barr has been polling around 1 to 1.5% in recent polls. A Research 2000/Daily Kos poll released just Friday, had Barr at a full 2%. That is more than enough to cause McCain/Palin to go down to defeat. As we all know, a good 90% of Libertarian votes come directly out of the GOP column.
I urge my Libertarian friends, especially those in swing states to shift these final days to McCain/Palin. Those States that are especially critical include: New Hampshire, Virginia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Missouri, Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada.
McCain/Palin lead Obama/Biden in the latest poll out of Wyoming with 68% to 32%. A Libertarian vote cast for Barr/Root in Wyoming, or even Utah, Idaho, Alabama, Kansas, and my native Texas, would not cause any harm. But Libertarians in the critical swing states must now weigh their vote very seriously and with great caution.
Do we want a guarantee of tax increases for virtually all taxpayers, more federalization of education, more pork barrel spending, and continuation of affirmative action quotas, a return of the so-called Fairness Doctrine intended to silence the voice of libertarians and conservatives across the nation? Or, do we want a friendly ear in a confirmed Libertarian Party friend and ally in the office of the Vice-Presidency of the United States.
For these reasons, I am voting for McCain/Palin on Tuesday and I urge all of my Libertarian friends to do the same.
Our party has made great gains and that is important. Nobody in the libertarian movement has worked harder than I have to assure those gains.
But at this moment in history, we must stand with our conservative friends, against a massive affront upon liberty and freedom itself. I call upon all freedom loving libertarians to consider this situation carefully and stand with me!
Eric Dondero
LIBERTARIANS
FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE, SOCIALLY TOLERANT, PRO-DEFENSE!
Why is this Ron Paul senior aide & Bob Barr aide pleading for Libertarians to vote McCain/Palin?
This is the editorial
Talk Turns To Jive About Ayers
INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY
Posted 10/10/2008
Campaign ‘08: Barack Obama now says he knew who Bill Ayers was but thought he was “rehabilitated.” And they say McCain is erratic! Where are the fact-checkers when you need them?
——————————————————————————–
Read More: Election 2008
——————————————————————————–
In an interview with sympathetic Philadelphia radio talk show host Michael Smerconish, taped Thursday and broadcast Friday, Obama changed the story of his relationship with Weatherman terrorist William Ayers yet again. He even had the chutzpah to lay the matter at the feet of Ronald Reagan.
“Ultimately, I ended up learning about the fact that (Ayers) had engaged in this reprehensible act 40 years ago, but I was 8 years old at the time and I assumed that he had been rehabilitated,” Obama said.
You’d think a graduate of Columbia University and Harvard Law School would have known that the actions of America’s premier terrorist bomber did not, due to tainted evidence, result in a single day of prison time. So just when and where did he think Bill Ayers was rehabilitated?
And just when and where did Obama learn about “this reprehensible act”? He does not say. But when you meet someone for the first time and end up in his house as he hosts your first fundraiser, isn’t it customary to inquire about his background?
Michelle Obama was asked about the relationship on “Larry King Live” on Thursday. “I don’t know anyone in Chicago who is heavily involved in education policy who doesn’t know Bill Ayers,” she said. Or his background?
When Obama did find out, and learned Ayers did not regret his deeds, the savvy and politically ambitious Obama should have dropped him like the plague. Instead, he lied (and that’s the only word for it) about their relationship.
“The gentleman in question, Bill Ayers, is a college professor, teaches education at the University of Illinois,” Obama told Smerconish. “That’s how I met him working on a school reform project that was funded by an ambassador and very close friend of Ronald Reagan’s” along with “a bunch of conservative businessmen and civic leaders.” This is the mother of all stretches.
University of Illinois records show that in the 1990s, Ayers was instrumental in starting the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, securing a $50 million grant to reform the Chicago Public Schools, part of a national initiative funded by Walter Annenberg, the former ambassador who died in 2002.
Annenberg wanted to reform schools, but certainly not along the socialist lines intended by Bill Ayers, who sees Venezuela’s system as a model and has a mutual admiration society going with Hugo Chavez. And to suggest Ronald Reagan had any connection is obscene.
In a Thursday column in the Philadelphia Daily News, Smerconish writes that “the facts suggest that Ayers is on the periphery of Obama’s public life.” This, we suppose, is Latin for “just a guy who lives in the neighborhood,” as Obama claims. In fact, Obama and Ayers worked intimately on many projects and served on boards together, routinely exchanging ideas.
As reported on pajamasmedia. com, Obama’s first known meeting with Ayers had to occur in Chicago in 1987. Ayers was an activist in the Alliance for Better Chicago Schools. Community organizer Obama’s Developing Communities Project was a member of that alliance.
The canard that Ayers’ crimes occurred when Obama was 8 is irrelevant. Obama was 24 at the time of the Weathermen’s last attacks. He was 29 when the last remnants of the Weather Underground and the affiliated May 19th Communist Organization were sentenced to prison in 1990. Surely Ayers’ background was in news accounts.
The claim that Barack Obama did not know who Ayers was when he launched his political career in Ayers’ living room is bogus. Ayers was a player in Chicago’s radical left politics. So was Obama, who has a problem with the truth.
I have to write 2 paragraphs on this editorial but i dont understand it, can someone please help!?
Here is a proven fact that I would like to hear the spin disproving them.
Obama’s cousin, Raila Odinga, is a Socialist who is trying to bring down the government in Kenya, Africa.
Raila Odinga is a well-known politician in Kenya. He served in various governmental positions including Prime Minister and was an opposition candidate for president in an election in Kenya in 2007. He didn’t win but claimed that the vote was rigged and the uproar and violence that resulted took hundreds of lives and displaced hundreds of thousands of people.
Obama and his Raila talk with each other daily?
There is no way of knowing how often they talk, but they have met, both in the U. S. and in Africa and have had telephone conversations. In a 2006, Odinga hosted Obama for a visit to Kenya and Obama appeared with him and praised Odinga at rallies in Nairobi. At the beginning of the U. S. presidential primary season in 2007, Obama called Odinga, according to the London Telegraph. Odinga said they discussed the “destabilizing constitutional crisis” in Kenya. The Associated Press quoted Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs as confirming the conversation.
Part of the controversy surrounding Odinga is his ties with Islamic interests. He campaigned for Islamic votes and it was rumored that he had signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with Moslem leaders. The content of the memo was not immediately released and stories circulated that Odinga had promised that if he was elected, Islam would be the only religion of Kenya and strict Islamic sharia law would become the law of the land.
***The Center for Responsive Politics (CRP), according to their web site, is a “nonpartisan guide to moneys influence on U. S. elections and public policy.”
According to the report posted on the CRP web site Donations for the Illinois senator from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac report between 1989-2008 tabulated up to $126,349. The same report show John McCain contributions from the same group tabulated to $21,550.
***Ayers was a founding member of a radical group known at the Weather Underground that carried out bombings of federal buildings including the Pentagon and the U. S. Capitol in the 1960’s. It was in protest of the Vietnam war. Ayers and his wife Bernadine Dohm spent a decade as fugitives from the FBI, which classed the Weather Underground as a “domestic terrorist group.” They resurfaced in 1980 after charges against them were dropped because of misconduct in collecting evidence against them. They both became professors in Chicago where Ayers was an education professor at the time that he became a campaign controversy in 2008. Ayers has been unrepentant about his Weather Underground activities and has been quoted as saying they “didn’t do enough.”
A review of board minutes and records by CNN show Obama, crossed paths repeatedly with Ayers at board meetings of the Annenberg Challenge Project in Chicago.
For seven years, Ayers and Obama — among many others — worked on funding for education projects, including some projects advocated by Ayers.
While working on the Annenberg project, Obama and Ayers also served together on a second charitable foundation, the Woods Fund, and that among the Woods Fund recipients was the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity United Church where Obama had his church membership.
Obama praised Ayers’ book on the subject of juvenile justice in a 1997 Chicago Tribune review, calling it “a searing and timely account of the juvenile court system, and the courageous individuals who rescue hope from despair.
Source:
http://www. truthorfiction. com/rumors/o/obama-kenya. htm