Lagniappe
Earl
Ofari Hutchinson : Ten
troubling questions
I asked Obama to answer before McCain asks
them
Here
are ten troubling questions for Democratic presidential contender
Barack Obama that he’d be wise to answer coming from
me. If he’s the Democratic presidential nominee you can
bank that John McCain and the GOP truth squad will ask him
them. The questions were sent directly to him at his national
campaign headquarters Friday, March 28. The questions are not
campaign rhetoric, gossip, and partisan allegations. They are
fully documented, and totally a matter of public record. If
Obama won’t answer them, then the challenge is for his
supporters to answer them point by point. This doesn’t
mean hurling the usual cheap shot, brainless, personal invectives,
name calling, personal insults, or character assassination.
This is no substitute for factual answers.
You stated that you were not in the Senate in October 2002 when
President Bush rammed through Congress the resolution authorizing
the use of force in Iraq. But you also stated that “perhaps
the reason I thought it was such a bad idea was I didn’t
have the benefit of U.S. intelligence.” This implies that
you might have voted for the war if you had been in the Senate
when the vote was taken. Why then do you condemn Hillary Clinton
and other Senators who voted for the war authorization resolution
when you admit the possibility that if you had been in the Senate
you would have done the same?
As chairman of the Senate subcommittee on Foreign Relations you
could have held oversight hearings, called witnesses and offered
alternatives to Bush’s disastrous efforts against A Qeada
in Afghanistan. Your subcommittee held none and provided no alternatives
to Bush policy that you condemn, why?
In the Senate you have one of the poorest attendance records,
and you often simply vote present on thorny issues, why?
Senate Legislation was proposed to require nuclear giant, Exelon
to make public disclosure of its radiation leaks. You did not
fully support that requirement. Exelon has been identified as
your fourth biggest campaign contributor. Why did you oppose
the tougher regulatory proposal for Exelon?
Chicago financier Tony Rezko has been accused of numerous financial
illicit dealings. You have claimed that you did no political
or personal favors for Rezko. Yet as an Illinois state legislator
you wrote endorsement letters to government agencies on his behalf,
as well as having conducted other documented financial transactions
and dealings and with him. Why do you deny that you have no relationship
with Rezko?
The head of your campaign finance chair is Penny Pritzker. Before
taking over Obama’s campaign finances, she headed up the
borderline shady and failed Superior Bank. It collapsed in 2002.
The bank engaged in deceptive and faulty lending, questionable
accounting practices, and charged hidden fees. It made thousands
of dubious loans to mostly poor, strapped homeowners. A disproportionate
number of them were minority. Why does she still have a principal
financial role in your campaign?
You have taken money in past campaigns from straw donors. These
are donors that have taken money from tainted and dubious sources
and then contribute to your campaign under their names. You have
talked much about financial openness in campaigns. Why did you
take money from straw donors in the past? And do you take money
from them now?
Following a speech by Hillary Clinton praising Lyndon Johnson
for his role in helping pass the 1964 Civil Rights Act, an Obama
campaign advisor privately released a four page memo urging hammering
Clinton for denigrating Dr. King. Yet, you told reporters that
neither you nor anyone in your campaign had made the accusation
that Clinton denigrated King. Why did you say that when clearly
it was the memo from your campaign advisor that triggered the
media and public assault on Clinton regarding King?
You have not produced a single public document that would provide
the public with greater insight and knowledge about legislation,
initiatives proposed, your votes on key bills, and your attendance
record during your terms in the Illinois legislature.
Why?
You have repeatedly charged that Clinton violated a pledge not
to put her name on the Michigan Democratic primary ballot. However,
neither Clinton nor any other Democratic contender pledged to
the DNC not to have their name on the ballot. Three other candidates
had their name on the ballot in addition to Clinton. Why do continue
to make this claim that the other candidates, but especially
Clinton, violated a pledge not to have their name on the Michigan
ballot?
Obama’s campaign is based on the firm pillar that he represents
a new, open, fresh, and transparent politics. He is the candidate
that is the antithesis of the political duplicity, double dealing,
evasions, lies and corruption that marred other candidates. Obama
can prove it by answering these questions; questions that raise
serious doubt about his contention that he represents a radical
break from the political past. If he won’t answer them
then will his supporters answer them for him? That’s again,
before McCain asks them.
Earl
Ofari Hutchinson is
an author and political analyst. His new book is The Ethnic
Presidency: How
Race Decides the Race to the White House (Middle Passage
Press, February 2008). Petroleumworld
does not necessarily share these views.
Editor's
Note:Editor's Note: This commentary was originally published
by opednews.com, on 04/01/2007. Petroleumworld
reprint this article in the interest of our readers.
All comments posted and published on Petroleumworld, do not
reflect either for or against the opinion expressed in the comment
as an endorsement of Petroleumworld. All comments expressed are
private comments and do not necessary reflect the view of this
website. All comments are posted and published without liability
to Petroleumworld.
Fair use Notice: This site contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the
copyright owner. We are making such material available in our
efforts to advance understanding of issues of environmental and
humanitarian significance. We believe this constitutes a 'fair
use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section
107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.
Section 107. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
All works published by Petroleumworld are in accordance with
Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving
the included information for research and educational purposes.
Petroleumworld has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator
of this article nor is Petroleumworld endorsed or sponsored by
the originator.
Petroleumworld encourages persons to reproduce, reprint, or
broadcast Petroleumworld articles provided that any such reproduction
identify the original source, http://www.petroleumworld.com or
else and it is done within the fair use as provided for in section
107 of the US Copyright Law. If you wish to use copyrighted material
from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair
use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Internet web links to http://www.petroleumworld.com are appreciated
Petroleumworld welcomes your feedback and comments:
editor@petroleumworld.com. By using this link, you agree to
allow E&P to publish your
comments on our letters page.
Petroleumworld
News 04/02/08
Copyright© 2008 respective author or news
agency. All rights reserved.
We welcome the use of Petroleumworld™ stories by anyone
provided it mentions Petroleumworld.com as the source. Other
stories you have to get authorization by its authors.
Send
this story to a friend
Your
feedback is important to us!
We invite all our readers to share with us
their views and comments about this article.
Write
to editor@petroleumworld.com
Any
question or suggestions, please write to:
editor@petroleumworld.com
Best
Viewed with IE 5.01+
Windows NT 4.0, '95, '98 and ME +/ 800x600 pixels
