Obama Expresses Regret For "Appearance" Of Impropriety

After receiving scrutiny from the Chicago Tribune over his involvement with an indicted political fundraiser accused of shaking down businesses seeking dealings with the Illinois Teachers' Retirement System Board and Illinois Health Faciities Planning Board, Senator Barack Obama has issued a written statement expressing regret for some personal business relations that at least appear to look questionable.  From Obama's statement:

"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," Obama said in a written statement Saturday. "For that reason, I consider this a mistake on my part and I regret it."

There may in fact have been no ethics violations, but I have some doubts.  Apparently Obama and Rezko purchased adjoining properties on the same day.  Obama then purchased a portion of the adjoining lot from Rezko to balance out Obama's yard.  The two then agreed to collaborate on the construction of a wrought-iron fence.  Rezko was supposed to pay for the fence, but the fence company hasn't yet received the $14,000 payment yet.  The Trib article is unclear about when the fence was built and, therefore, how long the bill has gone unpaid.  The article is also unclear as to whose property the fence is actually on.  One would think that it must be on Rezko's property since he was supposed to pay for it, but Obama hired an attorney and architectural firm to do some preliminary work, presumably to insure that it was built in a manner please to the Commission on Chicago Landmarks.  Maybe they both wanted a fence and decided to split the costs despite it being on the property of only one of them.  If so, you would think that Obama could provide some more details about who paid for what so we can see if the costs generally true-up.  That would be good for Obama.  The most incredulous turn of events would seem to be if the fence was on Obama's property and Rezko agreed to pay for the full amount of the construction.  Sadly, the journalist who wrote the article doesn't probe as deeply as he should have.

Another issue raised by the article is that Obama was paying his landscaper to provide service to Rezko's property.  Why would he do this?  I can understand neighbors working out agreements with one another for different things, but when one neighbor is a United States Senator and the other is an indicted fundraiser, something is just not right.  Keep in mind that Rezko raised money for Obama's 2003 campaign as well as for Obama's state Senate campaigns.  I would be stunned if this wasn't just a series of quid-pro-quos.  Obama has since decided to make sure that he receives payment from Rezko for the landscaping.  He is also going to divest his campaign fund of any Rezko money.  

From Obama's statement:

"I haven't been involved with him in any legislative work whatsoever or any government activities of any sort," Obama said.

That may be so, but the quid-pro-quos likely start out small, and politicians are probably prone to convince themselves that any votes they make that happen to align with the interests of their money sources are simply a matter of coincidence.  It's human nature to rationalize, but politicians seem to have a special gift for it irrespective of party affiliation.  Maybe the dealings between Obama and Rezko only appear suspicious because one of the parties has been indicted.  All I know is that I don't personally conduct that kind of business with my neighbors.  Perhaps these arrangements are not that uncommon among the more affluent, but I have my doubts.   

Update:  Ed Morrissey posts on the Obama-Rezko connection here. 

Previous:  Chicago Tribune Questions Obama's Relationship To Indicted Fundraiser