Originally Posted by SummerChild (Post 1602995)

Shawneeeb,

What about the work that he did during his 8 years as an IL senator? That's a long time in the legislative business. As a past IL resident, I can say that he was instrumental in bringing and getting passed many pieces of legislation that were very significant in IL - statewide.

Additionally, I can personally vouch for his knowledge of our government and the processes therein as I was in his Constitutional Law class while in lawschool. He taught three classes each year while also serving as an IL legislator and working the process in Springfield. I had the pleasure of learning about Brown v. Board from this man (our class dealt with the portion of Con Law addressing separation and equality issues - women's rights, voting rights, etc.) and many, many other pivotal constitutional law cases - as did many other students. Each quarter, he would allow students to override into his classes, even given his busy schedule, b/c there was that much interest in taking Constitutional Law from him. At that time, he was not in the U.S. senate nor running for the U.S. senate. Students wanted to take his class b/c he was a great professor and knew his stuff. He also engaged the class in a way that made everyone feel as if they had something to contribute...which can be a rarity in law school classes. Finally, his classes were challenging and very thought-provoking. Further, I can say that the man actually is as genuine and down-to-earth as he appears to be on television. He could have acted any way that he wanted to with us as students - and many professors did - but he was always genuine and down-to-earth.

8 years in the IL legislator (which is quite some time) in addition to those year in the U.S. senate, I would wager to say, probably gives him more legislative experience.

Whether you agree or not. I think that it's safe to say that Obama has significant legislative experience - dispelling the incorrect rumors of the media.

SC

Originally Posted by Wonderful1908 (Post 1604679)

This is amazing I believe it would be no contest between him and John Mccain so the thought that we are seriousy on the brink of an African American president it so awesome!

Originally Posted by darling1 (Post 1605570)

i think that because mccain has a lot of widespread appeal reaching alot of moderate folks, obama may have a tough time. the fact that we are still in a war still may be a large enough factor to pull folks toward mccain.

both candidates can unify this country. it will be pretty close.

Originally Posted by shawneeeb (Post 1602961)

This misleading blog piece has been proliferated throughout the internet. First of all, it compares apples to oranges. It attempts to understate Clinton's accomplishments by citing the number of bills she authored and passed into law. And then it attempts to over-inflate Obama's record by citing the total number of bills he sponsored (BOTH in state and federal congress).

If you look up the information for yourself (http://thomas.loc.gov/bss/110search.html) you can compare apples to apples:

- In the 109th Congress Obama sponsored 152 bills (26 were signed into law) and co-sponsored 427 (12 were signed into law). Clinton sponsored 177 (21 were signed into law) and co-sponsored 720 (19 were signed into law).

- In the 110th Congress Obama sponsored 113 (0 signed into law) and co-sponsored 375 (3 signed into law). Clinton sponsored 150 (0 signed into law) and co-sponsored 477 (4 signed into law).

- Grand Total Authored - Clinton 327 sponsored / 1197 co-sponsored vs. Obama 265 sponsored / 802 co-sponsored

- Grand Total Passed – Clinton 44 vs. Obama 41

THE FACT - During the time that Obama and Clinton were in Senate together, Clinton authored 23% more bills and co-sponsored 49% more bills. Clinton helped to pass 7% more bills than Obama. In addition, Clinton sponsored 299 bills and co-sponsored 1183 from 2001-2004 while Obama was not involved in national politics.

Originally Posted by Blacksocialite (Post 1605976)

I have grown absolutely exhausted by the in-fighting and 'poison pen' emails of the Democrats in this recent primary. My jaw drops every time a read something negative about a Democratic candidate or the party sent by registered Democrats.

The last election should have been a 'lay up' for the Democrats given Bush's record. Either Clinton and Obama will be better than a continuation of the Republican Party's leadership in The White House. I fear that if the in-fighting doesn't stop, John McClain will become President.

I am soooo tired of the Democratic Party now (after being active in it for literally half of my life), that after I vote in my state's primary - I'm becoming Independent.

Originally Posted by mccoyred (Post 1606134)

Being a registerd anything doesn't automatically tie you to the party line even when you go to the voting booth. I have been a registered independent since I first registered to vote on my 18th birthday over 20 years ago. I USUALLY vote Democrat but I have voted for an Independent party or Republican on occasion. Being an Independent has its pros - no 'guarantee' of my vote and no party crap - and its cons - not being able to vote in a closed state primary.

Besides, how do you know that the people sending the information are actually registerd Democrats? The only way you would know for sure is to look at their voter registration card! Heck some very venomous things about the candidates could be coming from the other party or even a so-called third party or other special interest...

Originally Posted by Blacksocialite (Post 1607487)

I know that he owns his own business now.

But I'm curious as to why the Republicans never elevated him to run for President?

He appeared to have all of the right credentials and was elected from Oklahoma (which is very conservative from what I understand). He also appeared to be the Black 'poster child' of the party at one time.