Obama’s Records as State Senator Are MIssing - Obama not disclosing them

[pathansen]

“Judicial Watch, the public interest group that forced the release of Hillary Clinton's daily White House schedule on March 20, announced today that the preliminary results of an investigation into Senator Barack Obama's record as an Illinois State Senator show that his statements about the maintenance of his files are suspect.”

“When questioned about the records by "Meet the Press" host Tim Russert on November 11, 2007, Obama said: "Well, let's be clear. In the state Senate, every single piece of information, every document related to state government was kept by the state of Illinois and has been disclosed and is available and has been gone through with a fine-toothed comb by news outlets in Illinois... every document related to my interactions with government is available right now."

“However, according to a February 25th letter from the Illinois Office of the Secretary of State in response to Judicial Watch's open records request, "The ISA does not maintain Senator Obama's personal records or papers. does the ISA maintain records generated by his office. In addition, the ISA has received no requests from Senator Obama to archive any records formerly in his possession."

"Barack Obama, just like Hillary Clinton, has a records problem," said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. "Our investigation suggests Senator Obama could have had his records archived so that they are available to the public, but, to this day, has chosen not to do so. Apparently, he does not want a complete paper trail of his time in the Illinois State Senate. Where are his office records?"
Link: http://interestalert.com/story/03270000aaa0554e.iw/siteia/WOMPOLIT/women_in%20politics.html

[anonymous171]

1. Unfortunately, Hillary must release her tax returns before Obama does anything.

[pathansen]

2. How come? She has already released her records.

[anonymous171]

5. Nope. Tax returns before all else.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

15. and you are who to make such a demand?

[anonymous171]

27. A voter who wants transparency.

And an American citizen. Hillary is not a Queen nor is the Clinton Dynasty above reproach or mistakes.

[pathansen]

54. Quit trying to spin everything around! Hillary already released 11,000 pages of documents

[anonymous171]

55. LOL! It's not amount of pages, but the date they're from.

[Melinda]

57. No, she did not. Those 11k of WH records pages were released only after lawsuit was filed

by Judicial Watch. She released nothing voluntarily. And those 11,000 pages are only WH records, not any of her 2000-2007 tax returns. The truth is only a google search away... why not just be truthful or, if unable, be silent?

Archives to Release Records on March 19 at 10 a.m.

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that the National Archives and Records Administration will release 11,046 pages of former First Lady Hillary Clinton’s daily schedule records, comprising 2,888 days of schedules, on March 19 at 10 a.m. in response to Judicial Watch’s lawsuit in the matter . As soon as practical, Judicial Watch will post the documents on its Internet site at www.judicialwatch.org.

On March 1, the National Archives notified the U.S. District Court that it anticipated Hillary’s daily schedule records would be available on or before March 20, the date of a status hearing in Judicial Watch’s lawsuit: “The Clinton Presidential Library (“Library”) completed its exacting page-by-page, line-by-line review of approximately 10,000 of the 30,000 pages of records potentially responsive to April 5, 2006 Freedom of Information Act request (“Request”) that is the subject of this action.”

The National Archives stated in its brief: “The Library has notified the Presidential representatives of the records scheduled for disclosure and anticipates that it will produce those records to plaintiff Judicial Watch, Inc. in advance of the March 20, 2008 hearing.” The National Archives, however, suggests it will take “one to two years” to begin processing Hillary Clinton’s telephone logs.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/judicial-watch-lawsuit-forces-national-archives-release-hillary-clinton-s-white-house-daily-schedule

[pathansen]

58. I never claimed she released them voluntarily - Read what I said

[Melinda]

63. Hillary didn't release anything; the archives did. And the issue is her tax returns.

How do you spin those?

[pathansen]

64. 20 years of Hillarys tax records and hundreds of thousands of pages of docs have been released

Yet Obama has released no records while he was a State Senator and only one year of tax records.

But you are obviously not a fair, logical person so you are now on my "ignore" list.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

70. Need Hillary's 2000-2007 tax returns, after she got rich

Hillary went from being broke when they left the whitehouse
to having a personal fortune estimated to be $54 Million.

It is the recent tax returns that people want to see.

[MADem]

19. Obama has said he's not releasing his records, though--he's not "transparent."

He doesn't want people looking at all those Rezko documents, see?

[anamandujano]

75. His hypocrisy knows no bounds.

[krawhitham]

52. She did?, can I get a link to her earmarks?

[pathansen]

59. check out her website

[SwampG8r]

79. thanks you won me 5 bucks

when she released her schedules i bet a friend that she would(and her surrogates)begin to say she had released her records

1 tiny document dump does not equal her records
lets see taxes from 2000-2006
lets see the first lady records
all of them please?

[UALRBSofL]

3. I would bet the farm the records will be found

Before the GE. With Rove in the background, he will get his sticky fingers on them somehow.

[MADem]

7. I'll bet he burned 'em in his big back yard. Pooooooof! nt

[Tribetime]

20. roves in hot water himself right now

[msallied]

40. Yay! Root for Karl Rove!

[pathansen]

61. Over 20 years of Hillary Clinton’s tax returns have been previously released

Along with hundreds of thousands of pages of records from her time in White House and countless other documents detailing her time in public life. Sen. Obama's record is far more opaque.

Sen. Obama has not released any records from his time in the state senate and only one year of his tax records.
link:
http://facts.hillaryhub.com/archive/?id=6742

[scheming daemons]

73. Sorry... no tax returns have been released for THIS decade....

...all she did was release tax returns from when she was first lady of Arkansas and the U.S.


No tax returns since.


Stop spinning. She hasn't released a single tax return from the time since her husband left office.

[MADem]

4. Rezko. That's why. NT

[joshcryer]

8. Yep.

[leftofcool]

13. Yep

[Seeker30]

21. Yep

[Hawkeye-X]

31. Nope.

Google "Individual H" and you'll see why (I'm sure you'll ignore that dripping fact)

Hawkeye-X

[MADem]

46. I see plenty of Obama's supporters are tied up with that guy. And he has NOT been charged?

He's cooperating with authorities? He's neither a subject nor a target? What does "implicated" mean?

But Obama returns the money in ....what? An abundance of caution? Or because he KNOWS something the rest of them, including Obama supporter Durbin, doesn't?

You could just as easily paint his divesting himself as evidence of GUILT...of foreknowledge.



http://www.reversespin.com/?p=516

Cherry also is a major donor to Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich, who has returned more than $100,000 in IPA money. Although he hasn’t been charged, Cherry was implicated in the recent corruption indictment of Illinois insider Tony Rezko. He has been identified by the news media as “individual H” in the indictment. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, Cherry was listed as a recipient of a no-work $250,000 finder’s fee on a state pension deal before the deal was quashed by the pension agency. The indictment says Individual H was substituted for another person to conceal the fee and is silent on whether Cherry was aware of the substitution. Cherry says he’s been told by the feds he’s neither the target or subject of prosecution, according to the Chicago Tribune. Soon after that incident, Cherry was given a controversial no-bid state contract by the Blagojevich administration to investigate insurance fraud in Illinois even though critics pointed out he had no expertise in the matter. Cherry billed more than $900,000 in six months and the state refused to release details of those billings.

Cutting through all the numbers, here’s what we have. Hillary Clinton, Durbin and others are wallowing in IPA related money. The articles are all out there about the very real possibility that IPA is scamming small and medium sized business owners across the country and, in the course of those operations, sexually harassing women. Hillary, Durbin and others don’t seem to care. Other politicians, including Barack Obama, returned IPA money. I wonder how the alleged fraud and sexual harassment victims feel about this?

You're going to have to do a little better than that. A guy who hasn't been charged, who is cooperating with authorities, who is neither a subject nor a target, is somehow, in your mind, the "equivalent" of this fellah?

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/353829,CST-NWS-rez23.article

What DOES Obama "know" about Mike Cherry, that no one else knows? And how does he know it? That's the actual question that arises from your veiled accusation. I mean, really--all I can tell from current news reports is that Cherry is a lot like Obama--enmeshed with Tony Rezko, but not charged with any crime.

If you've got anything else, put it out there. Enough with the mysterious bullshit. Speak plainly, or don't bother.

[Renew Deal]

6. Judicial Watch is a right wing organization

And once again, Clinton supporters are aligned with republicans.

[joshcryer]

9. Uh, are you forgetting the hundreds if not thousands of Obama supporters who linked it?

When Clinton was being called to release her scehedules?

[democrattotheend]

45. Yeah, and you guys yelled at us for it, and said it was not a legit source

[MADem]

12. And Obama supporters were "with 'em before they were agin' em.."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/04/judicial-watch-to-get-cli_n_89835.html

Let's not peg the bullshit meter all the way to the red with that "Ewwwwww, Judicial Watch" nonsense...they were your bosom buddies not too long ago.

[pathansen]

24. Judicial Watch was the SAME organization that forced Hillary to disclose her records first

So your arguement doesn't make sense.

[MADem]

71. AND pushed for the ABRAMOFF White House records!! We hate them--except when we LOVE them.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/abramoff.shtml

[dbonds]

10. When they say his personal notes...

are they saying his non-work related stuff. If the state has all work related documents, then they don't need his grocery lists for every week. What are they missing that they don't have? Something specific? Are there conflicts such as meetings that were scheduled but no minutes from? Or is it just personal notes?

[leftofcool]

16. minutes to meetings, conferences, memos, phone calls

normal things state senators usually keep records of

[dbonds]

23. All those are in the state records. They are looking for other notes.

Unless there are specific missing things in the states records. Its a twist of words they are using in that report. The state records are there with all the usual documents, but they don't archive his personal stuff meaning other notes.

[anonymous171]

30. This whole thing is a Hillary projection.

I say Obama waits until her Tax returns are released.

[dbonds]

36. I agree that it is a projection.

Blame your opponent for what you are guilty of. My point was that this whole thing is just a twist of words. All the expected documents are there, it is only 'extra' and 'personal' things that they don't automatically store, and most likely there was nothing extra to store.

[MADem]

50. Nope. They aren't. There are no state records, apparently, except what each agency holds.

It seems incredible to me that the state doesn't have a proper archive for legislative correspondence.

This is simply BEYOND BELIEF: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/14/politics/main3503289.shtml

Obama: I Didn't Keep State Senate Records
Democrat, Who Has Urged Clinton To Release Papers, Says He Never Kept Statehouse Docs


AP) Barack Obama, who's been scolding Hillary Rodham Clinton for not hastening the release of records from her time as first lady, says he can't step up and produce his own records from his days in the Illinois state Senate.

He says he hasn't got any.

"I don't have — I don't maintain — a file of eight years of work in the state Senate because I didn't have the resources available to maintain those kinds of records," he said at a recent campaign stop in Iowa. He said he wasn't sure where any cache of records might have gone, adding, "It could have been thrown out. I haven't been in the state Senate now for quite some time."

It's constituent correspondence, schedules, and all sorts of stuff, too, that is....GONE.


WASHINGTON -- After White House hopeful Barack Obama was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2004, he turned over "pertinent" files from his state Senate office to his successor and did not keep other office records.

Senior strategist David Axelrod said Sunday night, "Files pertinent to ongoing casework were passed to Kwame Raoul, his successor."

Regarding papers from his eight years as a state senator, Obama said in an interview Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press," "We did not keep those records."....Last Friday, during a press availability in Des Moines, I asked Obama if his records existed, and Obama said he did not know. "You know, I'm not certain, Lynn," Obama said. "As I said, I didn't have the resources to ensure that all this stuff was archived in some way . . . it could have been thrown out."

The day before, Obama told the Chicago Tribune, "Whatever remaining documents that I have are inevitably incomplete, and then the question is going to be where's this, where's that. Once I start heading down that road, then it puts me in a position that could end up being misleading."

"Meet the Press" moderator Tim Russert, following up, asked Obama, "Where are your records?

"Tim, we did not keep those records," Obama replied.

Obama said that every "single piece of information, every document related to state government was kept by the state of Illinois and has been disclosed and is available and has been gone through with a fine-toothed comb by news outlets in Illinois."

There is no central repository of records between state lawmakers and state agencies, and Freedom of Information Act requests must be filed to obtain documents, a process that has been taking months


http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2007/11/sweet_column_latest_on_obama_s.html

[Melinda]

62. Read again; the ISA has Obama's Public Records.. its his personal and constituent records JW wants.

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch, the public interest group that forced the release of Hillary Clinton’s daily White House schedule on March 20, announced today that the preliminary results of an investigation into Senator Barack Obama’s record as an Illinois State Senator show that his statements about the maintenance of his files are suspect. Judicial Watch’s investigation included the filing of a Freedom of Information Act request with the Illinois State Archives to obtain his records and papers. Judicial Watch is seeking: “Any and all public documents…resulting from Illinois State Senator Barack Obama’s years in the office (1997-2004) that the ISA in its possession.” Judicial Watch filed its open records request on February 7, 2008, after public statements made by Obama regarding his Illinois State Senate records.

During a campaign stop last fall, Obama at first claimed he did not have any records of his eight years in the Illinois state legislature. “I don't have — I don't maintain — a file of eight years of work in the state Senate because I didn't have the resources available to maintain those kinds of records.”

When questioned about the records by Meet the Press host Tim Russert on November 11, 2007, Obama said: “Well, let’s be clear. In the state Senate, every single piece of information, every document related to state government was kept by the state of Illinois and has been disclosed and is available and has been gone through with a fine-toothed comb by news outlets in Illinois…every document related to my interactions with government is available right now.”

However, according to a February 25th letter from the Illinois Office of the Secretary of State in response to Judicial Watch’s open records request, “The ISA does not maintain Senator Obama’s personal records or papers. does the ISA maintain records generated by his office. In addition, the ISA has received no requests from Senator Obama to archive any records formerly in his possession.”

Judicial Watch also contacted Obama’s successor, Kwame Raoul, who stated in a March 5 letter to Judicial Watch: “Any documents I would have inherited from Senator Obama would have been constituent work files, and those were reviewed and discarded upon me taking office.” State Senator Raoul also argued that even if he had any Obama records, he would not be required to disclose them.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/illinois-state-archives-letter-raises-questions-about-obama-s-records-claim

Recap: The ISA has Obama's PUBLIC records; his personal records are just that - personal. Any constituent records stayed in his office and in the custody of his successor, which his successor reviewed and discarded.

[MADem]

67. Uh, "constituent records" are letters written to, and on behalf of CONSTITUENTS. And they are

PUBLIC records, and they are NOT available.

Just because the guy threw the stuff out, and didn't ASK the archives to take his stuff, well, that in itself is certainly "suspect." What was he HIDING? That must have been a nice little bonfire he had in his new "courtesy of Mrs. Rezko" backyard....

When George Bush, as governor, wrote a cute little note to "Kenny Boy" or on behalf of "Kenny Boy" that was not a PERSONAL letter. It was written on government paper, typed by a government worker, and signed with a government pen. It was a RECORD GENERATED BY HIS OFFICE. A PUBLIC record.

You need to reread what you posted. They seek his PUBLIC RECORDS--the ones generated by HIS OFFICE. The Archives says they've never gotten any records from him. These people haven't haven't gotten them. They think he's LYING, too.

RECAP: Illinois State Archives Letter Raises Questions about Obama’s Records Claim
Archives Claims it Never Has Been Asked to Maintain Records from Obama’s Days as Legislator

Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch, the public interest group that forced the release of Hillary Clinton’s daily White House schedule on March 20, announced today that the preliminary results of an investigation into Senator Barack Obama’s record as an Illinois State Senator show that his statements about the maintenance of his files are suspect. Judicial Watch’s investigation included the filing of a Freedom of Information Act request with the Illinois State Archives to obtain his records and papers. Judicial Watch is seeking: “Any and all public documents…resulting from Illinois State Senator Barack Obama’s years in the office (1997-2004) that the ISA (has) in its possession.” Judicial Watch filed its open records request on February 7, 2008, after public statements made by Obama regarding his Illinois State Senate records.

During a campaign stop last fall, Obama at first claimed he did not have any records of his eight years in the Illinois state legislature. “I don't have — I don't maintain — a file of eight years of work in the state Senate because I didn't have the resources available to maintain those kinds of records.”

When questioned about the records by Meet the Press host Tim Russert on November 11, 2007, Obama said: “Well, let’s be clear. In the state Senate, every single piece of information, every document related to state government was kept by the state of Illinois and has been disclosed and is available and has been gone through with a fine-toothed comb by news outlets in Illinois…every document related to my interactions with government is available right now.”

However, according to a February 25th letter from the Illinois Office of the Secretary of State in response to Judicial Watch’s open records request, “The ISA does not maintain Senator Obama’s personal records or papers. (Nor) does the ISA maintain records generated by his office. In addition, the ISA has received no requests from Senator Obama to archive any records formerly in his possession.” ...

“Barack Obama, just like Hillary Clinton, has a records problem,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Our investigation suggests Senator Obama could have had his records archived so that they are available to the public, but, to this day, has chosen not to do so. Apparently, he does not want a complete paper trail of his time in the Illinois State Senate. Where are his office records?”

[SwampG8r]

80. since

your senatorial model is hillary clinton you have hoist yourself on your own petard by saying this

[Debi]

11. Tom Fitton, Tom Fitton where have I seen that name before????

Oh, that's right - on DU's Top 10 Conservative Idiots! :bounce:


http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/01/top10_2001_22.html

7 Tom Fitton - NEW! Weeks on chart: 1 - And while we're on the subject of lying about trashing the White House, here's Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch: "I know based on sources who have proved credible in the past, that Bush officials – whether they be career staff or political staff – have knowledge that laptops were stolen," said Tom in the oh-so-reliable online rag WorldNetDaily.com. But Fitton has decided to keep his sources confidential because "they still fear retaliation from officials in the Bush White House who are holdovers from the Clinton administration." Holdovers? Maybe they're worried that a mean-spirited janitor might suddenly attack them with a broom. Or a caterer with a grudge might spill hot soup on their pants. Or maybe it's all in Tom Fitton's imagination. Who can tell?


:crazy: Next thing you know Kenneth Blackwell's hit pieces will be used here. :crazy:

[leftofcool]

18. But JW was your friend when they were calling for HIllary's records

[Debi]

28. Not mine - I've never linked to JW

Nice broad brush you got there though...

[Mags]

14. wonder what he is hiding?

[Debi]

29. Maybe his grocery list? Or last year's Christmas cards? n/t

[Mags]

38. Ohhhhhhhhhh, I kinda of doubt that.

[anonymous171]

39. See post #37

[Debi]

41. Well, it can't be the Rose Law Firm billing records

we found those in Hillary's bedroom :crazy:

[SwampG8r]

81. maybe

hes hiding how he got so filthy rich in 7 years without any real income sources?
oh wait no
thats hillary

[ElsewheresDaughter]

17. He's hiding REZKO

[Hawkeye-X]

32. Still ignoring the facts, I see..

Google "Individual H"

[MADem]

69. There's no THERE there. He's in the same boat as ..... OBAMA.

"Implicated" in Rezko....

COOPERATING with authorities.

Not a subject.

Not a target.

Not CHARGED.

Individual H, or "unnamed political candidate." What's worse???

BREAKING: Obama linked to Rezko indictment
by hwc, Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 10:43:03 AM EST

The Chicago Sun-Times headline today:

Sun-Times Exclusive:
Obama surfaces in Rekzo's federal corruption case
Source confirmed Obama is the unnamed "political candidate" referred to in document which outlines case against Rezko

Obama is not named in the Dec. 21 court document. But a source familiar with the case confirmed that Obama is the unnamed "political candidate" referred to in a section of the document that accuses Rezko of orchestrating a scheme in which a firm hired to handle state teacher pension investments first had to pay $250,000 in "sham" finder's fees. From that money, $10,000 was donated to Obama's successful run for the Senate in the name of a Rezko business associate, according to the court filing and the source.

Rezko, who was part of Obama's senatorial finance committee, also is accused of directing "at least one other individual" to donate money to Obama and then reimbursing that individual -- in possible violation of federal election law.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/1/19/10433/7280

[MADem]

68. Yep. NT

[Warren Stupidity]

22. I preferred it when you folks were on strike.

However, please get it all out of your system. All of it. Clinton's campaign is terminal.

[GarbagemanLB]

25. When Hillary releases the last 6 years of tax returns, then she'll be able to demand transparency

[pathansen]

60. Over 20 years of Hillary Clinton’s tax returns have been previously released

She has also released hundreds of thousands of pages of records from her time in White House and countless other documents detailing her time in public life. Sen. Obama's record is far more opaque.

Sen. Obama has not released any records from his time in the state senate and only one year of his tax returns in 2006.

[pathansen]

77. She has already released 20 years of tax returns and 11,000 pages of records

It is now Obama's turn to release documents.
HOwever, it looks as if they were destroyed.

[cali]

26. my goodness, look at all the desperate little hillcritters

in this thread. kind of cute.

[Hawkeye-X]

33. Grasping at straws, throwing Rezko when they don't realize it's not Obama's problem.

[Debi]

34. They're all back from Vaca! n/t

[tabasco]

37. Fact Check: Obama's State Senate Records Are Publicly Available

http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck/2007/11/14/fact_check_obamas_state_senate.php

NOW - What about Hillary's:

- Senate earmark requests? Obama has released his. HILLARY IS STILL HIDING HERS.

- Tax returns 2000-2007? Obama has released his. HILLARY IS STILL HIDING HERS.

- Library contributor list? We know SAUDI ARABIA gave 10 million dollars. WHO ELSE IS ON THAT LIST AND WHY DO THE CLINTONS REFUSE TO SHOW IT TO ANYBODY?

- Hillary's First Lady records? HILLARY WANTS TO CLAIM FOREIGN POLICY EXPERIENCE BUT WON'T SHOW THE RECORDS OF IT.

IT'S FUNNY TO HEAR THE CLINTON SUPPORTERS SCREECH FOR RECORDS THAT ARE ALREADY PUBLIC WHEN HILLARY IS HIDING ALL HER RECORDS! THIS IS A DEBATE THAT OBAMA WINS!

[northzax]

42. you might want to fact check that factcheck site

Hillary released her records from being first lady.

[Hawkeye-X]

65. Fine, but what about 2000-2006

that raises a big question....

Hawkeye-X

[northzax]

72. yes, the question of why the campaign

has an outdatted fact sheet, one that has wrong 'facts' on it. Imagine your ire if Hillary's campaign had a fact sheet on the web with incorrect facts about obama? Even outdatted ones? There would be fifty threads a day talking about how she is an evil shrew and destroyng the party with her lies. But all of a sudden, those same people don't seem as interested in the exact facts, as long as most are right, if it comes from obama. Odd, huh?

[JoFerret]

44. Obama - the rough beast?

How does that fit?

[appleannie1]

35. Judicial Watch? Good grief. They are completely rightwing out

to dig up any and all dirt they possibly can on any Democratic candidate. What they cannot find, they allude to.

[bowens43]

43. Is bullshit , mud slinging and swiftboating all you have?

I guess it is. HIllary certainly couldn't win on the issues or on her character.

[OzarkDem]

47. My guess

He didn't spend a lot of time at work. Anyone who was working as hard as he was to rise to the next rung on the political ladder didn't have much time to actually do his job.

IIRC doing oppo research on a candidate who had a knack for not showing up to work in the state house. Turns out he was getting other legislators to vote for him, even when he wasn't on the floor.

[pathansen]

78. But his records all disappeared whereas all of Hillary's records have been released

[SwampG8r]

82. your dictionary must be different than mine

mine defines "all" a little differently than yours

[madrchsod]

48. well, well .well hillary supporters and juicy watch readers

here ya go.....i know this won`t satisfy you but i really don`t give a fuck....

"1. The State of Illinois has specific record-keeping requirements for their State Senators and, naturally, business occurring in the legislature. It has been confirmed that Obama abided by these requirements flawlessly.

2. All of said records, i.e. anything to do with the IL state government, i.e. everything is available through the State of Illinois. Some documents require a FoIA request but there is no OK that Obama needs to or can give. The public record is, well, public record.

3. Cases, legislation etc. that were ongoing at the time of Obama's election to U.S. Senate were transitioned to his successor Kwame Raoul.

4. Obama does not have any remaining personal records. Anything that is not part of the official record (see #1) would have been discarded because it is by definition inconsequential. There was no staff that could handle these as mere keepsakes.

That is all the information you need. Please contact the State of Illinois if you want access to the extensive public record."

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/03/obamas-state-senate-records-sc.php#comment-2682066
Cafe Talk | Talking Points Memo | Obama's state senate records scrubbed ???



"When asked about why he hadn't released his papers, Obama said that he had only one staff person assigned to him during his years in the senate and simply did not have the resources to keep archival records

I don’t have archivists in the state senate," he said. "I don’t have the Barack Obama state senate library available to me. I do not have a whole bunch of records from those years......


“You know I’m not certain, Lynn," Obama said. "I didn’t have the resources to ensure that all this sutff was archived in some way; it could have been thrown out. I haven’t been in the state senate now for some time. I’m not sure, Lynn. I don’t know."



http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/11/09/457959.aspx
Obama on his state senate records - First Read - msnbc.com

[bajamary]

51. do you really have to say f**k?

[bajamary]

49. Obama was actually missing or "present" for most votes

My Dear DUers,

My junior Senator was either MIA - not there for the vote - OR he voted "present" to the majority of votes taken during his years in Springfield.

I wonder why Mr. Obama missed all those votes.

Look at his current US Senate record below. Yikes, he's missed 37.4%. What would happen to you at your job if you missed 37.4% of your work?

From the Congressional record
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/states/il/

SENATE - Illinois

Barack Obama Missed Votes 37.4%

Dick Durbin Missed Votes 0.9%

[UALRBSofL]

53. bajamary, I see that

It makes me wonder if he will be present as the President.

[bigtree]

56. aww, is the right-wing group bugging? The Obama camp leveraged their criticisms against Clinton

based on the First Lady's schedule that JW was fishing for (and through).

Live by the sword . . .

[Hoof Hearted]

66. My oh my. I thought he was transparent!

Or, was it empty?

[scheming daemons]

74. Until the Clintons release their tax returns and their library donors list, I can't hear you...

...

[ericgtr]

76. Get back to us when Hillary's released her tax returns and get off the hypocracy

This is unbelievable.