- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next Page »
The Incremental Revolutionary
Some Republicans, prosecutors and police groups opposed it, saying it would be too cumbersome. But Obama took his case to death-penalty advocates, insisting it was the only way police and prosecutors could restore confidence in the criminal-justice system. In the end, this argument won over the cops and his colleagues. Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who initially opposed the reform, signed it into law after a 58-0 vote in the Senate.
Obama's signature effort in Springfield and Washington was ethics reform. The Illinois Legislature was considered the Wild West of campaign finance, and Obama and three colleagues were appointed to lead the cleanup. Together, they led the effort to ban gifts from anyone doing business with the state government. The new law forced lawmakers to disclose contributions of as little as $50 and stopped politicians from using campaign funds for personal expenses.
Some Republicans grumble that on the campaign trail, Obama is taking a bit more credit than he deserves for his accomplishments in Illinois. "I don't remember Barack leading the charge on any issue," says Republican state Sen. Christine Radogno. "He wasn't here and engaged long enough to develop the relationships, the knowledge of all the constituencies and nuances for all of that to happen."
Yet even many Republicans who opposed him on the issues say they found Obama to be reasonable and easy to work with. They say he didn't take politics personally and wasn't interested in grandstanding. "He's certainly a nice enough guy," says Radogno, who describes him as "charming" and "engaging." Kirk Dillard, another Republican state senator who worked closely with Obama, says the two of them met every Monday for a year at 7 a.m. to work on the death-penalty reforms. He says Obama would have liked to do more, "but he's practical. He knew when it was time to quit and to pass a bill."
In Washington, Obama continued to work on ethics issues, teaming up with fellow Democrat Russ Feingold after a series of national scandals surrounding GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Their legislation required more disclosure of pork-barrel spending and the "bundlers" who collect large campaign contributions.
James Thurber, director of American University's Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies, says Obama deserves much of the credit for the cleanup. "I think he was one of the major forces behind the provisions that came out in the act," says Thurber, who testified to Congress on the issues. "He held meetings, a lot of cross-party ones. He was trying to find support where he could." However, the reforms were not entirely successful: Obama's effort to create a tough independent Office of Public Integrity to monitor Congress went nowhere. "Senior members were against it," says Thurber. "I really think that's his biggest failure."
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next Page »
Loading Menu
Member Comments
Posted By: Lee Holmes @ 07/02/2008 8:21:46 PM
Comment: Nins: Why are you peddling BS trotted out by a pack of leftwinged rags? General James Simmons,not only did not cancel such a display,but produced it before reporters of several news services including CNN,NBC,Agence France Presse,REUTERS,the AP,ABC,and others on Nov.17,2007. Indeed,why would Iranian Supreme Council Member Ayatollah Khamenei agree that such arms were indeed,flowing to Iraq in his Nov.18,2007 meeting with Nuri al-Maliki of Iraq? You are presenting only half-truths with regards to Irans nuclear program. The IAEA not only acknowlages that Iran is making enriched uranium,but as late as last month,acknowlaged that Iran was ''only two years away from a nuclear weapon.Perhaps less.''[Remarks,Muhammed El-Baradei June 20,2008,AL-ARABIYA]. The IAEA recognizes that Iran now has plutonium,along with its acknowlagement that its large numbers of centerfuges ''could produce enough material for one bomb in six months to one year'',hence El-Baradeis newest worries. At this moment,Iran refuses to allow full inspections by the IAEA.
Posted By: Nins @ 07/02/2008 7:17:20 PM
Comment: Why did the US military cancel a news conference where they were going to display the "Iranian" weapons they found in Iraq? Because there WERE NO IRANIAN WEAPONS to display. Here are links supporting the fact that the weapons found in Iraq did not come from Iran:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_05/013695.php
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/05/fire_next_time.html
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbeyond/2008/05/iraq-the-elusiv.html
NOT TO MENTION that the Untied States itself has had a notable role in arming the insurgency. When the US dissolved the Iraqi Army, that flooded Iraq with weapons. More recently the Pentagon admitted that it had lost track of a third of the weapons distributed to Iraqi security forces in 2004-05, totaling 190,000 assault rifles and pistols that are currently on the streets of Iraq. The British paper that published this article got it's information straight from the US Government Accounting Office's public website: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/pentagon-admits-190000-weapons-missing-in-iraq-460551.html
Ask yourself, why would America want to pretend that Iran is pushing weapons in Iraq, when actually WE (the USA) has flooded Iraq's streets with weapons? Because Bush wants to declare war on Iran, and just like the fake "WMDs" in Iraq, he needs something to frighten Americans, so he comes out with this BS about Iran killing US soldiers in Iraq. He has also said that Iran is making nuclear weapons, but recent inspections have found NO EVIDENCE of nuclear weapons in Iran. JUST LIKE how repeated inspections found NO EVIDENCE of WMDs in Iraq. The reports of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN inspectors and nuclear experts at the Institute for Strategic and International Studies (ISIS) all agree that Iran DOES NOT have nuclear weapons. The IAEA report states that Iran only has "low enriched uranium, not the highly-enriched uranium necessary to produce a bomb." The ISIS reports states "It is important to note that they do not encompass the full scope of work required for a comprehensive nuclear weapons program. Missing is theoretical work on nuclear weapons, uranium metallurgy, and the development of a neutron initiator." http://www.yirmeyahureview.com/articles/2008/iaea_report_on_iran.htm#_ftn9
In case you think the idea that Bush wants to bomb Iran is reactionary, you should know that John Bolton, former US Ambassador to the UN, recently told FoxNews that he can "definitely envision Bush bombing Iran before he leaves office." By bombing Iran, Bush makes it more likely McCain will be elected. But can the US Treasury, can the US economy stand more war? Even if we could afford it, we don't have the manpower in uniform. You know what that means: draft and conscription. Vote for McCain. Watch your children come home in body bags. Watch America go into a Great Depression.
Posted By: dking312 @ 07/02/2008 2:26:23 AM
Comment: You goofy silly, folks who still act and look like dinosaurs in our space age.
You people who can't get off of that.