Obama successfully sued Citbank in 1994.

The original message in this thread is "uninformed". That's not the word I was thinking of, but it'll do in polite company.

The message and the link were obviously designed to get prospective voters shorts in a knot, clearly the clear objective of the posting. Here's why it is uninformed...

In 1994 Barack Obama was only a couple of years out of law school and was employed as an Associate at a mid-sized Chicago law firm. He was not a partner, nor did he have any client responsibility. Associates in law firms are those that work the long hours, prepare the legal briefs and the filings and generally operate in the background, following the instructions of the firm's partners. Associates are never assigned responsibility for litigating cases in court. Beyond that, law forms are in the business of representing clients in legal actions. Unless there's a conflict of interest or if a case is out of their practice specialty, a law firm will seldom turn down a client assignment.

So, for the original poster in this thread to suggest that "Obama sued Citibank" is ridiculous. It's like creating a headline describing the guy who sold the gun that was used to kill President Kennedy...Gunowner Kills Kennedy.

But hey, if the objective was to get people riled up and take their eyes off the real issues of this political campaign and make a decision based on emotion, the posting probably did have an effect on some people. If you think that will be in the long-term best interest of the U.S., I feel sorry for all of us.