RECENT POSTS
- Oprah, Health Care Lobbyists, Among Recent Visitors to White House
- An Obama Thanksgiving Menu, with an Extra Serving of Pie
- White House Thanksgiving Traditions: Broken and Observed
- Obama, GOP Air Differences Over Jobs, Economy In Thanksgiving Addresses
- White House State Dinner Party Crashers
- Obama to Lay Out Emissions Goals in Copenhagen
- Free Bird
- The "Good" War
- The Presidential Planner
- Under the Stars, Obama Toasts India’s Prime Minister
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Obama Pushback on National Journal Rankings
January 31, 2008 8:17 PM
The Obama campaign is taking serious issue with the National Journal rankings of him as the most liberal Senator in 2007.
Spokesman Bill Burton points out that because Sen. Obama was campaigning for much of 2007, he missed 32 out of the 99 votes the NJ used for its rankings.
Of the remaining 67, Obama and Clinton (who also missed many votes because she was campaigning, as did John McCain, etc), were both there to vote for 65.
They voted the same way on 63 of them.
On one where they differed, Obama voted with an amendment from Sen. Joe Lieberman, Ind - Conn., to create an Office of Public Integrity and Clinton voted against it.
On the other, Obama voted for an amendment from Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-NM, allowing "Y" visa holders to stay in the U.S. while renewing their visas, while Clinton -- who has staked out a more conservative position on illegal immigration -- voted against it.
And yet somehow he becomes the most liberal Senator, and she the 16th most.
Odd.
"Only in Washington can you get falsely attacked for being like Reagan one week and labeled the most liberal the next," Burton says. "The tendency of Washington to apply a misleading label to every person and idea is just one of the many things we need to change about how things operate inside the Beltway."
What say you?
- jpt
January 31, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (22)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
I say that you are supposed to be a reporter. Maybe you could a little work. Report what their rankings were in 2005 and 2006 when they were not on the campaign trail missing votes.
You could also point out the way this "smear" was done by same "journal" against Kerrey.
You could point out the bias this journal has.
You could do a little investigating and work yourself.
Posted by: DrSteveB | Jan 31, 2008 8:44:53 PM
Thanks for the update.
Posted by: washingtonian | Jan 31, 2008 8:30:43 PM
Post a comment
