What were the votes about? How many votes did each miss as a percentage of total votes? Did McCain/Obama skip votes on naming post offices, or did he skip votes on troop appropriations?

Facts would be helpful.

Context is important. If somebody's spewing this stuff at you without it, they're being dishonest.

Old shiat...
Voting present in Illinois is a very common tactic and is done for a variety of reasons.

Let's see--

Senators who missed the most votes--McCain, Johnson, Obama, Clinton take the top four spots.

Wonder why?

patrick767: Old shiat...
Voting present in Illinois is a very common tactic and is done for a variety of reasons.

That.

A lot of the times he voted present, there was an overwhelming majority of "yay" or "nay" votes.

pandabear: Johnson

Telling that this doyen of the believed extinct moderate right expends an entire column on McBush talking points not about why the GOP candidate should get your vote but why Obama should not get your vote. Nothing like a good old fashioned smear piece to remind one that a vote for pancakes is a vote for four more years of the same.

PoliticsByBrooks?

patrick767: Old shiat...
Voting present in Illinois is a very common tactic and is done for a variety of reasons.

Needs to be repeated. Again.

And how about that salad bar!

patrick767: Old shiat...
Voting present in Illinois is a very common tactic and is done for a variety of reasons.

It's still a valid criticism if the votes were on important issues. It can demonstrate a habit of failing to take a stand on issues.

Of course it could also be that he voted present on non-important issues so the entire thing is pointless. I really don't know.

And since Obama has only been in the senate for 2 years and has acquired a track record this abysmal, what does this say about him?

Weren't the Obama supporters some of the same people whining about Bush not physically being at the White House so much? They should be very angry with Obama then because unlike Bush, Obama does actually need to be in a particular spot to do his job.

lexnaturalis: What were the votes about? How many votes did each miss as a percentage of total votes? Did McCain/Obama skip votes on naming post offices, or did he skip votes on troop appropriations?

John McCain, the supposed "maverick" on environmental issues, didn't even show up to vote on the recent cap and trade proposal. You know, the one he "supports." He didn't bother to show up for a vote overturning a Supreme Court case that allows employers to pay women less than men if they lie about it and run the statute of limitations. He's missed several substantial votes.

Brooks owes his livelyhood to making fun of the crypto-nazi's sailboat.

lexnaturalis: Did McCain/Obama skip votes on naming post offices, or did he skip votes on troop appropriations?

Well, Obama certainly didn't skip any votes on troop appropriations, unless Illinois has a crafty plan no one know about.

alonzinator: PoliticsByBrooks?

This thread is now about women wearing patriotic bikinis. Don't disappoint me fark!

lexnaturalis: Did McCain/Obama skip votes on naming post offices, or did he skip votes on troop appropriations?

Clinton and Obama both have come back for (nearly) every single important bill. There's a few I'm pissed they didn't return for.

McCain... not so much. Hell, he's missed about 60% of every single vote in the Senate so far.

randomjsa: And since Obama has only been in the senate for 2 years and has acquired a track record this abysmal, what does this say about him?

Except that the criticism is about his voting record in the Illinois Legislature. Learn to read, you stupid troll.

Just another example of the liberal media at the NY Times. Oh ... wait ...

present

absoluteparanoia: alonzinator: PoliticsByBrooks?

This thread is now about women wearing patriotic bikinis. Don't disappoint me fark!

It's not exactly a bikini, but it sure is patriotic:

"I'm David Brooks. David Brooks, dammit. I'm one of the finest writers in this land. Everyone in America kneels at the altar of David Farking Brooks and his sublime ability to turn a phrase.

"But I can't use a cliche. No, no. That would be so, so...gauche. I need to forge my own path; I need to create something so perfect that it becomes part of the lexicon...."

FTFA:

blah blah blah throwing something under the truck! blah blah blah throwing someone under the truck! Not bus, but truck! Do you see what I did there?

lexnaturalis: patrick767: Old shiat...
Voting present in Illinois is a very common tactic and is done for a variety of reasons.

It's still a valid criticism if the votes were on important issues. It can demonstrate a habit of failing to take a stand on issues.

Of course it could also be that he voted present on non-important issues so the entire thing is pointless. I really don't know.

This is a good analysis

It's apparently a mix between Obama wanting to try working out an alternative, using strategery to thwart the GOP, or not willing to vote on something he hasn't properly read/is unsure about. A handful of the votes could be considered questionable.

alonzinator: PoliticsByBrooks?

I really hate that picture. She looks like a retarded golden retriever in a flag bikini.

absoluteparanoia - I agree

lilbjorn: Just another example of the liberal media bias at the NY Times. Oh ... wait ...

FTFY/QFT. Sad that Rupert Murdoch has fired 7 senior writers/editors since buying one of the last 3 independent papers in the US (WashPost, LA Times).

The piece is intellectually dishonest for nothing else if for not mentioning McCain's legislative record (or anyone else's) for comparison.

Brooks is a poor, poor replacement for Safire. I loved Safire, even if I didn't always agree with him.

The worst part of Brooks is his consistently wrong use of the phrase "Most Americans feel/believe..." which is inevitably followed by a claim that is easily refuted by going to any of the major opionion poll sites.

Brooks credibility went out the window with Applebee's Salad Bar. If he can't fact check something as basic as "Do they HAVE a salad bar"?, then the debate over anything more complex is a waste of time. David, get the basics down, first.

lexnaturalis: It's still a valid criticism if the votes were on important issues. It can demonstrate a habit of failing to take a stand on issues.

Of course it could also be that he voted present on non-important issues so the entire thing is pointless. I really don't know.

Here are some of the bills:
in 1997, Obama voted "present" on two bills (HB 382 and SB 230) that would have prohibited a procedure often referred to as partial birth abortion. He also voted "present" on SB 71, which lowered the first offense of carrying a concealed weapon from a felony to a misdemeanor and raised the penalty of subsequent offenses.

In 1999, Obama voted "present" on SB 759, a bill that required mandatory adult prosecution for firing a gun on or near school grounds. The bill passed the state Senate 52-1. Also in 1999, Obama voted "present" on HB 854 that protected the privacy of sex-abuse victims by allowing petitions to have the trial records sealed. He was the only member to not support the bill.

In 2001, Obama voted "present" on two parental notification abortion bills (HB 1900 and SB 562), and he voted "present" on a series of bills (SB 1093, 1094, 1095) that sought to protect a child if it survived a failed abortion. In his book, the Audacity of Hope, on page 132, Obama explained his problems with the "born alive" bills, specifically arguing that they would overturn Roe v. Wade.

And finally in 2001, Obama voted "present" on SB 609, a bill prohibiting strip clubs and other adult establishments from being within 1,000 feet of schools, churches, and daycares.

Unfortunately, the article in which I found these only mentions one that passed, and that was 52-1. I don't know about the others.

I have to admit, I'm ambivalent watching all this.

Really? I normally don't write long-winded op-ed pieces for the NY times about things I'm ambivalent about.

Nor do i condemn something with my words in both portions of my statement on why I'm ambivalent.

randomjsa: And since Obama has only been in the senate for 2 years and has acquired a track record this abysmal, what does this say about him?

I know the headline used some pretty big words, but those 130 votes were made when Obama was in the Illinois Senate, not the United States Senate. It may be true that there's no hate like Liberal hate, but trash like you has earned every bit of it and more.

brigid_fitch

Sounds to me like it was in places where he had a personal opinion which may have been at odds with the DNC and his vote would not have overturned the bill. Rather than taking a pointless stand, he deferred from voting. I kind of wish he had taken the principled position and taken the consequences, but if it would truly have been pointless, I can't really say that he did the wrong thing.

Where is the "not this shiat again" guy?

But really, didn't we hash this out like four months ago?

At least he voted, unlike McCain, who just missed the votes.

New amendment. No campaigning while Congress is in session if you are a member of Congress. Who needs term limits when they cannot effectively campaign for re-election?

lilbjorn: Just another example of the liberal media at the NY Times. Oh ... wait ...

Does this prove conservative bias? There was no mention of McCain anywhere in this article. The NYTimes were behind Hillary.

If you actually read this article it's not that bad. It says he's a crafty politician. Which he is. Non-crafty purely genuine people don't get that far in this party system.

mcwebe0: Sounds to me like it was in places where he had a personal opinion which may have been at odds with the DNC and his vote would not have overturned the bill. Rather than taking a pointless stand, he deferred from voting. I kind of wish he had taken the principled position and taken the consequences, but if it would truly have been pointless, I can't really say that he did the wrong thing.

I recall reading that some of these were because the laws were poorly written, and even though he agreed with the principle he recognized that the laws were going to be challenged and possibly overturned due to constitutional issues. Don't remember which ones had that issue. Not the abortion ones, those were part of a strategy endorsed by pro-choice groups, basically his present vote gave cover to people who otherwise would have passed the bill banning certain abortions.

Standing on principle is admirable and whatnot, but even in my plain old job one has to make deals and compromises. If I stood on principle every single time, I'd be one lonely and very unproductive guy.

OTOH, compromising every time makes you a dirtball, so there's a balance to be found somewhere.

Firemarshalbill: If you actually read this article it's not that bad. It says he's a crafty politician. Which he is. Non-crafty purely genuine people don't get that far in this party system.

I tried very had to pull something useful/constructive out of the article. I can't refute a bit of what Brooks is saying, as from a reasonable but different perspective, it certainly looks that way. All that said, if Obama can channel Machiavelli while preserving, protecting and defending the Constitution the way the Founding Fathers intended, I won't be unhappy.

/Obama supporter, if you didn't gather that already

You mean to tell me that David Brooks is a smug, sleazy, dishonest neocon hack?

Obama hasn't even been a senator for a full term...wait..what? He hasn't even been a SENATOR for a full term? Why the FARK is he running for the presidency? Oh yeah...he feels he is "Entitled" to it.

evil 1

i very well may vote for 'the other guy', but obama is 35 or older, lived in the usa for the last 7 years and for at least 14, was born in the usa... it's been a while since high school gov't class, but can you tell me why he shouldn't run? fact is, he's winning.