| Jackson50 said: I do not wish to explain all of it in here, but here is a nice piece on why the National Journal's rankings are not truly representative of how ideological a congressman is:http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=08c25e0a-9b88-49a6-97f5-45114f3fff28 And as I provided earlier, here is a more thorough examination of how ideological a congressman is: http://voteview.com/sen110.htm |
TNR isn't exactly what I would call unbiased, and given what happened to Kerry with this label in '04 it would be no surprise they want to avoid giving it to Obama.
I did see your other link before, and the algorithm is interesting.
The only problem is that Obama is still extremely liberal even in that algorithm. So we have two reports, one of which is the basis for the "the most liberal" comment and one of which was found to support the opposition to the statement, and they both say he is very liberal leaning.
So what we've learned is that the original comment wasn't off the cuff and had a substantive basis even if some disagree with it and even those who disagree with it still think he is very liberal, just perhaps not the most liberal.
I think that about sums it up, let me know if I missed anything. Its not like liberalism equates to evil or anything, it's just a difference of opinion. And my opinion happens to be very similar to Rocketpigs on this issue. Put simply we need someone who will cross the isle to get stuff done. And with politicians I judge how they will perform once elected by looking at what they've done, not what they've said.
 |
| To Each Man, Responsibility |
