B. Obama made it a point to say that "McCain voted with President Bush 90% of the time!" Again how stupid does he think we are?
President Bush doesn't even vote in the Senate or Congress!
Assuming he meant with the Republican Party, which he didn't say that is what he meant, but giving him some rope if it were. According to the Washington Post, there were 31 votes of any significance in the last session. This is weeding out all the motions to congratulate football teams for winning championships, and motions to congratulate high school achievers etc, etc, etc.
Of those 31 votes, 7 were unanimous votes. Meaning that even if a vote is taken and one party sees that it will be trounced in the vote like 70-30 at anytime a senator can make a motion to suspend voting and call for the vote to be a unanimous vote and it can be so noted and passed. So the record shows that both parties voted for the bill so as not to slow it down. So casting out those 7 unanimous votes that leaves 24 votes.
Of those 24 votes McCain voted along party lines 14 times and against party lines 10 times. So in reality McCain voted along party lines 14 out of 31 times....Lets see, 14 divided by 31 is 45.1%. A far cry from the 90% that B. Obama and the Democrates would quote.
Shoot if you count all the fu-fu bills that come the senate that pass unanimously or congratulating teams and high school scholars even B. Obama, Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid and Joe Biden vote "with the President" over 50% of the time.
8 comments:
As the commercial says, "90% of all statistics can be made to say anything… 50% of the time."
Statistics are abused and overly relied upon. All those numbers sound so undeniable, yet, statistics hide as much truth as they reveal.
You guys are so smart! At least 99%of the time! It's so cool to have smart brothers!
I don't think that Obama imagines that any of us think that the president votes in either chamber. The White House gives its opinions on all kinds of bills, I am sure that Obama meant that McCain voted with the positions published by the White House 90% of the time. Most Republicans probably fall into like percentages. That's normal. I don't believe for a minute that Obama thinks we are stupid, at least not any more than most politicians assume others don't know as much as they do! I also don't think that the 90% figure refers uniquely to the last session. I should think (I don't know) that they took a longer sample: probably the entire 7 and 1/2 measurable years of the Bush presidency.
During such a long run, it seems reasonable to think that the Obama campaign claim could be right. Even if it isn't right, it seems obvious that McCain in the White House will be Republican executive business as usual. Given the Dems are most likely going hold the House and the Senate, if McCain wins, it looks like a lot more stalemate and non-action. If you are a Republican, you may prefer that to total Dem control.
Checks and balances are what keep our country stable. Exclusive one party rule is usually not good. I suspect that if Obama wins in November, the House will swing back to the Republicans in the midterm elections. Voters as a whole usually prefer bipartisan progress. Partisan progress leaves half the country upset about something.
I do not know how long the sample was either. I don't think that the percentages would be any different over the 7 1/2 years. McCain has always been "a maverick" Republican. Even Romney during the campaign pointed that out time and again.
My next point is that time and again people are always saying what Doug just said in his response..."that Obama meant that...".
It seems that his followers are always having to clearify Obama's positions and policies for him. In any campaign everyone may say something they wish they had not said but it seems prevelant in Obama's case more than McCain's. i.e. The latest "Lipstick" controversy. In hindsight, I do not believe that Obama was directly attacking Palin, at least that is what the Obama campaign clean up crew said and I take them at their word having seen the video. However it was a poor choice of unscripted words. I think he realized it midsentance but couldn't stop himself.
Don't forget that McCain used the lipstick term no less than four times when describing Clinton's health care ideas (I saw all four clips). Odd that he ought to be so upset about someone using that remark when he has done so continually and when referring to a woman's ideas.
As for being an apologist for Obama, I guess it is a matter of assumptions, I assume that Obama meant what I think he meant because I believe that it is the only logical assumption, he ought to have said White House but that is synonymous with Bush.
I saw the McCain clips as well.
I don't think Obama meant to call Palin a pig. It's just an often used expression in politics. I think that McCain's camp over-reacted. However, judging from the response of his audience at the time, it seems they drew the conclusion that he was referring to Palin (but I don't think he was).
I'm a bit more cynical: I think that crowd was happy to have something to be angry about in regards to the 'other guy' who is 'the enemy' for the time being.
I have sooooo seen it at Democratic conventions. Ridiculous reactions to mundane comments. I am not proud to say that I have booed and hissed just because everyone around was doing it. Hopefully I will not be doing that any more!
Post a Comment