This entire meme has taken on a life of it’s own and I even checked with his Senate office some time ago trying to figure out where it started.
HE DIDN’T VOTE FOR THE BANKRUPTCY BILL
He voted for the Leahy amendment, the Akaka AmendmentS, the Kennedy AmendmentS, The Dodd Amendment, the Boxer Amendment, the Harkin Amendment, the Durbin AmendmentS, the Feingold AmendmentS, the Schumer Amendment, the Rockefeller Amendment, the Nelson Amendment, the Corzine Amendment,
He voted against cloture on the bill (IOW, to support a filibuster).
The only amendment he voted against that progressive would generally support is the limit on interest rates introduced by Dayton. It was rejected with 74 votes against including several Democrats who were generally against the broader bill. The text of the Dayton amendment seemed to be far broader than just about credit cards and preempts state ursury laws. I’d hardly call voting against it as rejection of such a rule in general.
By all accounts, he’d support a cap in a better written amendment–and Durbin voted against the Amendment as well.
I bring this up because Austin Mayor brought it up, but the more general issue is that somehow on the blogs people have misrepresented this vote since it occurred.
In terms of the other votes, he argued the same exact position Feingold did for a far worse vote in my opinion, confirming John Ashcroft. Feingold did the same thing on Rice. Only 13 voted against her in total.
While I already addressed the class action bill, I think there is a real problem with having class action suits consistently in state courts when the issues are interstate commerce. This is a key reason we have federal courts is to deal with issues that cross state boundaries.
Looking at Progressive Punch, he has the sixth most liberal voting record with only Durbin, Boxer, Kennedy, Reed and Sarbanes with more liberal records.
What do progressive want?
Of two local elections he weighed in on, he carried the more progressive candidate to victory in one, and in another he carried a more moderate candidate. I’d argue the first was his biggest mistake because Gianoulis is craptacular candidate. In the other case, many progressive would argue that he’s wrong because they supported Cegelis and he backed Duckworth. While it’s fine to be upset with him over that, it doesn’t necessarily make him less progressive. Several progressive organizations also took that route including SEIU, IFT, and Citizen Action endorsed Tammy as well. Are they not progressive or liberal?
In the out of state case, where Senators are traditionally very careful about crossing into an election in another state, he’s supporting Lieberman as is Durbin. I disagree with him, but so what–he’s with me on a whole host of issues.
When it comes down to central issues such as voting rights, he’s the guy who has most loudly complained about Voter ID bills that will disenfranchise many by being an effective poll tax. He took a lead on immigration reform. While many Democrats have tried to straddle the issue, he’s taken strong, clear positions.
Picking out a couple votes or actions that one might not agree with doesn’t make someone not progressive/liberal no matter how mad one is or how big of a grudge Matt Stoller has on the guy.
It was Sirota that started that, wasn’t it? Anyone know if he ever fessed up to that?
AP,
My mistake. I finally pulled my head out and figured out how I became so wrong. I was thinking about Sen. Obama’s vote against putting a federal cap on credit card interest rates.
That amendment would have capped credit card interest rates at 30%. But in addition to caping rates, it also would have superceded any state caps — including the states that cap credit card rates at 21%. So by voting against a cap of 30%, Sen Obama actually voted to maintain lower state caps.
So not only was I wrong about the bankruptcy vote that pissed me off — not a vote *for* the bankruptcy bill but his vote *against* credit card interest rate caps — I was also wrong to be pissed off about the vote that actually pissed me off.
Oh well, it’s nice to occasionally appear to be less Obama worshiping than someone else. But don’t worry, by tomorrow I will take back my crown as Obama-lover number one!
— S.C.A.M.
P.S. What do progressive want?
Not this: Obama said the [Paul Wellstone] was “magnificent.” He also gently but dismissively labeled Wellstone as merely a “gadfly,” in a tone laced with contempt for the senator who, for instance, almost single-handedly prevented passage of the bankruptcy bill for years over the objections of both parties.
Progressive Commandment No. 1: Never — EVER — talk smack about St. Paul.
No, I’m not sure if I’m kidding about that or not.
“Merely” was Sirota’s word. And I am highly suspicious of his “tone.”
Not that Gadfly is a good word, but Obama’s political radar seems a tad better than to bash a dead man, let alone a dead man beloved by the audience of his interviewer.
Doesn’t smell right.
Buck,
I suspect that Sen. Obama said that St. Paul was sometimes perceived as a gadfly and that that perception limited his effectiveness — or that’s what I chose to believe.
— SCAM
In this post, Archpundit is peddling a flat out lie in his defense of Barack Obama. See the details of this lie over at http://www.workingforchange.org/blog or by clicking here.
Progressive blogs should not mislead their readers in order to defend bad votes by politicians.
In his post, Archpundit is peddling a flat out lie in his defense of Barack Obama. See the details of this lie over at http://www.workingforchange.org/blog or by clicking here.
Progressive blogs like ArchPundit’s should not deliberately mislead their readers in order to defend bad votes by politicians.