So part and parcel of the McCain/Palin last-30-days offensive (cough) is trotting out the old canard about the Democratic candidate being “liberal” or “too liberal.” The current ammo being used is the National Journal‘s Vote Ratings, put together back during the primary, at which time they deemed him “most liberal senator in 2007.” Just as John Kerry was dubbed the same thing by them in 2003, the GOP plans on using this study to put the scarlet “L” on Obama’s forehead. (Remember, if you can’t get people to vote for you, maybe you can get them to vote against the other guy.)
But this article by Bob Geiger makes it clear that rather than being “too liberal for America,” the votes that Obama is dinged on are, in fact, right in line with the values that America holds and the programs it supports.
The Obama-Biden ticket could always hit back that the GOP again using “liberal” as a curse word ignores the fact that liberals are responsible for such all-American favorites as Social Security, Medicare, the minimum wage, the Peace Corps, Clean Air and Clean Water legislation, the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts and the Family and Medical Leave Act.
The Voter Ratings were based on 99 “key” Senate votes. What, then, were the horrific sins that Obama committed against the sanity and commonwealth?
Two of the votes that would cause McCain and Palin to shriek “liberal” at Obama were in favor of raising the Federal Minimum wage for the first time in a decade — something Americans overwhelmingly supported — and against another piece of cruel Republican legislation to kill the minimum wage entirely. And, yes, for all you folks out there making the lowest required wage rate, Senator McCain did vote to abolish it and let your employers decide based on state law or their own kindness how much you earn.
If a minimum wage is “too liberal for America,” Obama’s definitely not your man.
Obama also voted for a whole slew of other popular things including fully funding special education in our schools — you know, Governor Palin, for kids with special needs — allowing more children to get basic health care and lowering prescription drug prices on our senior citizens. Here’s to hoping our elderly in Florida consider that last one and allow the “liberal” cry from John McCain to send them to the voting booth for Obama.
Oh, worrying about high drug costs is so 2007.
Stem cell research? The vast majority of Americans support that science and the promise it holds for new treatments and cures for some of the most debilitating and deadly diseases. Barack Obama supported the “liberal” position of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act and, as a matter of fact, so did John McCain — but that won’t keep McCain and Palin from using it like a bat to beat Obama with.
Eek! John McCain got liberal cooties on himself! Eek!
The same hypocrisy is true with legislation by that flaming liberal Joe Lieberman that called for the creation of a Senate Office of Public Integrity to, as Lieberman put it, “aggressively investigate allegations of misconduct among [Senate] Members.” Lieberman, McCain and other Republicans voted for that — but somehow Barack Obama also voting in favor makes him an evil liberal American.
More liberal cooties! Maybe we should vote none-of-the-above to avoid any hint of ideological impurity!
American energy independence is one of the hot topics this campaign season and yet two votes cast by Obama to reduce U.S. dependency on foreign oil will be assailed by Team McCain — even though John McCain couldn’t even be bothered to show up for either of those votes.
I guess you can avoid becoming liberal if you never show up to vote. Indeed, that’s actually the case with McCain, based on the NJ article (emphasis mine):
Members who missed more than half of the votes in any of the three issue categories did not receive a composite score in NJ‘s ratings. (This rule was imposed after Kerry was ranked the most liberal senator in our 2003 ratings despite having missed more than half of the votes in two categories.) Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the only other senator whose presidential candidacy survived the initial round of primaries and caucuses this year, did not vote frequently enough in 2007 to draw a composite score. He missed more than half of the votes in both the economic and foreign-policy categories. On social issues, which include immigration, McCain received a conservative score of 59. (McCain’s composite scores from his prior years in the Senate, published in our March 2007 vote ratings issue, are available here.)
Get that? We can’t actually judge how “liberal” or “conservative” John McCain was in 2007 on economic and social issues because he didn’t show up to vote often enough. It does cause one to wonder how “engaged” he’ll be as president.
Meanwhile, back in the Geiger analysis …
And on Iraq, caring for our troops fighting there and in Afghanistan and securing America within our own borders, Obama has consistently voted for what “Main Street” thinks is right and which again, in Bizarro Republican World, would make voting in step with the American people a bad thing.
The majority of Americans no longer want us bogged down in the Iraq quagmire and all of Obama’s votes to set a timeline to get the hell out of that mess makes for more GOP evidence of his “liberal” ideals. Obama also voted to implement the 9/11 Commission recommendations — how did that become a liberal stance? — and to fund screening of cargo containers at major U.S. shipping ports… McCain didn’t show up for work to vote on those issues that day either.
Why, one wonders, are these considered a “liberal” stand?
Finally, it’s a very strange part of the election cycle when the McCain-Palin team thinks it can turn votes Obama made on behalf of America’s troops and their families against him — but they’re going to do exactly that when it comes to the Democratic nominee’s efforts to limit the duration of Iraq deployments and extend the period of downtime troops receive with their families before they can be sent back.
“This is an amendment that is focused squarely on supporting our troops who are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan,” said Senator Jim Webb (D-VA), a combat Veteran, arguing for one of two bills he authored to give troops more time between deployments. “It speaks directly to their welfare and to the needs of their families by establishing minimum periods between deployments for both our regular and reserve components.”
Obama voted with the troops and their families on that issue, McCain voted against them — and this is a bad thing for Obama?
Republican Senator Chuck Hagel sponsored a bill to limit Iraq deployments to 12 months saying that the extended tours favored by the Bush administration is “…wearing down the troops and their families, impacting the mental and physical health of our troops.”
Again, wherever Sarah Palin speaks in the next month, she will try to convince voters that Obama siding with Hagel and military families was a nasty liberal plot while McCain voting with Bush and against the troops was the right thing to do.
So what exactly has John McCain done for veterans lately?
Look at what other votes Obama made in the 99 that paint him as “liberal” in the eyes of the National Journal:
- Expanding the State Children’s Health Insurance Program by increasing taxes of those earning more than $1 million. (Several of the votes counted here were votes in support of SCHIP, which means, I guess, it’s a really liberal program.)
- Blocking individuals from serving on Food and Drug Administration drug advisory panels if they have conflicts of interest. (How liberal!)
- (Against) repealing the estate tax. (A favorite for people who stand to inherit bucketsful of money.)
- Approving the fiscal 2008 budget resolution. (!)
- Limiting debate (i.e., forcing a vote) on the energy bill to increase fuel-efficiency standard to 35 miles per gallon by 2020 and shift energy-tax incentives.
- (Against) defining a fetus as an “unborn child.” (Abortion is a deeply divisive subject, to be sure, but most Americans are in the “uncomfortable middle,” and aren’t eager for any wild swing on current policy.)
- Preventing Mexican trucks from operating on most U.S. roads.
- Voting for various plans that would set time tables for withdrawal from Iraq (nearly all the foreign policy votes tallied have something to do with this; it seems to be what defines “liberal” for the NJ).
The table is hard to read (whether an item is a “Conservative” or “Liberal” position seems to vary depending on the yes or no vote, as far as I can see), but looking at the the summary, there’s nothing there that shocks or dismays me as an unreasonable position — no “send money to Hamas” or “educate children about gay pride” or “ban the word ‘God’ from the English language” or any of the normal conservative bugaboos that get the “L” word slapped on them. Granted, I’m of a liberal bent these days, at least in social policy, but this seems like pretty mainstream stuff to me — left of center, not lunatic fringe, as McCain and Palin will try and paint the “most liberal senator.”
Doyce (hardly a political ranter) shared the Geiger article in Google Reader, and commented there:
I’ve actually spent a lot of time at http://thomas.loc.gov/ (the Library of Congress archives) in the last couple weeks, looking over the laws that Obama has sponsored in the last two sessions (550+), the ones he got passed (20+), and how he’s voted. More people should do that, instead of taking their ‘knowledge’ of the candidate’s voting record from whatever “Male this to all you’re freinds!!!” email they got this week.
Barring that, take a look at this piece, dissecting Obama’s ‘liberal’ voting record. Only in the US (when contrasted against the current Republican neocons) could this man be called “liberal”.
Indeed. Do the research yourself; don’t just rely on the sound bites from campaign ads. And when you hear someone claiming that Obama is a “liberal” (let alone something goofy like “too liberal for America”), be sure and make them define their terms — what specifically do they consider as (too) liberal for themselves (if not America), then decide if you agree.
The LIBERAL ELITE. What? This gets me- Reps rail against the intellectual liberal elite. So what they are saying is that intteligent, well-educated people tend to be Liberal. You never hear of the “Conservative elite”. Oh no- they represent the ‘man in the street’ who by definition is average. Conclusion: It is being clever and well educated that makes you Liberal. Perhaps Conservatives should be honest “Vote for XXXX- they are a bit thick, just like you”
Of course they sometimes make typing errors….