Back in January the Los Angeles Times ran an article exposing “misvotes” on the part of Senator Barack Obama while a member of Illinois State Senate. This story got little mention in the mainstream media, probably because they were busy baking cookies for their beloved Obama or perhaps giving him a foot rub. Obama brushed the misvotes off as a simple “oops”.
Obama feels that the fact that he misvoted six times is no big deal stating, “I think this is a nonissue.” Well one of his “mistakes” was a vote to strip millions of dollars from a child welfare office in Chicago. Maybe we should ask those children in Chicago and those that help them if they think that this is a “nonissue”.   ÂÂ
After the votes were taken Obama would say that he misvoted and would ask that the official record show that he wanted to vote the other way. However, according to the LA Times, “the actual vote stands and the official record merely shows the senator’s ‘intent'”. This allowed Obama to have his cake and eat it too, letting him to play both sides of the fence. Is this really the type of behavior we want from someone who wants to be President of the United States?
It isn’t just Obama’s “oops” votes that are a problem, he also cast roughly 130 “present” votes. What is a “present” vote you ask? Well it is neither a “yes” nor a “no” and it simply allowed Obama to get around going on the record on particular issues. Some of these issues were politically charged issues such as anti-abortion legislation put forth by Republicans. When a Republican legislator put forth a bill that would have made it easier to prosecute children as young as 15 as adults Obama voted “present”. This isn’t the type of leadership I want to see from a Democratic President, it is cowardice and political gamesmanship.
Illinois State Senator Christine Radogno, the Republican co-sponsor of the bill seeking to prosecute children, said, “Voting present was a way to satisfy those two competing interests.”
Advocates for the bill such as Thom Mannard, director of the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence, believes that political calculation was behind Obama’s “present” vote. “If he voted a flat-out no,†Mr. Mannard said, “somebody down the road could say Obama took this vote and was soft on crime”.
So it appears to me that while Obama constantly preaches “change”, it is nothing but politics as usual with him. When the heat was turned up he decided to check out and either not vote or explain that he simply pushed the wrong button. Well we can’t afford a President that refuses to take a position on the tough issues and God forbid we have one that pushes the wrong button.
“God forbid we have one that pushes the wrong button.”
At least he understands that there is a button. You can’t say as much for our current Prez. Button? What Gul Darn button?
I would rather have someone who’s playing both sides of the fence and maybe working both sides of the aisle. That would be far better than just towing the party-line at all costs.
He’s not perfect. Our president is not the Pope. He’s not infallible.
Jon,
Thankfully we are going to be rid of a current President on 1/20/09.
However we should not compound the mistake that is George W. Bush by electing another President with no foreign policy experience whatsoever. Hillary Clinton offers us a candidate that has experience and won’t be learning on the fly.
You are right about our leaders not being “perfect” or “infallible”. Hillary’s vote in regards to Iraq prove this. However she has moved on from that and now opposes Bush’s war in Iraq.
Obama did not have to cast a vote on that. If he had, he wouldn’t have had the luxury to vote “present” or state that he pushed the wrong button. It would have been interesting to see how he would have voted without the safety blankets he had in the Illinois legislature.
“God forbid we have one that pushes the wrong button.â€Â
Wow, that’s taking it rather far, too far. I’m tired of this demonization of either candidate. 130 present votes is troubling but out of how many votes he cast in the state senate? It is actually 130 “Present” votes out of a total of 4,000. That comes out to roughly 3% of his votes.
Hillary said that she voted for the bankruptcy bill but hoped it wouldn’t pass. I’m sorry, none of our candidates are above this and the issue with Obama is he’s merely another poiltician, nothing more, nothing less. And if we hold all politicians to this standard and that they can never say the system must change, then it never will. Politicians still have to operate within this system. Hillary taking millions from lobbyists will not change the system, business as usual. You can argue this until you are blue in the face with either of them.
What drives me crazy is that Clinton supporters refuse to admit that there is an issue with Clinton herself, not even her, but the perception of her. As the campaign has gone on she’s lost supporters, she started out way ahead of everyone else and we don’t need this for the GE.
Present votes and mistakes will not mean that Obama is going to press the wrong button and your fear mongering will not make it so.
Wow. Obama already has experience writing signing statements. Maybe he should put that in a television ad.
“What drives me crazy is that Clinton supporters refuse to admit that there is an issue with Clinton herself, not even her, but the perception of her.”
Just wait until the media’s love affair with Obama ends. I believe that will be shortly after he wins the nomination (if he wins it). They will turn on him like a pack of wild dogs.
The perception of him will change quite a bit once they start in on him like they have continually done with Hillary.
We already know what they are gonna throw at Hillary, they have been throwing it since 1992. He on the other hand is unchartered territory. It will get ugly real fast and the only thing that will “change” is his poll numbers. That change will be a big downward spiral.
We already know what they are gonna throw at Hillary, they have been throwing it since 1992. He on the other hand is unchartered territory. It will get ugly real fast and the only thing that will “change†is his poll numbers. That change will be a big downward spiral.
——————————–
I keep hearing this as well. They’ve thrown everything at her yes and I know many Dems and Republicans who will not vote for her no matter what. That is not going to change any time soon. I however would vote for Hillary and will work hard for her. But really, I’m tired of hearing Dem get giddy over the idea of Obama crashing and burning just because they dislike him so.
You say the perception of him will change. That is something neither of us can know and this would be the case with ANY candidate!
“You say the perception of him will change. That is something neither of us can know and this would be the case with ANY candidate!”
You have to admit that the media has taken it pretty easy on Obama. When they decide to finally be critical of Obama his public perception will decidedly suffer. The American public is on his bandwagon right now because it is “hip” and “cool”. They will disembark once it isn’t the “in” thing.
Sean-
Yep, it’s sad but true. If Obama’s the nominee, I’ll crawl over broken glass to vote for him if I have to. But still, I don’t think we’re doing some disservice to our party by pointing out that he’s not perfect. I know all the Obama fans in the “netroots” have visions of “permanent majorities” and “change” and “people-powered revolution” and sugar plum fairies dancing in their heads, but let’s get real. He’s had an easy time with the media so far, and that’s about to change if he wins tomorrow and becomes the nominee. If you thought the right’s attacks on Kerry in 2004 were nasty, then be prepared for a total onslaught against Obama.
Heather-
We’re not “giddy”. We’re only asking the tough questions that need to be asked before we have a nominee. Is Obama ready for primetime? We know Hillary’s survived it all over the last 16 years. But since Obama has NEVER been in a competitive election against a Republican, we don’t know how he’ll be able to handle the heat. We already know the same old garbage the GOP has always been throwing at “The Clintons”… But how will Obama handle scrutiny over his voting record? Over his inconsistencies on trade & economic issues? Over Rezko?
We should deal with this now, so that we’re prepared when the GOP comes to smear & swift boat us to death.
No, I don’t believe so. I don’t think they will “disembark” and you have no evidence to prove this just as I don’t have any to say that they won’t. But I refuse to damn either of these candidates, especially since one of them will be the nominee, like it or not. Right now, the tactics the Clinton campaign is taking on is troubling to me but then again, she’s doing us all a favor by vetting him now I guess?
It really comes down to how you want to perceive things.
I really don’t think the press or anyone else is going to trun on Obama like a pack of wild dogs. I am sure there will be moments, but I think that like it or not, his race protects him quite a bit. No matter what the press of the repubs do it will all just come back and bite them in the end.
That’s just a prediction tho. I suppose I could be wrong.
I actually believe that an Obama-McWar race will be the fairest media race in history. They are both media darlings and I don’t see that changing anytime soon. It actually might be first election in a long time where the electorate gets to decide which candidate they like based on the merits, etc. And frankly, if Obama can handle the Clinton machine, he can handle the right-wing. He has an incredible ground game, a lightening quick rapid response team, and because he is a blank slate not much to throw at him. What are the right wing going to run on his middle name being Hussein? That will get old by April.