NYT: Rhetoric /= results

This is another example why I don't think capitulation to "bi-partisanship" (aka caving into GOP/corporate demands) is the proper tact when only one side, the side Americans seem to be agreeing with most these days, is doing all the capitulating.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/us/politics/03exelon.html?hp

When residents in Illinois voiced outrage two years ago upon learning that the Exelon Corporation had not disclosed radioactive leaks at one of its nuclear plants, the state’s freshman senator, Barack Obama, took up their cause.

Mr. Obama scolded Exelon and federal regulators for inaction and introduced a bill to require all plant owners to notify state and local authorities immediately of even small leaks. He has boasted of it on the campaign trail, telling a crowd in Iowa in December that it was “the only nuclear legislation that I’ve passed.”

“I just did that last year,” he said, to murmurs of approval.

A close look at the path his legislation took tells a very different story. While he initially fought to advance his bill, even holding up a presidential nomination to try to force a hearing on it, Mr. Obama eventually rewrote it to reflect changes sought by Senate Republicans, Exelon and nuclear regulators. The new bill removed language mandating prompt reporting and simply offered guidance to regulators, whom it charged with addressing the issue of unreported leaks.

Those revisions propelled the bill through a crucial committee. But, contrary to Mr. Obama’s comments in Iowa, it ultimately died amid parliamentary wrangling in the full Senate.

 

I knew this story would get posted. I just figured it would be JayFarrar. Yeah, what a bastard Obama is. He's never accomplished anything, such as selling pardons or trade status.

 

Jeebus, I'm tired of this bullshit about Obama caving to Republicans. Hillary was the one who grew up a Republican, who was the president of the College Republicans at Wellsley, and who had the husband who praised Reagan effusively (with none of Obama's qualifications about their disagreements) in 1991.

And let's not forget what the results of Hillary's "my way or the highway" approach on healthcare were.

 

Better we bunker down in a room, ignore anyone we don't like and then attempt to sell our holy writ to fifty percent plus one of the legislators in Washington.

After all, that's how Hillary Clinton reformed our health care system.

And the success of that approach has been so wonderfully demonstrated by the current administration.

 

Any reason it shouldn't be posted. Hillary's taken worse lumps for less.

Is Obama's record above scrutiny?

 

Though shall not scrutinize any record, speech or actions of Barack Obama.
-- SportsJournalists.com 11th Commandment

 

No, that's the 12th Commandment.

The 11th Commandment is "Thou shalt honor thy grandfather spnited by making old jokes."

 

I'm not anti-Obama, heck I'll probably vote for him, but I welcome more stories about him, pro or con. Hillary was right in the sense he hadn't been scrutinized enough.

I've always been a lesser of the evils-guy, so I prefer to know the worst possible thing about every candidate and go from there. Hillary makes me squeamish.

 

This is why senators have a hard time winning the White House: thousands of actions on the record that can be picked apart, in or out of context.

 

I love threads like this.

Blue dots, carry on.

 

We're taking a break from cheering about 9/11. :