Great post. I wish you could get it out to the MSM. We need to wake America up now, before it's too late.

The pathetic thing is the hordes of young males that support Obama (because he's "cool") don't realize that regardless of who is president, there may come a day when America is drawn into another war and THEY will be the veterans, the disabled soldiers just fighting for basic benefits.... and they idolized and pushed a candidate that was too busy running for president to show up for them.  

They are rejecting a candidate that has a proven record (regardless of the political season) of standing up for the military and getting them the benefits they and their families deserve. Instead they're choosing a guy who "talks to the American people" about what he's going to do.

Haven't we had ENOUGH of the middle-aged men in suits telling us what they're GOING to do??? Time to try something different. How about electing a president who has EXPERIENCE doing what needs to be done? Not empty promises like Reagan, and like Bush, and now, Obama.  

Great post!  I second that motion to get it out to the MSM.  Perhaps you could lob it over to the Hillary campaign.

I caught that comment too. And he said it with a smug look while he was nodding his head, as if it was a legitimate excuse. Unfortunately, nobody called him on it. Not even Hillary. Of course, she didn't get much of a chance, since the moderators quickly moved on to another question. You might have more luck getting her campaign to call attention to it than getting the MSM to report it. If she gives a fire and brimstone speech about it being an example of his being all hat and no cattle, even the media would probably pick up on it and show the clip. You can pretty much bet that the GOP campaign strategists didn't miss it, and you will see him in a campaign ad saying that he didn't have any meetings because he was too busy running for President before this race is over.

because she has ALSO missed the same votes as Obama, except the FISA vote.

if you're going to criticize Obama for his missed time in the Senate, you're also going to have to critique Clinton, Biden AND Dodd as well.

Sorry it depressed you. The purpose was to fire you up.

You need to post this over at dObama.

I'm sure you'll get skewered, but hey!

I was flabbergasted when Obama admitted that he hadn't convened any meetings of his important subcommittee because he was too busy running for President. That's essentially what he said. And of course Russert and Williams gave him a pass.

Having the title means nothing if you haven't actually done the job.

But I guess we're just supposed to "hope" he knows what he's doing.

Great research, thank you!

This does need to get out to the MSM and the so-called progressives although they will probably discount it as unfair to their golden boy. Can you get this on the HuffPo or ??

Lets face it, none of the candidates for the nomination have great track records for voting.
Obama was taking on the Giant Inevitable Dominant Frontrunner, starting from scratch. He was like 4 touchdowns behind the day he announced his candidacy.
As a constituent of his, I want public financing like he has almost achieved by getting a million small donors. But we need it to actually be codified in congress and that would reduce the time requirement on candidates. He is a strong proponent of public financing and I think if he sweeps into the white house with a good majority in congress he might get it done.

If HRC comes back and secures the nomination, I will support her as well.

Bottom line here; support your candidate but please do not damage either candidate as either democrat is light years better than McCainBush.
HRC was reasonably positive last nite..please follow her lead.

Why thank you so very much. You are right about the mind blowing stuff. Best natural high I've found.

The thing is, Obama keeps talking about how we took our eye off the ball in Afghanistan.  Well, NATO Europe has Afghanistan.  How could he have not held a single meeting.

My wife and I caught it.  She's an Obama supporter and she said, why did he take the position if he was too busy?  I said, well, he wanted it on his resume!  She didn't look happy...

Fleaflicker join us at hillarysvoice

FleaFlicker, post this on the blog at HillaryClinton.com. Say this is your research piece which you want to share with the campaign strategists.

I would suggest that Hillary supporters do not want to press this issue. I guaratnee her attendance in the Senate hasn't been exactly golden either.

Just looking at the vote tallies in the bills that Obama missed, it seems like he wasn't going to be a critical swing vote.  You still need to show up to work, hell I do it every single day.  It is also poor form to blame it on a presidential campaign, even though that was obviously the reason he missed these votes.

Still, I believe the Clinton campaign brought this up as early as pre-Iowa with the "present-vote-gate" from the Illinois State Senate.  If it was so lethal, you think it would have grown some legs way back then.

I'm not defending Obama in missing these votes, but the lethality of these charges seems a little exaggerated to me.

Will someone do an equivalent post for Hillary?

Based on GovTrack, links below, I've calculated that Obama voted in 60% of Senate roll call votes compared to 72% for Clinton between 1/1/2007 and 2/27/2008

However, if you look only at 2007, Obama voted in 72% compared to Clinton's 77%

And in 2008, it's Obama voting in 33% compared to Hillary's 9%. This probably suggests that the underdog votes less. i.e. in 2007 when Obama was behind, he spent less time in the senate. In 2008 when Hillary is trailing Obama, she's spend a lot less time there than Obama.

Here are the links. You can count them yourself.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes.xp d?year=2008&person=400629
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes.xp d?year=2008&person=300022

Fleaflicker, Sandeep et al. Look, it's over. Why the HRC campaign couldn't have come up with this in December instead of spluring on Mark Penn will be part of the HRC 2008 obituaries.  HRC needed to knock him out or have him fumble in the debate yesterday. She tried and failed. That's the media narrative which means that nothing changed.

On March 5 the general election will begin with Obama vs. McCain after HRC either graciously bows out or gets an Al Gore/Nancy Pelosi/Harry Reid/Ed Rendell reality0check. . In the end, it's never about "experience" or substantive achievement on a resume -- it's about likability and trust.(If it were, we'd be debating about Biden vs. Richardson) The primary voters have decided that Obama is preferable to Hillary.

Feb 4 will result in HRC wins in OH & RI; BO wins in TX & VT and maybe a net HRC delegate pickup of 10 delegates (at the most). The post is interesting and will be useful material for the McCain campaign, the RNC, and the Hannity/Limbaugh/Ingraham axis of evil.

It was just incredibly dumb.  Now in the general he's going to have to backtrack from it when McCain throws it at him.  

Forget the missed votes that weren't close.  Any intelligent being can understand that.  But to have the "audacity" to say "I couldn't perform the job I was being paid to do because I was too busy campaigning"?  It's one of the stupidest remarks I've ever heard uttered in the middle of a race.

Not only will McCain have a ball with it down the road, but it speaks to his political judgement.  There are other honest ways to answer that question like "had I seen the need for a sub-committee meeting I would have called one because I was closely monitoring the scope of my responsibilities" or something to that effect.

But essentially what he said was "I blew off the appointment because, sheesh, I had to CAMPAIGN, ya know?"

So, like, um, what can we expect from President Obama in 2011 and 2012?  Will he be too busy campaigning to worry about his job?

Look, Obama will take the time in June to do 2 days of made-for-TV Afghanistan hearings on his NATO subcommittee. That's the advantage of having this thing wrapped up next week so that he can try and score some political points and defang these charges from McCain.

Guys, think constructively.

There are two candidates who want to end the war (HRC and BO) and one who wants to it to go indefinitely. That's what it comes down.

You know, when Obama said that, about passing legislation to help veterans, I remembered his false statement after Iowa, when he said he passed a bill to make nuclear plants report accidents.  Actually, he introduced it, then, at the behest of the nuclear industry, watered it down to the point where the plants would NOT have to report accidents, and then it did not pass anyway.

So when he pulled it again last night, I waited for someone to question him.  Nothing.  This country no longer has journalism.

First question: Are these quotes from a source? If so, can you post a link? Thanks.

Obviously I support Hillary, so I'm sympathetic to a lot of your arguments. I agree that not having a single committee hearing is pretty egregious and doesn't speak well to his seriousness in dealing with the nuts and bolts of governing. I know that Hillary's subcommittee on Superfund and Environmental Health held three hearings in 2007. I wonder what Biden and Dodd did while they were running.

If I were to play devil's advocate, however, I'd want to know things such as--well, a lot of hearings, though important, are sparsely attended. (For example, I think only two Republicans showed up to the Valerie Plame House testimony, though that was probably more political.) It'd be good to know if he was the only one who was missing, or how many other committee members were there.

Remember, sooner or later you have to hit that final stage of Clinton Grief -- Acceptance. And then, likely, you'll get over whatever Obamaphobia or Obamaphenia or whatever Obamaconjuction you're dealing with and remember that the democracy sucks sometimes, but Republicans suck more, and Obama at his worst is better than Bush on days that end in "Y." Since McCain is Bush with more ego, let's start concentrating our bile thataways...

NO ONE is going to pay attention to this because everyone understands the obvious fact that junior senators who chair a SUB-Committee don't mean squat!

The MOST effective way for him to bring attention to the issue is by running for and winning election to the presidency.

percent of senate roll call votes attended by candidate.

   Jan. 2007 - Feb 2008
    Obama    60%
    Clinton  72%
    McCain   44%

   Jan. 2007 - Dec. 2007
    Obama    62%
    Clinton  77%
    McCain   44%

   Jan 2008 - Feb 2008
    Obama    33%
    Clinton   9%
    McCain   39%

When folks get a chance...visit diaries that are not about this Primary.

I am a Republican (gasp) and I just wanted to weigh in on this. I proudly opposed President Bush in both primaries and did not vote for him in the general, so I can speak with some experience.

If you have serious reservations about your candidate DO NOT vote for him/her in the GE. Many people did in my party and we got Bush (bad) instead of Gore (not as bad). This country needs citizens who vote issues and policy, not by identity or party affiliation.

There are too many similarities about Bush and Obama and we CAN NOT go down that road again!! I have found myself in a strange position this election cycle: I have been defending Hillary non-stop lately.

Obama's tactics are some of the most reprehensible and dishonest tactics I have witnessed on the national scene (and yes, swift boat ads were dishonest). I do see it every day in the murky waters that are Illinois politics though, which shouldn't surprise anyone, considering where Obama learned his craft.

And that is what makes Obama worse than Bush. Say what you will about him, but Bush never PRETENDED to be an agent of change, to "end business as usual in Washington." No. He knew he was going to continue shady DC politics and play them.

Obama, on the other hand, is downright lying, saying he will change business as usual in Washington while using horribly devisive and dishonest tactics. He will use them in Washington too, and soon afer his corronation, we will find out that he is nothing but Bush II (or is that Bush III). If you really have doubts about Obama, vote Green (I did in 2000), Nader, a fringe party, or write Hillary in. But do not enable the candidate you can't stand. I never will regret my votes from 2000 and 2004!

In the interests of full disclosure, I will be voting for McCain in the GE. I personally think he has unmatched integrity and experience compared to the other candidates. If Romney had made it, I would be rehearsing 2000 and 2004 all over again, or maybe even voting for Hill (I can't believe I just wrote that).

However, I really wish Hillary would win, because I would be MUCH, MUCH more comftorable with Hillary at the reigns. Obama's inexperience, judgment (Rezko, Ayers, his pastor), and dishonesty (again, Rezko, Ayers, this campaign, promising not run for President, ect, ect, ect) all scare the living daylights out of me. I'm not far off from him on most policy, but this guy is crooked and we cannot have that in the White House.

Fleaflicker, this is a great post.  Keep up the good work.  

As I posted on another thread, the House Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Europe has held nine hearings since the Democrats took over.

The House Foreign Relations Committee Subcommittee on Europe held nine hearings in 2007.

http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/testimon y.asp?congress=&mo=&day=&yea r=&title=&committee=4&submit .x=30&submit.y=10

Among the topics discussed were

- U.S./Greek relations

• Whether the US/EU need a missile defense system
  
• Expanding visa waiver programs
  
• The impact of extraordinary rendition on transatlantic relations

Does anyone want to argue that these aren't important topics? The last one seems like a big one to me.

"Hmmm... we have soldiers dying in Afghanistan..."

There are a LOT more of our soldiers and innocent civilians in general dying in Iraq than Afghanistan.

Hillary - Thanks for enabling Bush's illegal invasion of that country. Tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of people's blood is on your hands as well as Bush's.

The fact that you FINALLY stated in last nights debate that you wish you could take that vote back doesn't change that fact.

A President should have the FORESIGHT to avoid disasters, like Obama has proven he has. Hillary's HINDSIGHT has cost the US too much in too many ways, including lives.

I went and looked at the list of hearings of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee from the 109th Congress (2005-2006), when it was under Republican control:

http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senat e/senate11sh109.html

Of these, I found at least three that were held by the European Affairs Subcommittee (as I didn't look at all of them, there may be some more).

The Lifting of the EU Arms Embargo on China, March 16, 2005

U.S.-E.U. Regulatory Cooperation on Emerging Technologies, May 11, 2005

Islamist Extremism in Europe, April 5, 2006

Back then the subcommittee was chaired by that known intellectual giant and longtime student of foreign policy, Sen. George Allen. Allen was up for re-election and in the fight of his political life.

Who would have thought that the subcommittee worked harder under George Allen than Barack Obama?

The Senate is in session right now.  And it isn't in Texas or Ohio.  Where's Hillary?

In Texas or Ohio, just like Obama (and McCain, for that matter).  See, the problem with all of Hillary's memes is that they boil down to "Obama sucks as much as I do."  Hard to get people to vote for you that way.  Here's a hint for the next election: mix in a positive message now and then.  It might help.

Exposed for being a fraud is never a pleasant thing. He has been busy telling the American people how he feels---Spare me, Obama.  Just spare me the bullshit, and do your damn job.

"Russ Feingold has proposed legislation titled: A bill to provide for the safe redeployment of United States troops from Iraq. The bill has 15 co-sponsors listed below. One name notably absent from this proposed bill is none other than Senator Barack I Was Too Busy Running for President Obama."

Now, you take a bill that Obama has stated that he's not sure he supports BECAUSE IT DOES NOT PROVIDE A DATE CERTAIN TIMELINE FOR THE WITHDRAWAL OF US TROOPS and you characterize his failure to co-sponsor as "too busy running for president."  Does Hillary have anything other than gratuitous smears?  Because if she does, I sure haven't seen it.

Sorry, I got here late and only saw the title--Is this about a diary about why Clinton hasn't released her tax returns?

Hillary is too busy running for President to release her tax returns.

for President to release her tax returns... an even bigger potential issue.

Obama-Webb 2008

S.2634
Title: A bill to require a report setting forth the global strategy of the United States to combat and defeat al Qaeda and its affiliates.
Sponsor: Sen Feingold, Russell D. [WI] (introduced 2/13/2008)      Cosponsors (14)
Latest Major Action: 2/27/2008 Senate floor actions. Status: Cloture on the motion to proceed to the measure invoked in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 89 - 3. Record Vote Number: 34. COSPONSORS(14), ALPHABETICAL [followed by Cosponsors withdrawn]:     (Sort: by date)

     Sen Boxer, Barbara [CA] - 2/25/2008
      Sen Brown, Sherrod [OH] - 2/25/2008
      Sen Byrd, Robert C. [WV] - 2/25/2008
      Sen Casey, Robert P., Jr. [PA] - 2/26/2008
      Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY] - 2/25/2008
      Sen Dodd, Christopher J. [CT] - 2/26/2008
      Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 2/25/2008
      Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. [NJ] - 2/26/2008
      Sen Leahy, Patrick J. [VT] - 2/25/2008
      Sen Menendez, Robert [NJ] - 2/14/2008
      Sen Obama, Barack [IL] - 2/25/2008
      Sen Reid, Harry [NV] - 2/13/2008
      Sen Schumer, Charles E. [NY] - 2/26/2008
      Sen Whitehouse, Sheldon [RI] - 2/26/2008

A change in Feingold's bill -- the removal of an end date for troop redeployment in an effort to win wider support -- persuaded Obama to not co-sponsor the measure.

If you don't know already, Obama voted FOR the Bush-Cheney Energy Bill and both Clinton & McCain did NOT.  He said in a debate that it was due to nuclear provisions within the bill.  He gets money from execs at Exelon here in IL.  They own the nuclear plants here.  Also Rezco (now on trial) owns a company called "Rezmar" (google rezmar and iraq--woa!)  Rezmar received a contract recently to build a nuclear plant in Iraq.  If you really think the RNC does not have the commercials ready to go after him, you are sadly mistaken.  All that is necessary to destroy the image of 'perfection' the media created in Obama is something simple and FACTUAL like this.  Those taken by his message of purity will feel betrayed and McCain is as good as elected.

I wil back him if the is the candidate, but many won't because of what will be coming out in the RNC commercials this fall.  Sen Clinton will do a great job.  The role of a president according to the Constitution is only one thing--foreign affairs.  The world respects the Clintons.  The perfect person for that role was Biden, but the early states screwed us all out of that foreign affairs opportunity with Biden.

Botom line...Obama has a connection to this energy bill and the nuclear profits to his friends here in IL.  I'll back him if it comes to it, but if Tx comes through maybe it won't HAVE to happen to us.