Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Presidential Candidates May Miss Climate Vote


Sen. John McCain walked through the wilderness that surrounds Chester Morse Lake with state and local officials North Bend, Wash., May 13, 2008, to call attention to his climate change agenda. (Associated Press)

Updated 6:48 p.m.
By Juliet Eilperin
LOS ANGELES -- While the three remaining presidential candidates have touted climate change as a central theme in their campaigns, all of them may miss next week's critical vote when the Senate considers a landmark bill imposing mandatory limits on greenhouse gases.

With the debate set to begin Monday, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) will miss the entire proceedings because he will be campaigning all week. In a press conference Wednesday McCain defended his decision to skip the vote, and outlined his opposition to the bill.

"First of all, I have not been there for a number of votes. The same thing happened in the campaign of 2000," he said. "The people of Arizona understand I'm running for president of the United States."

McCain added that even if he did show up he would not back the bill, which is authored by two of his closest allies, Sens. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) and John Warner (R-Va.).

"Second of all, as I have said, I'm very deeply committed to the nuclear component of any legislation that will have a significant effect on greenhouse gas emissions," he said. "And I've been disappointed so far that there has not been a robust and serious addressing of the issue of nuclear power...You're never going to really significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions unless nuclear power is a major component of it. I know that's not a popular position."

Democratic Sens. Barack Obama (Ill.) and Hillary Clinton (N.Y.) -- both of whom back the Lieberman-Warner bill -- haven't said whether they'll vote on it, but it comes just as their presidential primary is reaching its end. A source close to the Obama campaign said the senator is working on amendments to the bill that he could offer as a co-sponsor even if he cannot return to Washington early next week.

"It's going to be difficult during the last few days of the primary season," the source said.

Clinton spokesman Phil Singer said he did not know yet whether his boss would vote on the legislation.

Environmentalists warned today that presidential candidates can't claim to be green on the campaign trail when they're ducking the most important environmental vote of the year.

"If you don't come back to vote on the bill, you can't say that you're all that serious about taking action on climate change," said Lexi Shultz, deputy director of the climate program at the advocacy group Union of Concerned Scientists.

By Web Politics Editor  |  May 29, 2008; 12:14 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: McClellan on the Today Show
Next: Obama's Doctor Gives Him Clean Bill of Health

Comments

I agree with comments by anonymous 3:24pm and 3:29pm.

If McCain was so concerned about the environment, why would he have to resort to ridiculous photo-ops walking through a forest? How does that show commitment to environmental protection? All it shows it that McCain is just another dishonest politician.

McCain is JUST LIKE BUSH in this regard. His commitment to environmental protection is all talk and no action.

His record over the last several years in Congress proves it.

NO MCCAIN IN '08!

Posted by: College Dad | June 1, 2008 2:47 AM | Report abuse

The candidates are wise to avoid voting on an issue that would impose mandatory limits on CO2 gas emissions and drive down the standard of living in the United States.

They should instead organize an inquiry into the reasons why the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and US federal research agencies like NASA, DOE, NOAA, NSF, etc. - have been working together to promote this web of mis-information:

1. CO2 from the tail pipes of Western economic engines caused global warming.

2. Earth's climate is immune from the cyclic changes in sunspots and solar activity.

3. Hydrogen fusion in the Sun bathes planet Earth in a steady and unchanging flow of heat.

4. Solar neutrinos from H-fusion in the Sun magically oscillate away before reaching our detectors.

The UN's IPCC alone could not have convinced the public of the validity of this fairy tale. NASA, NOAA and DOE were active partners; NSF did not speak out as this misinformation was presented to the public as scientific facts.

I do not know the answer, but that seems to be the key question in the current debate over global warming.

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Emeritus Professor
Former NASA PI for
Apollo Lunar Samples
http://www.omatumr.com

Posted by: Oliver K. Manuel | May 30, 2008 10:18 AM | Report abuse

Clinton has taken Kentucky and Obama is right there in Oregon.
The Democratic race for nomination is still very much alive - and most likely to be decided by superdelegates - as CNN points out clearly

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/20/primary.wrap/index.html

If you're tired of waiting around for those super delegates to make a decision already, go to LobbyDelegates.com and push them to support Clinton or Obama

If you haven't done so yet, please write a message to each of your state's superdelegates at http://www.lobbydelegates.com

Obama Supporters:

Sending a note to current Obama supporters lets them know it's appreciated, sending a note to current Clinton supporters can hopefully sway them to change their vote to Obama, and sending a note to the uncommitted folks will hopefully sway them to vote for Obama. It's that easy...

Clinton Supporters too .... !

It takes a moment, but what's a few minutes now worth to get Clinton in office?! Those are really worth !

Sending a note to current Clinton supporters lets them know it's appreciated, sending a note to current Obama supporters can hopefully sway them to change their vote to Clinton, and sending a note to the uncommitted folks will hopefully sway them to vote for Clinton. It's that easy...

Posted by: feeba | May 30, 2008 8:09 AM | Report abuse

THE MCLLELAN STORY IS FRONT PAGE IN BBC LONDON, AND ALL MAJOR NEWS OUTLETS.
I CAN'T BELIEVE FOXNEWS DID NOT CATCH UP ON IT. 4000 AMERICANS DEAD-TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS LOST---AND...IT WAS ALL A LIE. GW'S QUEST FOR GREATNESS.
CRIMES A/G HUMANITY

Posted by: HELO MADRO | May 29, 2008 8:11 PM | Report abuse

So, you DO understand the role of the "Devil's Advocate" but you think I should be nicer about it? Point well taken -- you try responding as much as I do here and see how polite you are about it -- for your information, however, my wife is sitting right here next to me at the moment and we often laugh about my posts. Our friends know that I am a trouble-maker, always pointing out the other side of things.

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 5:32 PM
---------------------------

There is a difference between taking a side for the sake of discussion and being a jackass.

I would certainly hope that a grown, married fella such as yourself is aware of that difference...but your track record proves otherwise.

No matter. If you wish to piss people off when you could just as easily inspire them by changing your tone and not your message, that is your decision. I hope for your sake that your friends do not share my view of you.

"What this country needs is more free speech worth listening to."

-Hansell B. Duckett

Posted by: You don't get it | May 29, 2008 6:14 PM | Report abuse

P.S. -- perhaps you are confusing my posts on these threads with the Fake JakeD?

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 5:35 PM | Report abuse

This is why I still don't get you:

So, you DO understand the role of the "Devil's Advocate" but you think I should be nicer about it? Point well taken -- you try responding as much as I do here and see how polite you are about it -- for your information, however, my wife is sitting right here next to me at the moment and we often laugh about my posts. Our friends know that I am a trouble-maker, always pointing out the other side of things.

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 5:32 PM | Report abuse

McCain needs a pair of bunny feet... so's to ease up that flip-flopping business he has to do to appease all this owners

Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

I'm glad the old turd McBush will miss this one (S-2191). Not enough $ for nukes?? BS. Try 1/2 trillion bucks in nuke subsidies. Thats more than the usual TAXPAYER bailout. Would you invest in a nuke plant (without taxpayer funds or the Price Anderson Act protection)? I think not, even with the subsidies wall st and others won't. Get on the Green bandwagon! (and fast!) Lefty.

Posted by: leftsailor | May 29, 2008 5:11 PM | Report abuse

Not sure how your referenced theory applies to me -- I am using my real name, and I've posted my home address even -- I am anything but "anonymous" compared to most people here. So, what part of "Devil's Advocate" are you not understanding?

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 4:27 PM
---------------------------------------

I don't care if you have given your real name or real address...it's the internet. There is no way to prove you are who you say you are. EVERYONE on the internet has the potential to be annonymous.

I'm not saying you are wrong in everything you say, nor am I saying your opinion doesn't matter. I was merely pointing out that you shouldn't approach people as if THEIR opinion doesn't matter, yet somehow YOURS does. John Gabriel's Theory comes into play here because I very highly doubt you would say some of the things you have said (and in the same way you have said them) in the comments section on Washington Post if people were sitting right next to you instead of behind a screen.

That's how it applies.

I know when I see your screen name, I shouldn't even waste my time reading what you have to say anymore.

I highly doubt that I'm the only one.

Posted by: This is why I still don't get you | May 29, 2008 5:10 PM | Report abuse

In common parlance, a devil's advocate is someone who takes a position just for the sake of argument. This process can be used to test the quality of the original argument and identify weaknesses in its structure. More formally, however, during the canonization process of the Roman Catholic Church, both the Promoter of the Faith (Latin Promotor Fidei) and the Devil's Advocate (Latin advocatus diaboli) were canon lawyers appointed by the Church to argue for and against the canonization of the candidate, respectively. It was the latter's job to take a skeptical view of the candidate's character, to look for holes in the evidence, to argue that any miracles attributed to the candidate were fraudulent, etc. The Devil's Advocate was opposed by God's Advocate, whose job was to make the argument in favor of canonization. In my opinion (obviously) Barack HUSSEIN Obama should not be "canonized" ...

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse

On person (Below asked) "if all 3 will miss the vote then why is it just about Mccain. Because as it stand now, He is the only one that has said he was not going to be there. If you look back in the story. they state that they were not sure if they were going to vote or not. By thing is did they ask and if they did not that is bad reporting on there part. If they asked the dems and they refused to answer then that is a different story, but they don't say the reason they don't know if they will attend it or not.

Posted by: KC | May 29, 2008 4:34 PM | Report abuse

"The case for nuclear power as a low carbon energy source to replace fossil fuels has been challenged in a new report by Australian academics," from "Nuclear's CO2 cost 'will climb'", P. Rincon, BBC News, 04/30/08.

"The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) recently put out a report that says that nuclear power is too complex and too expensive and that the lead times are way too long for nuclear power to be capable of solving the greenhouse effect," from "The truth about uranium mining and nuclear weapons, Socialist Worker Australia, 04/20/07.

Furthermore, the Emissions Trading Scheme "was supposed to be 3.4 billion pounds cheaper than alternative methods of meeting its ambitious Kyoto targets; instead it is costing consumers untold billions in windfall profits and dividends for power producers and their over-fed shareholders," from "European energy groups involved in carbon trading are manipulating the scheme for profit, not principle, Power Tool, Guardian UK 05/17/06.

Care to consider how Zero Interest Loans rebuilt Europe and Japan (after they started the war...)...?

The permanent magnet MagLev Wind Turbines = low center of gravity, making them perfect for offshore wind farms--the potential is unlimited...

Convert electricty into Hydrogen for rainy days...

Existing cars could be converted into Electric Cars by using a battery and a slot-car type system... Highways have good drainage, a conductor could easily be laid down...

Doesn't take a genius to figure out who murdered the Electric Car--nor why...!!!

Posted by: Michael L. Wagner | May 29, 2008 4:34 PM | Report abuse

I agree with a lot of the post here in that, each candidate has not shown up for a number of bills. and to be fair mccain is consistent if he does not support a bill, he does not show up for it. So you have to give him that. one of the commenters states how at least he is talking to the press, etc. etc and that is the only reason why this is getting coverage etc. etc. Realize that he talks to the press because he need to be in the headlines. because the dems. are still in the headlines every day due to this long primary, he has to get in some where, so he talks to the press very often. think about it for about a month you hardly heard anything about or from mccain, then all of a sudden he is talking to the press all the time. Don't be fooled he knows what he is doing, the man is not that stupid. but once the dems primary is over, you will hear a lot about each one real soon. so just be patient.

Posted by: KC | May 29, 2008 4:29 PM | Report abuse

I still dont get you:

Not sure how your referenced theory applies to me -- I am using my real name, and I've posted my home address even -- I am anything but "anonymous" compared to most people here. So, what part of "Devil's Advocate" are you not understanding?

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

JR:

I post to give the opposing viewpoint and to give little-known facts. Thanks for asking.

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 4:08 PM | Report abuse

I'm sorry he will miss the vote, But that's Ok I plan to miss mine for him.

Posted by: Appleness | May 29, 2008 3:35 PM | Report abuse

I am not here to change minds, that's for sure. Think of me as the Devil's RECTUM ; )

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 2:47 P

Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Look at his expression in the photo, I can hear him thinking: "Just five more minutes and I'll get of of this godd*m sodden forest, crap my hip hurts from this dampness, Jeezuss, I almost stepped on a bananna slug, I hope a bird doesn't crap on my head....if they'd just cut down a few of these Gdamn trees it would look a lot more like my home in Arizona..."

Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 3:29 PM | Report abuse

Maybe their writing this story about McCain because he is taking photo-ops like the one above like he's always been some sort of tree hugger. He's probably tagging trees for removal. ALL the environmental agencies rate McCain with the lowest scores, oh, and most of the Veteran agencies give him the LOWEST score despite himself claiming that he "literally gets the highest ranking from ALL of the Veteran agencies". Literally, means "Literally", not "sometimes"

Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 3:24 PM | Report abuse

To JakeD:

Do you really want to know? I post on this blog because of people like you. I am not a paid Obama blogger, but I see what I believe to be cheap, dirty, childish remarks about a candidate that I believe in. Most of these remarks go against everything I believe in and so many of the arguments raised here have holes in them you could drive a truck through. That's because many of them are built on fear and hate. I also see a lot of overt hypocrisy in Hillary and McCain.

Why do you post here?

Posted by: JR | May 29, 2008 3:18 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for the suggestion : )

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

I am not here to change minds, that's for sure. Think of me as the Devil's Advocate ; )

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 2:47 PM
--------------------------------

See, that's what pisses me off about you. You do have some very compelling arguments, and I actually agree with many of your viewpoints...but if you try to get your message across with civility and politeness instead of acting like a half-drunk sailor, people might actually listen to you. Hell, the main reason I don't defend you (or your opinion) when people start ripping on you is because of how you present yourself.

If all you are trying to do is rile people up, then fine...you are doing a fantastic job. If you want people to actually LISTEN to what you have to say, I highly recommend you adjust your attitude and stop treating people like their opinions don't matter.

Just a suggestion from a stranger.

Posted by: Still not getting you | May 29, 2008 2:57 PM | Report abuse

He was for it before he was against it....

Posted by: tom | May 29, 2008 2:55 PM | Report abuse

Running for President?!! He has won his parties nomination and the election is not until November. Does he plan to take any votes between now and November!!

Posted by: Jose Lopez | May 29, 2008 2:52 PM | Report abuse

I am not here to change minds, that's for sure. Think of me as the Devil's Advocate ; )

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 2:47 PM | Report abuse

What better way to get the alternative viewpoint out than poking you in the eye of a hurricane?

P.S. -- I already golf in my spare time.

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 2:34 PM
----------------------------

Well...one better way would be to offer a compelling yet civil argument as opposed to falling back on acting like a five year old...yeah, that would definitely be a better way.

If you like arguing, fine...I have no problem with that. If you like trying to get people to understand your viewpoint, or possibly even change theirs...that's great, I love doing that sort of thing.

But you are going about it all wrong.

Google John Gabriel's Greater Internet F**kwad Theory. Click on the first link (it will say Green Blackboards). THAT is how I view you. I don't listen to your opinion or even try to see things from your point of view because (almost) every time you post something on here, it is done in such a way that matches exactly what is in that first link.

Just like Wil Wheaton said at PAX '07..."When you are playing online...have fun! But don't be a d*ck, okay?"

Posted by: I still dont get you | May 29, 2008 2:45 PM | Report abuse

jeffrey8:

No, I am not.

I do know enough about politics, though, to know that BOTH SIDES of the aisle have a vote count on this bill. If the GOP Whip thought it was going to be close, he would have let McCain know.

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 2:37 PM | Report abuse

JR, Sean, or Adam:

Why did YOU post on this thread?

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

JakeD is a paid republican blogger.

Posted by: jeffrey8 | May 29, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Because they don't know if the others will be voting or not. Mccain, stupidly, big surprise, he is an idiot anyway, made it an issue by telling the press core. This guy doesn't have a brain in his head.

++++++++
If all three are missing the vote then why the story on Mc Cain, is this the end of the free pass?

Posted by: JR | May 29, 2008 2:13 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

I don't get you:

What better way to get the alternative viewpoint out than poking you in the eye of a hurricane?

P.S. -- I already golf in my spare time.

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 2:34 PM | Report abuse

The "Straight Flip Flopping Express!!!"

How can anyone change their positions more than Hillary Clinton does? McCain might be old, but he's certainly nimble.

NO MORE BUSH. NO MORE CLINTONS.

Posted by: jeffp | May 29, 2008 2:33 PM | Report abuse

LAWSource:

Do you currently practice law in Arizona? Short of a disaster, you are aware that John SIDNEY McCain does not need your vote to win Arizona's 10 Electoral Votes, right?

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 2:27 PM | Report abuse

Cool, man. I used to live there. And the results from this poll say everything. You won't believe these results!

http://www.votenic.com

Posted by: Bill | May 29, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

You know, there is something I don't understand about you JakeD. I CONSTANTLY see you on Washington Post stories talking about how biased this newspaper is and how much you disagree with their coverage of things (perfect example, the first comment you made on this blog post). I also constantly see you in the comment section blasting other folks, calling them names, or just all around proving John Gabriel's Greater Internet F**kwad Theory (google it if you don't know it).

If you disagree with what is said here so much...why do you still insist on hanging around trolling the comments section? Wouldn't you be spending your time better by being somewhere that you didn't attack everyone constantly?

I mean, you are obviously free to do what you want...I'm just saying...it's a little strange that you spend so much time with a website/newspaper that you disagree with so much...not to mention a website/newspaper that has readers that you disagree with so much as well.

Get a hobby, like building plastic models or playing video games or picking up an instrument...why do you waste your time in a place where you don't agree with most of what is said?

Posted by: I don't get you | May 29, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

JR:

Good question.

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 2:20 PM | Report abuse

CONSISTENT??

I say all this as an Arizona Democrat who twice voted for him in the past, not because I agreed with all his positions but because I thought he had integrity. And I think he did, once. He *chose* to throw it away. What kind of a leader would this sad, patheteic flip flopper be?
-- Mary Bricker, Tucson, Az

Posted by: LAWSource | May 29, 2008 2:19 PM | Report abuse

I basically agree with Adam (below):

"This would only be a big deal if McCain was trying to have it both ways: vocally support the bill, but not actually vote for it. He's being consistent. He opposes it and he's not voting for it."

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 2:15 PM | Report abuse

If all three are missing the vote then why the story on Mc Cain, is this the end of the free pass?

Posted by: JR | May 29, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

They both did in Iowa ; )

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 2:12 PM | Report abuse

"And did anyone criticize Obama or Clinton for their non-votes on the Farm Bill?"
Are Obama and Clinton running around saying "I'm the farmers president"?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

Hi, I'm running for president, I promise to you that I will curb greenhouse gasses - but I won't vote when the time comes.

My friends, I am a war hero, I've sent our finest into battle 'cause I was duped, I have showed lack of good judgement and naivety. Now there is a bill to help build a better middle-class by offering education benefits to our men and women who serve, but I won't vote on it.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 2:08 PM | Report abuse

The vote will only be one vote because of politics.

The dems will purposefully make it one vote.

The gop did this against kerry too.

They had a bill concerning unemployment benefits and they voted so it would turn out that if Kerry was there he would have been the difference.

Everything is politics in an election year.

Posted by: Sean | May 29, 2008 2:02 PM | Report abuse

To Man,

McCain misses more votes because Harry Reid is majority leader.

Reid schedules the floor votes.

Reid is a democrat.

Reid and the dem leadership are not stupid.

They have important votes when McCain is across the country and has long scheduled speeches and multiple events where space has been leased and can't be cancelled.

This all goes back to George Allen. If it wasn't for the Macaca moment Gop would control the senate and they would have votes when Obama was across the country.

Posted by: Sean | May 29, 2008 2:00 PM | Report abuse

I agree that, if a particular vote fails by one vote, missing that vote sends the clear message that campaigning for President was a bigger priority for the candidate than the one, single issue that was being voted on. How's that for a compromise?

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 1:58 PM | Report abuse

I agree priorities matter. John McCain made global warming a priority. But he's not voting on the bill.

And all candidates miss votes. But I think it's telling that McCain has missed over 100 votes more than Obama, despite having his nomination wrapped up much earlier. He's also missed a boatload of environmental votes, and for someone who's trying to brand him self as an environmental advocate, that doesn't fly.

Posted by: ManUnitdFan | May 29, 2008 1:50 PM | Report abuse

At a time when he is making it part of his campaign it would have been nice if he at least showed up. This is one more example of the advisors he has around him and the bad advice they continually give him. I would have had him there if I had to drag him no matter what. At least his views would be on the record and current instead of have to be constantly putting out more fires. His campaign is horrible and figures to only get worse when some real pressure is put on it. Watching them operate from day to day is hard to believe. This campaign is a train wreck waiting to happen. I am glad I not want to be a Mccain supporter I would be screaming what a bunch of idiots he has around him.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Why isn't the headline about Obama missing the vote.

Obama will not be in Washington on Monday he will be in Michigan.


McCain should be getting praised for giving the press such access. Instead the press uses it against him.

This will set a long term precedent that McCain got no credit for giving the press such access.

The long term precedent is if you talk to the press they will every day do a gotcha story.


Obama and Clinton are missing the vote next monday but that isn't the story because Clinton hasn't talked the press in two weeks and it can't be a a story if you can't ask them the question according to the media.


McCain for the love of god get the press off your bus every day. They want you to lose. They never give you credit for giving them 50 times the access that Clinton or Obama do.

In the last two weeks Clinton hasn't talked to the press once. In that time McCain has had the press on the back of his bus for at least 15 hours. McCain has had to answer for every bad potential news item against him.

Lesson from this campaign will be if you want to win give the press no access because if you give them no access they can't write how you will be missing the vote only if you give them access will they go after you.


After this campaign no campaign ever ever ever will give the press any access.

What is the point the media has proved that if you give them access they use it against you.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 1:47 PM | Report abuse

Good point, Sean, but I am holding out for a McCain victory myself ; )

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Obama is going to miss the vote. Obama is going to be in Michigan on monday.

Clinton is going to miss the vote. Clinton is going to be in Montana on Monday.

McCain has a speech scheduled during this vote.


The only reason why the story is about McCain is because he every day has the press on his bus. Every day he talks for hours with the press.

Clinton hasn't talked to the press in two weeks. She wouldn't answer a question in south dakota yesterday and she hasn't talked to them in two weeks.

Obama talks to the press rarely.

So the press isn't able to get a question to Obama why he is missing the vote or to Clinton.


After McCain loses the election one of the take aways will be how disastrous it was for him to talk to the press every day for hours on his bus.


So the media who is constantly nitpicking at McCain will get short term gain in a liberal president with 60 senate seats but long term no candidate will ever give the press access like McCain does.

If you are going to write this story without responses from Clinton and Obama then that is bad journalism. You at least need to call their staffs. And if they say no comment report that.

Posted by: Sean | May 29, 2008 1:41 PM | Report abuse

"magically ACCEPTABLE threshold"

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 1:37 PM | Report abuse

It matters quite a bit, because of priorities and (for me at least) being consistent -- ALL current office holders have to sacrifice official duties to run for President and that's just a modern-day fact -- I can assume, for the sake of argument, that you similarly chided John FORBES Kerry for missing Senate votes in 2004? Or, is missing 2/3 of the votes your opponent missed some magically threshold for you?

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 1:34 PM | Report abuse

Why does it matter if it's a close vote or not? Here's the trail of logic:

1. McCain claims he has a strong environmental track record.
2. A global warming bill is up on Capitol Hill.
3. McCain has reservations about the bill.
4. McCain won't come back to vote on it.

If McCain truly had a strong environmental record, he would at least vote on environmental issues. Or, he would come back to try to offer an amendment to increase aid to the "nuclear industry."

Saying the bill is going to pass no matter what gives McCain a pass on not voting that he doesn't deserve.

Posted by: ManUnitdFan | May 29, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

I actually found a picture of Miss "Climate Change" 2007:

http://www.lawfuel.co.nz/blog-images/article-resized-annanicole.jpg

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

Is it supposed to be a close vote?

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 1:14 PM | Report abuse

Jake:

McCain was touting his environmental credentials just a couple weeks ago, so missing the vote on global warming legislation is important. As is not being there to even take part in the debate.

As for Obama's missed votes (which is only 2/3 of McCain's, by the way), as soon as Obama touts his record on something one week and misses a vote on it the next, then the press can go after him too. To my knowledge, that hasn't happened yet.

Posted by: ManUnitdFan | May 29, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

So, where are all the headlines that Obama missed 241 votes (41.8%)?

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 1:04 PM | Report abuse

You know to be honest, he is probably not up to the campaigning and also being a senator. He probably can't do all the running around Hillary and Obama are able to do just due to his age and health. It is all he can do to make the speeches he has to make much less his other duties.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Thats because they zip back and forth to make votes. In the words of Mccain, he is too busy running for president.

++++
I don't seem to recall the WaPo announcing every vote that Barack HUSSEIN Obama or Hillary DIANE Clinton missed (or John FORBES Kerry, for that matter) while running for President.

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 12:22 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

When I first read the headline I thought there was a new eco-friendly pagent, Miss Climate 2008.

Posted by: Jon | May 29, 2008 12:34 PM | Report abuse

This would only be a big deal if McCain was trying to have it both ways: vocally support the bill, but not actually vote for it. He's being consistent. He opposes it and he's not voting for it.

And did anyone criticize Obama or Clinton for their non-votes on the Farm Bill?

Posted by: Adam | May 29, 2008 12:34 PM | Report abuse

To be fair, McCain has missed 60% of all votes in the Senate during this session.

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/senate/vote-missers/

It would probably be more newsworthy if he WAS going to vote on the bill. Just because he's made global warming an issue for his campaign, don't expect him to make any special trips to Washington to take action on it.

Posted by: ManUnitdFan | May 29, 2008 12:28 PM | Report abuse

I don't seem to recall the WaPo announcing every vote that Barack HUSSEIN Obama or Hillary DIANE Clinton missed (or John FORBES Kerry, for that matter) while running for President.

Posted by: JakeD | May 29, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company