Comments on: TIME’s 10 Best Senators

By: Mark

Mark — Mon, 17 Apr 2006 15:50:49 +0000

Indeed – many of the profiles were quite alarming (God, that Ted Kennedy is almost singlehandedly responsible for half of the boondoggles we have to turn around at some point)…

By: Jojo

Jojo — Mon, 17 Apr 2006 15:48:09 +0000

It’s disappointing that Time’s metric for how successful a senator you are seems to be based on how much government money you spend.

By: DBrooks

DBrooks — Mon, 17 Apr 2006 15:21:25 +0000

It says something that I would find it very difficult to vote for at least six of them, and possibly as many as eight. Maybe the fact that I have been involved in, or surrounded by, politics for about 40 years mean I have a “different” view.

By: Mark

Mark — Mon, 17 Apr 2006 13:26:52 +0000

I’m not really indignant, I really meant this to be more of an ‘FYI’. Having said that, I was struck by the fact that McCain, Snowe, AND Specter are on a list that, after all, only has ten people on it…

By: Fargus

Fargus — Mon, 17 Apr 2006 12:57:56 +0000

That having been said, it’s certainly worth noting that 60% of the top 10 list is Republicans. Surely if Time was trying to be some insidious liberal hotbed, they could have come up with some more Democratic senators to put up there. I’m sorry, Mark, but this post just seems like reaction for reaction’s sake.

By: Fargus

Fargus — Mon, 17 Apr 2006 12:53:56 +0000

Your leaving off Time’s inclusion of John Kyl is telling, Mark. The indignation grabbed me for a second, but it seems a bit disingenuous now that I see the whole list.