Comments on: Is Ted Stevens Our Worst Senator?

By: mtl

mtl — Fri, 01 Sep 2006 03:00:23 +0000

I second the ted v. John winner.

Kennedy isn’t going to compromise his principals(as insane as they are). Kerry checks for any wind in his bathroom, and adjusts his pee stream accordingly.

By: too many steves

too many steves — Fri, 01 Sep 2006 01:09:17 +0000

Ha! In my case it would have to be “too many stephens” otherwise my mom would be upset.

By: Mark

Mark — Thu, 31 Aug 2006 14:55:58 +0000

fatman, you know, as hard as it is for me to say this, I think Teddy Kennedy is a better Senator than Kerry. At least Kennedy has been involved with some real legislation, even if I am personally opposed to almost every item on his agenda…

By: mtl

mtl — Thu, 31 Aug 2006 13:54:45 +0000

maybe, you should change your name to “too many stevens”-

(a jab at the Senator and those on the gop like him, not directed at your moniker)

By: too many steves

too many steves — Thu, 31 Aug 2006 13:41:06 +0000

And who here thinks this “cost-benefit” analysis will be positive, i.e.; show a positive ROI? We know the I = $15m (ish), what is the R other than a projected reduction in Pork Spending? Would the good Senator from Alaska sign up for that? I think not.

Classic bureaucratic tactic: condition your support on something that is impossible to produce. I am wise to your scheme Mr. Stevens.

By: fatman

fatman — Thu, 31 Aug 2006 06:31:34 +0000

Oh, all right, I know, I know, John Kerry’s our worst senator; but the headline was more attention grabbing this way…

With all due respect Mark, Jean Francois isn’t even the worst senator from Massachusetts.

By: mtl

mtl — Thu, 31 Aug 2006 05:41:23 +0000

I used to give a lot of leeway for Alaska senators, thinking they were a large source of our domestic oil production.

They aren’t.

By 1997 numbers, they were 5th (or 7%).

Texas was number one with 33%.

It struck me as odd that a populated state, is left to produce 4.5 times as much oil. Apparently national environmental concerns are state selective, but in a progressive view, better Texas than alaska. Go figure.

By: Sean P

Sean P — Thu, 31 Aug 2006 03:25:23 +0000

Yeah, but Chafee is from Rhode Island so his voting record, such as it is, is about the best the Republicans can hope for. And Ted Steven’s BS about a cost benefit analysis really fries me (did his Bridge to Nowhere get such a study? I doubt it). I’ll second Mark’s nomination of Stevens.

By: Gulf Coast Bandit

Gulf Coast Bandit — Thu, 31 Aug 2006 02:24:45 +0000

Umm, what about Lincoln Chafee? At least Ted votes for judges… (not to defend pork or anything)

By: A Blog For All

A Blog For All — Thu, 31 Aug 2006 01:48:48 +0000

Secret Senator Secret No More

And Stevens, who was never shy about spending taxpayer money, now wants a cost benefit analysis on a bill that would essentially open up the earmark process to public review? Well, don’t that beat all.