USA Today uncritically reported McCain's reference to Obama as National Journal's "most liberal senator"
SUMMARY: USA Today uncritically reported that Sen. John McCain "noted" that Sen. Barack Obama "was once named the most liberal senator by National Journal magazine." But USA Today did not report that McCain himself "did not vote frequently enough" to receive a rating. Further, USA Today did not report that the National Journal ranking was based on 99 votes selected by the magazine's staff, a subjective methodology that Obama himself has criticized.
In a June 6 article, USA Today uncritically reported that during an interview with the newspaper, Sen. John McCain "noted" that Sen. Barack Obama "was once named the most liberal senator by National Journal magazine." But in citing McCain's reference to the National Journal's 2007 Senate vote ratings, USA Today did not report that McCain himself "did not vote frequently enough" to receive a rating, according to the National Journal. Further, USA Today did not report that the National Journal ranking was based on 99 votes selected by the magazine's staff -- a subjective process that Obama himself criticized. By contrast, a separate study by political science professors Keith Poole and Jeff Lewis that was based on all 388 non-unanimous Senate votes during 2007 produced a different result, ranking Obama as tied for the 10th most liberal senator. In that same study, McCain was ranked the eighth most conservative senator in 2007.
During a February 11 Politico/WJLA-TV interview, Obama responded to a question by Politico editor-in-chief John F. Harris about the Journal's vote ratings, saying, "[A]n example of why I was rated the most liberal was because I wanted an office of public integrity that stood outside of the Senate, and outside of Congress, to make sure that you've got an impartial eye on ethics problems inside of Congress. Now, I didn't know that it was a liberal or Democratic issue. I thought that was a good government issue that a lot of Republicans would like to see. So that's the problem with some of these ratings - how they score things. It uses categories that I think don't make sense to a lot of Americans." As Media Matters has repeatedly documented (here, here, here, here, here, and here), among the 99 votes Obama cast that contributed to National Journal's "most liberal senator" label -- in addition to the ethics office vote he named -- were those to implement the 9-11 Commission's homeland security recommendations, provide more children with health insurance, expand federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research, and maintain a federal minimum wage.
Media Matters for America has documented recent instances in which media outlets repeated McCain's reference to Obama's National Journal rating without also noting that the magazine did not rate McCain in 2007 due to his absenteeism from the Senate, or pointing out the study's subjectivity.
The June 6 USA Today article also reported: "McCain, whose campaign nearly unraveled last summer from money woes, said he has not decided whether to accept about $85 million in public financing for the fall campaign." However, in raising the issues of public financing and McCain's "money woes" from last summer, the article did not point out that in order to help finance his campaign, McCain signed a loan agreement in November 2007 under which he could have been required under certain circumstances to remain an active candidate, regardless of whether his candidacy was viable, in order to receive matching funds to pay back the loan. Federal Election Commission (FEC) chairman David Mason cited the loan in taking the position that McCain cannot opt out of public financing in the primary without FEC approval, as McCain has attempted to do, meaning that every day that McCain spends beyond the primary campaign limits of the public financing system -- which he has already exceeded -- he could be breaking federal law. President Bush withdrew Mason's pending renomination to the FEC in early May.
From the June 6 USA Today article:
In the interview, McCain continued to focus on what he called Obama's inexperience, describing him as a novice who believes in "big government" and "doesn't understand."
Americans "didn't find out about me yesterday," said McCain, who has been in the Senate for 21 years. "They're just getting to know Senator Obama," whom McCain noted was once named the most liberal senator by National Journal magazine.
[...]
- On campaign finance. McCain, whose campaign nearly unraveled last summer from money woes, said he has not decided whether to accept about $85 million in public financing for the fall campaign.
The senator, author of sweeping changes in 2002 to campaign finance laws aimed at limiting the influence of special interests, has improved his fundraising haul lately but lags far behind Obama, who has set records with his $265 million take so far. McCain has raised about $90 million.















wz,
A fair criticism of McCain.
AA,
No, he's not. Even the American Conservative Union doesn't think so.
"among the 99 votes Obama cast that contributed to National Journal's "most liberal senator" label -- in addition to the ethics office vote he named -- were those to implement the 9-11 Commission's homeland security recommendations, provide more children with health insurance, expand federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research, and maintain a federal minimum wage"
That liberal Bastid! Wanting things the majority of Americans support.
Julia,
There ya go basing liberals again by calling Obama a name. tsk. tsk.
That's as true a reason as any, why they use senseless vague ultimately meaningless generalizations to describe any Congressperson's voting record, rather than actually cite specific votes... because if they cite the votes, then they risk getting a substantial discussion going:
"so he voted that particular way on that particular legislation? gee, what's so bad about that?"
You better believe that's the last thing this "media" wants: a substantial discussion of any political issue at all, with details and specifics included.
Better to just play on voter's vague impressions and prejudices... better to keep away from details and specifics, and instead use meaningless generalizations in discussing political issues.
That right there pretty much describes the complete context in which we presently hear the word "liberal" used by the worthless "media"
provide more children with health insurance
SCHIP in its form presented for vote, was not what majority of Americans wanted. Sorry to burst your bubble.
Summary: USA Today uncritically reported that Sen. John McCain "noted" that Sen. Barack Obama "was once named the most liberal senator by National Journal magazine." But USA Today did not report that McCain himself "did not vote frequently enough" to receive a rating.
Aw come on...McCain would be rated the Most Maverick Senator of course!
Not showing up to vote makes him a rebel ;-)
Aw come on...McCain would be rated the Most Maverick Senator of course!
Not showing up to vote makes him a rebel ;-)
We've already established that Gramps McCain is a Ford Maverick:
NOW are you saying he's an AMC Rebel??? :-)
I'm thinking this is the most appropriate ride for Grampy in a few months.
I think its aweful funny that the corporate owned media thinks that by bringing up Obama's voting record as somehow the most liberal.... as if that's a bad thing.... will somehow stop people from voting for him!
Besides..... Bernie Sanders is the most liberal, by far!
Also, wasn't John Kerry the most liberal senator back in 2004?
Come to think of it.... wasn't Al Gore the most liberal politician in 2000?
Can;t the right-wing get their story straight?
I heard somewhere else Obama was a Muslim Marxist. How can he keep all these hats straight?
As to him being the "most liberal" ... I'm sure the National Journal cherry picked the votes they used to come up with the conclusion they were looking for. They fixed the facts around results they wanted. The NJ would be most useful birdcage liner.
I don't know of any conservative that 'hates' Obama.
Try listening to Mark Levin's radio pukefest for more than five minutes.
Good question, AA. Do you hear yourself?
Can we have one reality check, a side of sanity and a glass of reason.
You should meet my uncle.
He said "I ain't voting for no n****r who changes their name to Obama. Obama is not an American name."
He truly hates him (he's also from WV. Nothing against WV, but I think that's worth noting.)