New Obama chain mail being circulated

Well, I think we're all pretty familiar with most of the Obama chain mails being circulated.  I got an interesting new one today, though:

Subject: The hard statistics (senate voting record of Clinton and Obama)

From one of those talkback comments to an article on the Hillary and Obama race:

**************************
There are many things that Obama and Clinton have in common, and a few where they differ (in my opinion, mostly in the categories of diplomacy, rhetorical skill, and personal appeal). However, if we must stretch so far for differences that we paint Senator Clinton as an emotional (read manipulative) campaigner, let's just have a look at her voting record and look at Senator Obama's as well:

"Senator Clinton, who has served only one full term (6yrs.), and another year campaigning, has managed to author and pass into law, (20) twenty pieces of legislation in her first six years.

These bills can be found on the website of the Library of Congress (www.thomas.loc.gov), but to save you trouble, I'll post them here for you.

1. Establish the Kate Mullany National Historic Site.

2. Support the goals and ideals of Better Hearing and Speech Month.

3. Recognize the Ellis Island Medal of Hon

4. Name courthouse after Thurgood Marshall.

5. Name courthouse after James L. Watson.

6. Name post office after Jonn A. O'Shea.

7. Designate Aug. 7, 2003, as National Purple Heart Recognition Day.

8. Support the goals and ideals of National Purple Heart Recognition Day.

9. Honor the life and legacy of Alexander Hamilton on the bicentennial of his death.

10. Congratulate the Syracuse Univ. Orange Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship.

11. Congratulate the Le Moyne College Dolphins Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship.

12. Establish the 225th Anniversary of the American Revolution Commemorative Program.

13. Name post office after Sergeant Riayan A. Tejeda.

14. Honor Shirley Chisholm for her service to the nation and express condolences on her death.

15. Honor John J. Downing, Brian Fahey, and Harry Ford, firefighters who lost their lives on duty.

Only five of Clinton 's bills are more substantive:

16. Extend period of unemployment assistance to victims of 9/11.

17. Pay for city projects in response to 9/11

18. Assist landmine victims in other countries.

19. Assist family caregivers in accessing affordable respite care.

20. Designate part of the National Forest System in Puerto Rico as protected in the wilderness preservation system.

There you have it: the facts straight from the Senate Record.

Now, I would post those of Obama's, but the list is too substantive, so I'll mainly categorize.

During the first (8) eight years of his elected service he sponsored over 820 bills. He introduced:

233 regarding healthcare reform,
125 on poverty and public assistance,
112 crime fighting bills,
97 economic bills,
60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills,
21 ethics reform bills,
15 gun control,
6 veterans affairs and many others.

His first year in the U.S. Senate, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored another 427. These inculded:

**the Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 (became law),
**The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act, (became law),
**The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, passed the Senate,
**The 2007 Government Ethics Bill, (became law),
**The Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill, (In committee), and many more."

So, what did you do with your experience?

•  Tips for experience used well.

  by Sean Robertson on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:12:36 AM PDT

  •  By calling it "chain mail", it sounded like

    something evil, either pro-Obama evil or anti-Obama evil.

    But I read it as a perfectly ok comparison of their records (assuming it's true, of course).

    Is there a problem with it?

    by mnicholson0220 on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:21:26 AM PDT

    •  yeah

      the problem is it compares legislation she authored and passed into law with everything in the world he even co-sponsored, both in the state legislature and the Senate, regardless of whether he either played a part in authoring it or whether it passed into law.

      by jrooth on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:25:19 AM PDT

      •  Ah, ok. NOT a good thing. Thanks.

        by mnicholson0220 on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:29:59 AM PDT

        •  why I said "hell no", even as a Obama supporter

          n/t

          by billlaurelMD on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:42:14 AM PDT

      •  Here is some Info on the US senate

        work of Clinton vs Obama:

        Hillary Clinton
        (in 6 years + 1 year campaigning)

        Bill Sponsorship & Cosponsorship

        Statistics: Hillary Clinton has sponsored 354 bills since Jan 22, 2001, of which 307 haven't made it out of committee (Extremely Poor) and 2 were successfully enacted (Average, relative to peers). Clinton has co-sponsored 1723 bills during the same time period (Average, relative to peers).

        Those two enacted bills are (from Poblano) :

        S.1241 (108th Congress)
        Title: A bill to establish the Kate Mullany National Historic Site in the State of New York, and for other purposes.

        S.3613 (109th Congress)
        Title: A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 2951 New York Highway 43 in Averill Park, New York, as the "Major George Quamo Post Office Building".

        Barack Obama
        (in 2 years + 1 year campaigning)

        Bill Sponsorship & Cosponsorship

        Statistics: Barack Obama has sponsored 129 bills since Jan 4, 2005, of which 120 haven't made it out of committee (Poor) and 1 were successfully enacted (Average, relative to peers). Obama has co-sponsored 545 bills during the same time period (Average, relative to peers).

        His enacted bill is:

        S.2125 : A bill to promote relief, security, and democracy in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
        Sponsor: Sen Obama, Barack

        Now, these two other bills mentioned in the current diary:

        2. the Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 (became law),

        3. The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act, (became law),

        are real, and Obama seems to have contributed heavily to them, but since they didn't appear in govtrack.us (and that site is very credible), he was probably a co-author, but the bills probably had only one main author (Coburn and Lugar, resp) listed in the system.

        ~~

        Obama's IL Senate record:

        The list given here (and seen elsewhere) seems to be what he sponsored probably at least a co-author of, not just a co-sponsor (co-sponsor can just call up sign on to a bill at least in the US Senate from what I gather. co-author is someone that writes portions of the bill):

        233 regarding healthcare reform,
        125 on poverty and public assistance,
        112 crime fighting bills,
        97 economic bills,
        60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills,
        21 ethics reform bills,
        15 gun control,
        6 veterans affairs and many others.

        What would be helpful is to know how many of these bills were passed into law in IL.

        That's what I know.

        by NeuvoLiberal on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 11:09:57 AM PDT

        •  Poblano's diary:

          Hillary Clinton, Empty Pantsuit: Her Track Record from the Senate is a good read for further exploration.

          by NeuvoLiberal on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 11:12:30 AM PDT

        •  TennesseeGurl's post

          below validates the IL senate record above by linking to this useful NYTimes post.

          by NeuvoLiberal on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 11:24:36 AM PDT

        •  Additional note

          Obama has served only in a Democratic-controlled (well, sort of) Senate.  I would expect that the fact that Clinton's first four years were in a Republican-controlled Senate may account for her poorer record of getting bills out of committee.

          In any event, neither Clinton nor Obama has a stellar record, if the measure is sponsorship of enacted bills.

          by Old Left Good Left on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 11:51:31 AM PDT

          •  Well, 2005-2006 was Republican controlled

            Obama and Clinton both shared Dem-controlled 2007.

            Obama's bills (Congo relief and Obama-Coburn) seem to have come from 2005-2006. Not sure about Lugar-Obama.

            Obama's US senate isn't all that bad: 3 substantive bills we can account for. His IL senate record seems to be actually quite strong:
            
            from NYT's larger image

            by NeuvoLiberal on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 12:14:23 PM PDT

•  No I wouldn't

  I am an Obama supporter and I do feel that his experience is underrated and hers overrated, but this email is deceptive, because it doesn't compare apples with apples and oranges with oranges.  I compares what Clinton has passed to what Obama has written.

  If there was a fairer version of this, I might consider.

  by Meng Bomin on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:15:25 AM PDT

  •  Was thinking the same thing

    It doesn't specify what he himself authored, and of that, what was passed. It's easy to say what someone cosponsored, just about any senator will have a long list for that.

    by Hannibal on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:17:22 AM PDT

  •  Slimy!

    I didn't catch that. Good catch.

    by Practical Progressive on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:17:31 AM PDT

  •  Great point

    I am a Clinton supporter and I do feel that her experience is overrated and his underrated, and I couldn't agree more about your point.  Apples to oranges.

    by LiberalVirginian on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:20:57 AM PDT

  •  Not even just what he has written

    but it just says "sponsored."  I wouldn't be surprised if it includes all the bills he co-sponsored.

    by fbihop on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:23:00 AM PDT

    •  I feel quite safe in saying

      no sitting Senator ever writes his or her own legislation. Shoot, we're really lucky if they even read their own legislation.

      by elmo on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:52:11 AM PDT

      •  Thats so true.. The COS and the rest of the staff

        read and write bills for some not all legislators. The disconnect with some of the legislators is quite scary.

        by TennesseeGurl on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 11:02:22 AM PDT

•  can we get Factcheck.org on this? n/t

  by AnnArborBlue on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:15:37 AM PDT

  •  It's unfair

    I've been poking at thomas.loc.gov myself and I only got 116 hits on Obama while I got 150 on Clinton. I figured out that it only reports on the current Congress. Hillary's items in the email seems to only be this year while Obama's may be his entire US Senate tenure + his Illinois tenure. If you note the wording:

    "During the first (8) eight years of his elected service "

    I think Hillary is seriously under-reported and I think Obama is being presented in a deceptive manner.

    by johnsonwax on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:29:15 AM PDT

    •  that would explain why it didn't look right to me

      if it was just this current term for Hillary.

      also, "Pay for city projects in response to 9/11" seems rather, um, vague. . . .

      by nycstray on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:50:45 AM PDT

•  Thank you

  for once and for all (I hope) crushing the experience advantage myth of HRC.  

  by Mas Gaviota on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:15:55 AM PDT

  •  it is called critical thinking...

    use it!

    by idealistlefty on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:17:39 AM PDT

    •  Does "critical thinking"...

      ...include determining whether the two lists of bills are comparable?  Where is the list of bills that Clinton authored/sponsored that weren't passed?  Where's the list of bills that Obama authored/sponsored that were passed?

      This e-mail is completely misleading, and is the kind of slimy tactic that I'm sure Senator Obama would want to disassociate his campaign from. I wouldn't forward it because it reflects badly on Obama's candidacy.

      by Bill W on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:23:35 AM PDT

      •  that was what I was implying...

        I'm not good at snark I think ;-)

        by idealistlefty on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:31:26 AM PDT

•  I don't know,

  I think it's important that a president support the goals and ideals of Better Hearing and Speech Month. And experience in naming things comes in handy too. Who needs 233 regarding healthcare reform, 125 on poverty and public assistance, 112 crime fighting bills, 97 economic bills, 60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills, 21 ethics reform bills, 15 gun control, 6 veterans affairs and many others. Superfluous I say!

  by psilocynic on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:18:52 AM PDT

•  I'm deluded

  I thought you meant there were some new Obama chainmail hauberks for a new Peter Jackson movie or something.

  by Jeffersonian Democrat on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:19:14 AM PDT

•  I don't think I'd ever forward

  an unsourced email. Not even to my cat.

  by decembersue on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:20:54 AM PDT

•  Forward it, alright!

  Forward it to [e-mail] -- the campaign's official defense against smear chain letters.  We'll be curious to know what you hear!

  by EliWho on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:21:04 AM PDT

•  feh

  Like most chain mails, this is deceptive bullshit.  Whoever authored this is doing Obama a disservice.

  by jrooth on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:22:29 AM PDT

•  This has been all over the blogs on the WI...

  newspapers for the past couple days.

  by glendaleguy2007 on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:23:23 AM PDT

•  Flawed

  It only counts bills Hillary authorized AND passed, while it counts any bill Barack authored or cosponsored, regardless of whether it everp assed or even made it out of committee.

  by greatn on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:26:16 AM PDT

•  no more election spam please n/t

  by s choir on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:27:03 AM PDT

•  I agree with some others,

  The email does have an obvious bias from the start, and I could almost hear people arguing against portions of it as I was reading.   Outside of that, I think the information has the potential to make a  powerful statement against the argument that Senator Clinton is really wonky and is a workhorse in the Senate.  I don't discredit her work, and I think she has been a good Senator; I just don't think she deserves more credit than Obama for work done there. She's had more than twice as much time in the US Senate compared to Senator Obama, and a question people should ask (and demand an answer for) is "What did you do what that time?"

  Another thing I did find interesting is that the highest number of Obama's sponsored bills in IL were on Health Care.  I would love to see him get stronger on health care since it's often referred to as Clinton's signature issue.  

  by Punditcrat on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:27:23 AM PDT

  •  it shows potential

    but, as has been pointed out -- the bias seems most to suffer from an apparent methodological comparison

    i think if it was evened out a bit, it would be more effective (assuming that once done, it maintains a supportive argument from the diarists POV)

    i like the idea (mostly because whenever i hear the CW meme of change v experience i want to pull my teeth out with vice-grips) but creating a false comparative narrative isn't as convincing as a genuine comparison would be ...

    by josephk on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:32:56 AM PDT

    •  agreed

      I'll credit Clinton for pushing the fact that change and experience aren't mutually exclusive.  I think both candidates represent change (anything but Bush is a hugely positive step) so it seems like experience is what we should try to quantify more if we can.  If that email could be trimmed down to some actual "hard statistics" like the subject line promises, it would be worth forwarding, for people that do that forwarding type of thing.  I will admit, as far as these kind of forwarded emails go I've seen many worse attempts to get a positive point out there.  I appreciate the attempt, just needs some revisions.

      by Punditcrat on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 11:07:31 AM PDT

•  I'd forward it to snopes

  For useful debunking

  by chick ghandil on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:28:21 AM PDT

•  No I wouldn't

  People that make a habit of sending me chain-mails of any sort end up in my spam-filter pretty quickly.

  by Anglo on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:28:25 AM PDT

•  Does he salute the flag?

  Is he a closet Muslim?

  Does he hate America?

  Is he "Halfrican American?"

  Does his wife hate America?

  Did he copy his speech homework in High School?

  sick of this _____  am I.

  by 7November on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:28:50 AM PDT

  •  yeah, is this election over yet?

    I'm tired.

    by Punditcrat on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:30:09 AM PDT

    •  I think it's gwin fer tuh git werse n/t

      by 7November on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:33:50 AM PDT

•  I've seen this posted on serveral HRC-BHO

  related articles on MSM websites.  It seems like a variety of folks are cutting and pasting it into the comment blogs all over the place.

  With the internet now such a routine part of so many people's lives the action, I wonder if the center of gravity of this campaign will continue to decentralize to the supporters.

  Like vast diffuse mobs of trench warfare coming up with their own initiatives, launching their own campaign programs.

  This will give newfound power to many who are not accustomed to it. I hope our extended loose network of troops quickly learns the advantages of positive campaigning and the dangers of taking it owon their own to engage in negative campaigning on the presumption that their candidates formal campaigns would appreciate this.  

  It can be counterproductive.  I don't know enough about the facts to make any comment on this example, I am only speaking more generally.  

  We should promulgate the insight from non-violence resistence and advocating with discipline and restraint.  Even the Samarii warrior learns to minimize negative karma by focusing ones power on acheiving worthy positive goals while minimizing unintended side effects.

  I hope we all remember that those who live by the sword die by the sword.

  And what Gandhi suggested, "the means is the ends in the process of becoming."

  Meaning here we should all aspire to support our favorite candidates winning on their merits and avoid using Rovian smear tactis, deceptions, and trickery.

  One reason I have oppossed all GOP candidates since Lee Atwater started advising dirty tricks, it that they have adopted the ethos of might makes right and the ends justifies the means.

  But I do not what to exchange one set of GOP power abusing thugs for Dem power abusing thugs.

  If we pursue the tactics and methods ofto our "enemies" we risk becoming like them.

  Only if we remain true to our highest and most noble principals and aspirations even in the darkest corners can we hope to transform our political system for the better.

  by HoundDog on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:35:50 AM PDT

•  It really isn't fair.

  I'm an Obama supporter but i would not pass it along.

  Hilzoy at Obsidian Wings did a series of posts, very carefully researched, which compare Obama and Hillary on their legslative records.  Both have a lot of fluff--all legislators do post office namings and so on.

  As far as substance, both tried to get good legislationpassed.  I'd give Obama a slight edge because he worked onn the ethics reform.  Also the eightly Gitmo lawyers credit him with doinng the most ork on habeas corpus.

  I wish this chain letter was more fair because ther does need to be push back on Hillary's "emptysuit, no accomplishhments" slur.  Obama has a solid track record of wonky legislation particularly in the area of health care for the poor, ethics, prevention of voting fraud and voter surpression, and support for wounded soldiers.

  by wren on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:41:48 AM PDT

•  Hamilton

  favored empire over democracy or in todays terms (the elite rule).  The Senator from Illinois favors direct democracy. Go Wisconsin !

  by zenobia on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:42:20 AM PDT

•  Oh, come ON, people!

  I'm looking at the poll results, and right now 63% of respondents have voted "Absolutely!"

  I'm an Obama supporter.  I'm even a die-hard Obama supporter.  But I don't think that gives me a free pass to give up all semblance of analysis or critical thinking before passing on (dis)information.

  How could anyone look at the ******WILD****** discrepancies between the HRC numbers and the BHO numbers in that e-mail, and not think, "Hmmm.  I'd better check this out before forwarding it.  It looks fishy"?

  And if you do look at it more carefully, it becomes pretty obvious why the numbers are so different.  Not only are they not apples and oranges, they aren't even apples and asparagus.  More like apples and mammoths, or apples and stalactites.

  We are not supporting Obama effectively if we are sending tripe like this out into the cyberuniverse, where it takes on a life of its own and is impossible to retract.  I've already seen this e-mail a couple of times today on various sites, and I'm sure it has spread to thousands, hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of people right now.

  Do we really want tomorrow's headlines in all the MSM to be about how Obama's supporters are trying to defraud the voting public about the candidates' experience?

  Please, please, please.  So far Obama's campaign has been run head and shoulders above Clinton's in both competence and integrity.  Please let us "grassroots" folks not be the ones to change that.

  by NWTerriD on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:43:23 AM PDT

•  Is there a more honest comparison?

  I'd like to see the respective lists of authored, co-authored, and passed legislation by each.

  I'd like to see it broken down to just the U.S. Senate in terms of direct comparison, though I think a separate list of Obama's years in the state senate is worth putting up, again broken down to authored, co-authored, and passed.

  This one? Too obviously weak.

  That's the problem with chain e-mails. They look great on the surface, but don't stand up to scrutiny. The hope is that you'll read it once, get excited, and forward it to your entire address book before you even think about it.

  It's stale cheese doodles for a mass consumption short attention span society.

  Unfortunately, it works more often than it should.

  by BobzCat on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:45:25 AM PDT

  •  I would suggest

    that you go take a look at what Hilzoy at Obsidian Wing has painstakingly compiled.  It turns out that it's not as easy as it sounds to put together comparable lists as one might think.  

    Hilzoy has done a lot of work, but the information is still pretty limited at this point.  I think s/he would welcome assistance in making it more complete and comprehensive.

    by NWTerriD on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:52:11 AM PDT

    •  Thanks

      It really is a difficult comparison to make: bills get revised, altered, mutate, and what gets passed often bears little resemblance to what was originally authored. Others get written for a variety of reasons, some of which aren't to necessarily see them passed in the original form, but merely as a starting point.

      A better comparison would be the two senators' approach to the same issue, as reflected in the bills they author on similar matters. But even that would involve a lot of nuance.

      by BobzCat on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 11:08:32 AM PDT

  •  Too much work

    Easier and more fun to post very long-winded dairies overanalyzing fluffy little rumors.

    But not to worry, once this gets past the primaries, the more serious nonpartisan political activists will kick in and you'll finally get some meat.

    by Free Spirit on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 11:03:45 AM PDT

•  i dont forward emails except to DOJ

  when they are nefarious

  by TAPayne on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:52:17 AM PDT

•  I a very proud to see Obama supporters

  pointing out that this is complete BS.  Even as a Hillary supporter, I appreciate honesty.  Thank you.

  And to the diarist, do you realize you are making a fool of yourself?

  by dhonig on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:53:18 AM PDT

  •  See?

    We're really pretty good folks.  Feel free to join us!  :-)

    by NWTerriD on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:56:17 AM PDT

    •  I will

      after the convention.  Of course, who knows what "us" will look like by then?  I'm hoping it will turn into "we," WHOEVER wins the nomination.

      by dhonig on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 11:03:35 AM PDT

•  Shoot Straight

  This is what I mean!  More Fluff for Obama.  And as a New Yorker - housing??? 9/11???  Big, Big issues here.  And Im just curious - do you know the difference between a STATE and FEDERAL legislation - especially if the MAJORITY are of the opposing party?  My friend - be fair and play it right.

  List the truth and let is speak for itself.  

  by BronxBoy71 on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:53:34 AM PDT

  •  looking at her 9/11 statements here

    gives you an idea that she wasn't just sitting around naming things. i wonder if some of the $$$ mentioned in the statement falls into the pay for city projects re 911 notation in the email

    "http://www.senate.gov/~clinton/issues/911/

    by nycstray on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 11:04:07 AM PDT

•  The fair thing to do is link both records..

  This list what they sponsored by themselves.. It's much more extensive when you add the things they co-sponsored.. We can agree they are both great Senators..
  Obama's Senate Record-2007
  http://thomas.loc.gov/...

  2006
  http://thomas.loc.gov/...

  Obama's State Senate Record
  http://www.nytimes.com/...

  Clinton's Senate Record
  http://thomas.loc.gov/...

  2006
  http://thomas.loc.gov/...

  by TennesseeGurl on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 11:14:26 AM PDT

  •  here's a link that may help also

    http://clinton.senate.gov/...

    by nycstray on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 11:16:21 AM PDT

  •  nice post, TG.

    by NeuvoLiberal on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 11:23:01 AM PDT

•  Why would anyone forward any chain mail?

  Much less this one.. it's supposed to be funny I guess but it's really not.

  by Scoopster on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 12:00:43 PM PDT