It seems like common sense to refer to a presidential candidate’s prior record in an effort to see how that person may govern once in power. Obviously, one cannot know for sure, as circumstances change. Past experience may nevertheless inform and identify philosophical leanings, tendencies and one’s general modus operandi.
Accordingly, a qualitative as opposed to a quantitative examination of the candidates’ records should prove useful. Hilzoy, at Obsidian Wings, offers such an analysis in a well-researched series of posts on Clinton’s and Obama’s respective legislative records. As early as 24 Oct 2006, Hilzoy observes Obama’s MO of cooperation and conciliation. But more to the point, the candidate apparently knows “the way to a wonk’s heart” on a number of topics, including but not limited to: nuclear nonproliferation, avian flu, the regulation of genetic testing and reducing medical malpractice suits. Last week, Hilzoy listed the the bills and amendments that each candidate sponsored, along with those that they cosponsored. Please note not only the number of bills and amendments but also their significance.
Accordingly, a qualitative as opposed to a quantitative examination of the candidates’ records should prove useful. Hilzoy, at Obsidian Wings, offers such an analysis in a well-researched series of posts on Clinton’s and Obama’s respective legislative records. As early as 24 Oct 2006, Hilzoy observes Obama’s MO of cooperation and conciliation. But more to the point, the candidate apparently knows “the way to a wonk’s heart” on a number of topics, including but not limited to: nuclear nonproliferation, avian flu, the regulation of genetic testing and reducing medical malpractice suits. Last week, Hilzoy listed the the bills and amendments that each candidate sponsored, along with those that they cosponsored. Please note not only the number of bills and amendments but also their significance.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home