Don't get me wrong: there is nothing bad about being liberal. Hell, people like Krugman ought to be reminded of this whenever they act like HRC is more progressive than Barack.
But...isn't it convenient that in 2004 the Democratic nominee also happened to be ranked this way by the National Journal? And how there is no real logic to the assignment of "conservative" and "liberal" to the votes cast?
Steve at The Carpetbagger Report points out that:
Better yet, National Journal’s press release on the rankings noted the criteria was based on 99 key roll-call votes last year: “Obama voted the liberal position on 65 of the 66 votes in which he participated, while Clinton voted the liberal position on 77 of 82 votes.” So, Clinton voted for the liberal position 77 times, Obama voted for it 65 times, which makes Obama the chamber’s single most liberal member. Got it.More from Steve Benen here and here.
