Wow Jeff, I guess these other groups were not quite as "proud" of Cabana Boy's record:

Doug Ose’s liberal ratings from conservative organizations:
Lifetime D+ from the National Rifle Association
Lifetime F from the Gun Owners of America
Lifetime 32% from the National Right to Life Committee
Lifetime 55% from the Campaign for Working Families
Lifetime 55% from the Family Research Council
Lifetime 78% from the American Conservative Union
Lifetime 58% from the National Taxpayers Union
Lifetime 48% from the Eagle Forum
Lifetime 52% from the Republican Liberty Caucus
Lifetime 62% from Citizens Against Government Waste
Lifetime 55% from the Federation for Immigration Reform
Lifetime C from Americans for Better Immigration

Senator McClintock has received 95% to 100% ratings from all the similar California organizations for his ENTIRE 22 years of service.

John

Poor, Angry John. Hanging out with Ken, Tom, and Pizza boy is making you quite bitter.

Feel free to show everyone the actual votes from the score cards and you'll notice they have nothing to do with the issues these groups proport to represent. I've noticed your campaign hasn't shown any votes, but rather scorecards. Let's say NTU - they like to oppose logging in Alaska. Would Tom support or oppose that position?

Whoever you are:

We all have some problems with how ratings are done, but it is a much better way to see a member's record than to trust them to cherry pick a few good votes to prove whatever point they want to make

What you are saying here is that ALL of these groups are mistaken and that Ose is the real conservative. THat is going to be a very hard sell to the savy voters of the 4th CD.

John

Actually - I note you don't say what these organizations say this rating means.

For example: 58% from NTU is around a B or B-. Why? Because if you vote to spend money on the military or the war, they count that as a vote for spending. That's why they admit that no-one scores 100% EVER and that most Republicans score in the 50-60's while most Dems score under 20%. In other words, Ose is 3 times more conservative than Charlie Brown would be.

And as the anonymous poster noted, some of these votes are just unreal. For example, one immigration vote the anti-Ose people cite is a vote they wanted to oppose a treaty that had not even been signed yet, where the GOP leadership opposed the amendment to ban a treaty not yet signed, that the President opposed the vote, and that CA business opposed the vote as without this eventual treaty they would have had to pay BOTH Mexican and US social security taxes. So a vote not to double tax Californians was seen as pro-immigration? Had he voted the other way, he would have gotten a worse score from NTU.

See - you can't please everyone. That's why you need someone who can work with a variety of people to get things done. That's the only way you will truly make a difference in Congress. We need a worker, not a grandstander.

Well, the NTU just came out and endorsed Senator McClintock, so I guess that ends that part of the debate.

The Hayworth amendment WAS about stopping the practice of giving Social Security benefits to illegals!

John

The Hayworth Amendment WAS about scoring political points less than two months before an election on an issue without merit that had downsides no matter how a member voted. Fortunately for Doolittle nobody made a big deal at the time of his "yes" vote even though it would have raised taxes on Americans. That's because the guys who were for Doolittle and increases in taxes then are now against Ose but still for an increase in taxes now.

Wow, that's confusing! Face it, John. Your social security / immigrant point is a huge loser.

No Bob, actually it is a BIG winner... It would only be a big loser if it was not true!

John

Jeff - you need to register this post as an in-kind expenditure!

Aaron,

Careful what you say here, that might just be covered by the campaign finance law that Cabana Boy voted for and then I would have to report my time as well, and I am worth a lot more that Jeff! :)