I'm not in favor of it myself but that page is hardly a sound reference weighing the pros and cons of the bill. Lets look at some of the names of their "guides"

Summary of Energy Industry Giveaways in the Energy Bill

May the Best Lobbyist Win

Drilling for Tax Credits: Runaway Coalbed Methane Development Doesn't Need a Tax Break

There are few other politicians in Washington I would trust actually weighed every part of a bill coming to a vote. Did it give (obviously) handouts to the Republican friendly industries? Of course. Did it have legitimate parts that lays groundwork for better regulations down the road? Probably.

Few, if any, face the same dread finality of decision that confronts a Senator facing an important call of the roll. He may want more time for his decision—he may believe there is something to be said for both sides—he may feel that a slight amendment could remove all difficulties—but when that roll is called he cannot hide, he cannot equivocate, he cannot delay—and he senses that his constituency, like the Raven in Poe’s poem, is perched there on his Senate desk, croaking “Nevermore” as he casts the vote that stakes his political future.

- John F. Kennedy

Posted at April 10, 2008 3:35 PM in response to New Obama Ad In Pennsylvania Attacks Hillary Ad That Attacked Obama Ad

But most of the time, legislation is a murky brew, the product of one hundred compromises large and small, a blend of legitimate policy aims, political grandstanding, jerry-rigged regulatory schemes, and old-fashioned pork barrels. Often, as I read through the bills coming to the floor my first few months in the Senate, I was confronted with the fact that the principled thing was less clear than I had originally thought; that either an aye vote or a nay vote would leave me with some trace of remorse. Should I vote for an energy bill that includes my provision to boost alternative fuel production and improves the status quo, but that’s wholly inadequate to the task of lessening America’s dependence on foreign oil? Should I vote against a change in the Clean Air Act that will weaken regulations in some areas but strengthen regulation in others, and create a more predictable system for corporate compliance? What if the bill increases pollution but funds clean coal technology that may bring jobs to an impoverished part of Illinois?

- Audacity of Hope

Posted at April 10, 2008 2:48 PM in response to New Obama Ad In Pennsylvania Attacks Hillary Ad That Attacked Obama Ad

I like how she tries to slip in that Iowa/NH/NV moved their dates without mentioning that THEY moved because FL and MI were trying to move.

Iowa/NH/NV petitioned the DNC commitee for waivers that allowed them to move their dates and the waivers were approved.

It's a half truth but damn does it sound juicy to anybody not paying FULL attention.

Posted at March 17, 2008 6:30 PM in response to Breaking: Florida Will Not Hold Revote

I like how she tries to slip in that Iowa/NH/NV moved their dates without mentioning that THEY moved because FL and MI were trying to move.

Iowa/NH/NV petitioned the DNC commitee for waivers that allowed them to move their dates and the waivers were approved.

It's a half truth but damn does it sound juicy to anybody not paying FULL attention.

Posted at March 17, 2008 6:30 PM in response to Breaking: Florida Will Not Hold Revote

Every politician has their good sides. It's a shame our current political environment demands hostility and animosity to "the other side" in all cases. Either or. For or against.

Posted at February 29, 2008 4:02 PM in response to Sen. Jay Rockefeller Endorses Obama

From: http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=799

He’s now the 15th US Senate Democrat to endorse Obama, who started out the year with exactly one endorsement (that of his Illinois colleague Dick Durbin) and now has more support from the chamber than Clinton (who has the backing of 12 Senate Democrats).

Posted at February 29, 2008 3:23 PM in response to Sen. Jay Rockefeller Endorses Obama

I haven't seen one yet and I see NO reason why he'd run them against mccain. He will laughingly swat them away from mccain better than he can against Hillary.

Posted at February 29, 2008 12:15 PM in response to Obama Responds: I Will Never Use "Threat Of Terrorism To Scare Up Votes"

And if that happens they just bring up how the Clinton campaign trusted Drudge enough to give him info in the past. "Oh NOW it's an untrustworthy news source?"

Course, maybe their saving their reply with a live Hillary press conference fueled by fury.

That went over good last time.

Posted at February 25, 2008 10:51 AM in response to Obama Camp Hits Hillary Over Drudge Story

I'm surprised at how easily they can get away with saying certain caucus' are so unfair. Especially with the excuse that low turnout in the past hurts them now.

Yah that's the flip-side of a 50 state strategy. When people in state feel their vote doesn't matter, they dont vote. Then along comes an instance where their vote is crucial but the numbers get messed up because nobody voted before.

Saying this is unfair for elections is pretty damned ironic.

Posted at February 18, 2008 9:48 AM in response to Hillary Camp Only Recently Learned About Texas Delegate Rules

Slight crossover from the election side, with Feingold having a hard time trying to decide between Clinton and Obama, this does her no favors.

Posted at February 12, 2008 12:08 PM in response to Senate Votes to Give Retroactive Immunity for Telecoms