Can somebody tell me anything about the Patrick Henry Think Tank

[LittleClarkie]

Near as I can tell it's a club with illusions of grandeur. It's based out of California, and at least one poster here quotes them as if they're God.

Are they more than just a club? Did I just make an ass of myself by saying to the above poster "Dude, they're a club. That's it"?

[JI7]

1. it doesn't matter how big it is

just like the nra, christian coalition, sierra club etc they come up with their own ratings system based on which bills they think are important and the vote they think is correct. it's subjective.

[LittleClarkie]

2. I know it's subjective. But the people who came up with it don't know that

It's been creeping me out that some point to that chart and say we need to get rid of the Senators that aren't measuring up to their standard. The problem is that MOST of the Senators have a negative rating according to that chart.

I guess it's just another part of the circular firing squad. But if these people are trying to sell themselves as something more important than they actually are, I'd like to know about it.

It just bothers me, is all. I hate for people to buy into this group as an authority if they're just another group of people like DFA with opinions no more or less special than the next group of 3-credit experts.

[JI7]

3. i think

the people who buy into these things and who start all these threads about how we have to get rid of this or that democrat have an agenda.

i think they are the type to just complain about things rather than work on trying to get something positive done.

so i don't take them seriously.

kind of like how one day senator x is a hero and senator y is a horrible sell out dlc pnac etc. by the next vote the situation is totally reversed.

[karynnj]

4. Strange ranking system

They are ranking the senators based on a grand total of 5 votes and penalizing every Democratic senator 10 points for unanimously agreeing not to filibuster Gonzales - essentially converting the Gonzales vote to be a -20 for all who voted to confirm and 0 for those who voted against him. (They only look at the Rice and chertoff, and Gonzales confirmation votes and the vote to certify the election and the class action law suit.)

Only 3 Senators are in positive territory, though some like Kennedy are at 0 - how do you take seriously a 0 rating for Kennedy?. The 3 that are positive are Boxer at 20, and Akaka and Kerry who are at 2.5. The latter 2 benefit from not being there to certify the vote. So they are penalized -7.5 for being "AWOL" - nice choice of words? Those who voted to certify the election were given -10.

So at the current time looking at the scores, only Boxer looks good. In fairness, it is February and any yearly score can not be looked at seriously - might be a good idea if they used a rolling 12 month score. At least at this point, the score card is being used only as a stick to hit the Senators with.

http://patrickhenrythinktank.org/sen-scores.html

[TayTay]

5. This seems like pretty small potatoes to me

http://patrickhenrythinktank.org/

It's a self-defining liberal club. They make up the rules to fit what they want. (Kennedy a zero? I don't think so.) They use whatever they deem as a litmus test and rate accordingly. (Hey, Kerry voted 4 times against the Class Action Lawsuit Denial law. Therefore he should get +30 more points. So should Teddy K.)

Oh well, at least my esteemed Junior Senator is on the plus side for once.

[LittleClarkie]

7. That's what bugged me

last night. One of the posters who quotes from these guys all the time called another poster, who was only quoting from the bill in question, a Republican. This club's analysis if a bill is no more valid than anyone else's, and any resolution they pass is just puffery in my eyes. That would be fine and their business if they didn't wield it as a weapon against senators and posters. Going after Senators is one thing, but going after another poster with information from a site that appears to be, as you say, small potatoes, is quite another.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch...

Is there really a Patriot III, by the way? Is HR 418 really all that scary?

[paulk]

6. it is not possible to make an ass of yourself

when responding to the poster you are referring to.

;-)

[LittleClarkie]

8. Thanks.

Much obliged.