First, the US Senate:

 

Shleby (R-AL)

Sessions (R-AL)

Begich (D-AK)

Murkowski (R-AK)

McCain (R-AZ)

Kyl (R-AZ)

Prior (D-AR)

Lincoln (D-AR)

Feinstein (D-CA)

Boxer (D-CA)

Udall (D-CO)

Bennett (D-CO)

Dodd (D-CT)

Lieberman (I-CT)

Carper (D-DE)

Kaufman (D-DE)

Nelson (D-FL)

LeMieux (R-FL)

Chambliss (R-GA)

Isakson (R-GA)

Inuoye (D-HI)

Akaka (D-HI)

Crapo (R-ID)

Risch (R-ID)

Durbin (D-IL)

Burris (D-IL)

Lugar (R-IN)

Bayh (D-IN)

Grassley (R-IA)

Harkin (D-IA)

Brownback (R-KS)

Roberts (R-KS)

McConnell (R-KY)

Bunning (R-KY)

Landrieu (D-LA)

Vitter (R-LA)

Snowe (R-ME)

Collins (R-ME)

Mikulski (D-MD)

Cardin (D-MD)

Kerry (D-MA)

Kirk (D-MA)

Levin (D-MI)

Stabenow (D-MI)

Klobuchar (D-MN)

Franken (D-MN)

Cochran (R-MS)

Wicker (R-MS)

McCaskill (D-MO)

Bond (R-MO)

Baucus (D-MT)

Tester (D-MT)

Nelson (D-NE)

Johanns (R-NE)

Reid (D-NV)

Ensign (R-NV)

Gregg (R-NH)

Shaheen (D-NH)

Menendez (D-NJ)

Lautenberg (D-NJ)

Udall (D-NM)

Bingamen (D-NM)

Schumer (D-NY)

Gillibrand (D-NY)

Hagan (D-NC)

Burr (R-NC)

Conrad (D-ND)

Dorgan (D-ND)

Voinovich (R-OH)

Brown (D-OH)

Inhofe (R-OK)

Coburn (R-OK)

Wyden (D-OR)

Merkely (D-OR)

Specter (D-PA)

Casey (D-PA)

Reed (D-RI)

Whitehouse (D-RI)

Graham (R-SC)

DeMint (R-SC)

Johnson (D-SD)

Thune (R-SD)

Alexander (R-TN)

Corker (R-TN)

Cornyn (R-TX)

Hutchison (R-TX)

Hatch (R-UT)

Bennett (R-UT)

Leahy (D-VT)

Sanders (I-VT)

Webb (D-VA)

Warner (D-VA)

Murray (D-WA)

Cantwell (D-WA)

Byrd (D-WV)

Rockefeller (D-WV)

Fiengold (D-WI)

Kohl (D-WI)

Enzi (R-WY)

Barrasso (R-WY)

 

Next, the catagories:

 

Very Good:

 

Good:

 

Adequate/Average:

 

Bad:

 

Very Bad:

 

So let's mix and match each, have justification and avoid making judgments based on ideology. The criteria are pretty much how well they represent their constituency, the ethics of their tactics and the general character of themselves and their legislation. Obviously you should feel free to dispute what others say if you disagree with them, but answers such as "all are very bad/very good" are generally unacceptable.

Just a couple off the top of my head.

 

Very Good:

Lugar (R-IN)

Fiengold (D-WI)

McCain (R-AZ)

Bond (R-MO)

Feinstein (D-CA)

Durbin (D-IL)

Baucus (D-MT)

 

Good:

Hatch (R-UT)

Graham (R-SC)

Sanders (I-VT)

Snowe (R-ME)

McCaskill (D-MO)

 

Adequate/Average:

Franken (D-MN)

Chambliss (R-GA)

 

Bad:

Dodd (D-CT)

Coburn (R-OK)

Reid (D-NV)

 

Very Bad:

Ensign (R-NV)

Specter (D-PA)

Landrieu (D-LA)

Inhofe (R-OK)

I like Durbin and I'd put him in "good." Dick Lugar is excellent.

 

Taking politics out of the equation and going on straight honesty, Feingold is about as honest a guy as you can get. I don't know where that puts him.

 

I hate Inhofe and Coburn with a passion and I'd be pretty embarrassed if I lived in OK. They are both, umm, how do I put this nicely... complete f***ing idiots.

I don't disagree with that early list very much (posted while I was writing mine)

Yeah McCain was awesome with his flip flop on torture.

I'd probably move Sanders and Graham into Very Good then move Bond down to good now that I look at it.

Mikulski is pretty solid for MD, she has a lot of seniority, and I'd say "good." Cardin is kind of anonymous IMO but not necessarily bad.

Why avoid judgments based on ideology?

Edited December 16, 200916 yr by JorgeFabregas

Yeah McCain was awesome with his flip flop on torture.

Eh McCain's got a long career behind him before doing that, and I wouldn't say it was a flip flop so much as a convenient sellout, which they all do out of necessity at some point or another. The 2008 McCain was a pretty bizarre thing to watch though, it was pretty much totally separate from his Senate career.

I'm not holding anything McCain did in the presidential election or leading up to it against him.

Why avoid judgments based on ideology?

Creates an impasse and a worthless discussion

Eh McCain's got a long career behind him before doing that, and I wouldn't say it was a flip flop so much as a convenient sellout, which they all do out of necessity at some point or another. The 2008 McCain was a pretty bizarre thing to watch though, it was pretty much totally separate from his Senate career.

As you also recently read in Greenwald's book, the torture stuff is something he voted on as a Senator.

Why avoid judgments based on ideology?

Trying to keep it subjective from a partisan POV. Unless somebody is like, pro killing gays or something absolutely nuts, its kind of irrelevant as to how well they do their jobs.

Evan Bayh is an arrogant, dismissive dick. I can say that on a 100% personal basis, and nothing to do with idiology.

As you also recently read in Greenwald's book, the torture stuff is something he voted on as a Senator.

I can't remember exactly how Greenwald framed it, but it was something along the lines of how he ended up voting on a measure that was so watered-down that it was worthless but he still claimed he was against torture and nobody called him on it. He got away with being able to claim several things actually.

I like Durbin and I'd put him in "good." Dick Lugar is excellent.

 

Taking politics out of the equation and going on straight honesty, Feingold is about as honest a guy as you can get. I don't know where that puts him.

 

I hate Inhofe and Coburn with a passion and I'd be pretty embarrassed if I lived in OK. They are both, umm, how do I put this nicely... complete f***ing idiots.

 

 

Don't tell Coburn's patients that. After several thousand successful baby deliveries, I would think Idiot is a bit harsh, no.

 

And giving Franken anything but incomplete is moot.

Does anybody disagree with Lugar and Fiengold as the two best senators in the US?

Don't tell Coburn's patients that. After several thousand successful baby deliveries, I would think Idiot is a bit harsh, no.

 

And giving Franken anything but incomplete is moot.

This is about Coburn (R-OK) not Dr. Coburn.

 

Franken has actually been pretty consistent and respectful so far, nothing great and nothing bad.

Don't tell Coburn's patients that. After several thousand successful baby deliveries, I would think Idiot is a bit harsh, no.

 

And giving Franken anything but incomplete is moot.

That's kind of irrelevant to his career in the Senate, but I'm going solely off the asinine statements he makes all the time. Maybe he does that on purpose, I don't know.

That's kind of irrelevant to his career in the Senate, but I'm going solely off the asinine statements he makes all the time. Maybe he does that on purpose, I don't know.

 

Whats worse, an actual stupid person, or a smart person who tries to act incredibly stupid and hoaky to fit in with his voters. (Grassley/Cobourne, I'm looking at you)

 

Lieberman appears to be actually stupid.

 

edit: also, both missouri senators are terrible. That state is not capable of producing a thoughtful senator, and house members are rare.

 

Insane that truman came from that state.

Edited December 16, 200916 yr by bmags

I don't know how you can do this without bringing up ideology.

 

Take Lugar for example. I like some of the stuff he's done, but I wouldn't rate him very high because of his stance on gay rights and him being a member of the Family.

 

Someone else may see those things as positives.

Durbin!? Very good?!

 

And I think they're all bums for the record. Not a one does anything for their state, it's all for them and their campaign war chests.

Edited December 16, 200916 yr by Jenksismybitch

Very Good

Feingold - WI

Tester - MT

 

Good

Lugar - IN

Boxer - CA

Gilibrand - NY

Burris - IL (Based on his performance as a lame duck Senator ONLY)

Brown - OH

Graham - SC

Franken - MN (and rising)

Sanders - VT

 

Average

Menendez - NJ

Lautenberg - NJ

McCain - AZ

Harkin - IA

Schumer - NY

Dodd - CT

Specter - PA (and rising)

Rockefeller - WV

Kerry - MA

Hatch - UT (and falling)

 

Bad

Reid - NV

Murkowski - AK

Kyl - AK

Lincoln - AR

Carper - DE

Byrd - WV

Bunning - KY

Vitter - LA

Nelson - NE

Baucus - MT

Bayh - IN

 

Horrible

Lieberman - CT

Chambliss - GA

Coburn - OK

Thune - SD

 

 

Whats worse, an actual stupid person, or a smart person who tries to act incredibly stupid and hoaky to fit in with his voters. (Grassley/Cobourne, I'm looking at you)

 

Lieberman appears to be actually stupid.

 

edit: also, both missouri senators are terrible. That state is not capable of producing a thoughtful senator, and house members are rare.

 

Insane that truman came from that state.

I used to like McCaskill, but she proving herself more and more to not be what I thought she was. Bond says some dumb things, but he's a pretty alright guy.