Shame. Double Shame.

I’m a big believer that voters need as much information as possible to make informed decisions about a person or an issue. Considering what happened in Montana’s June 3 primary, we might want to have photos by the candidate’s name on the ballot to help the voters make informed decisions, too.

The more information we can read about a candidate that is not tainted one way or the other the better. That’s the reason the non-partisan organization, Project Vote Smart, is important. Plus, the organization is based in Philipsburg, Montana, right here in our own backyard.

Unfortunately many candidates don’t participate in the Project Vote Smart’s Political Courage Test.

On June 5 in a post about the Political Courage Test, I wrote, “Shame on any candidate who does not complete the survey.”

A few days later, Project Vote Smart kicked Republican Presidential candidate John McCain off their board for failing to complete the 2008 Political Courage Test.

So, shame on you, John McCain, for not taking the 2008 Political Courage Test.

McCain is not alone. Although he completed the Political Courage Test in 2004, he is far ahead of Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama who also has failed to complete the 2008 Political Courage Test. Obama last completed the test in 1998 when he was running for the Illinois State Legislature.

So, double shame on you, Barack Obama, for not taking the 2008 Political Courage Test.

According the Project Vote Smart, in 2006 just 48% of the candidates participated in the Political Courage Test. By the way, U.S. Senate candidate Jon Tester refused to let us know where he stood on the issues in 2006. So far, Governor Brian Schweitzer has failed to complete the Political Courage Test for 2008, but his opponent, State Senator Roy Brown, has completed it. Good for Roy Brown. I applaud him for his openness.

We have a right to know where all the candidates stand on the major issues facing our country. If a candidate is secure in his/her beliefs, this test should be very easy for them to complete, and they should complete it for the voters.

2 thoughts on “Shame. Double Shame.

  1. You are correct James. Most people believe everything they read and don’t check to see who is putting out the information.

  2. “The more information we can read about a candidate that is not tainted one way or the other the better.”I agree with you 100% Jack. Good post.Unfortunately, I believe <>most<> folks couldn’t be bothered with checking such web sites and currently rely on their local morning read and Yahoo/MSN/AOL portals for such “non-biased” info.

Comments are closed.