E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSIndiana Treasurer Richard Mourdock breaks down his defeat of six-term Sen. Dick Lugar, R-Ind.
An epic good-bye letter, passed along by NBC's Libby Leist, from Sen. Richard Lugar, dissecting everything he sees that's wrong with Washington and both parties:
Prepared Statement of Senator Richard G. Lugar on the Concluded Indiana Senate Primary
May 8, 2012
I would like to comment on the Senate race just concluded and the direction of American politics and the Republican Party. I would reiterate from my earlier statement that I have no regrets about choosing to run for office. My health is excellent, I believe that I have been a very effective Senator for Hoosiers and for the country, and I know that the next six years would have been a time of great achievement. Further, I believed that vital national priorities, including job creation, deficit reduction, energy security, agriculture reform, and the Nunn-Lugar program, would benefit from my continued service as a Senator. These goals were worth the risk of an electoral defeat and the costs of a hard campaign.
Analysts will speculate about whether our campaign strategies were wise. Much of this will be based on conjecture by pundits who don't fully appreciate the choices we had to make based on resource limits, polling data, and other factors. They also will speculate whether we were guilty of overconfidence.
The truth is that the headwinds in this race were abundantly apparent long before Richard Mourdock announced his candidacy. One does not highlight such headwinds publically when one is waging a campaign. But I knew that I would face an extremely strong anti-incumbent mood following a recession. I knew that my work with then-Senator Barack Obama would be used against me, even if our relationship were overhyped. I also knew from the races in 2010 that I was a likely target of Club for Growth, FreedomWorks and other Super Pacs dedicated to defeating at least one Republican as a purification exercise to enhance their influence over other Republican legislators.
We undertook this campaign soberly and we worked very hard in 2010, 2011, and 2012 to overcome these challenges. There never was a moment when my campaign took anything for granted. This is why we put so much effort into our get out the vote operations.
Ultimately, the re-election of an incumbent to Congress usually comes down to whether voters agree with the positions the incumbent has taken. I knew that I had cast recent votes that would be unpopular with some Republicans and that would be targeted by outside groups.
These included my votes for the TARP program, for government support of the auto industry, for the START Treaty, and for the confirmations of Justices Sotomayor and Kagan. I also advanced several propositions that were considered heretical by some, including the thought that Congressional earmarks saved no money and turned spending power over to unelected bureaucrats and that the country should explore options for immigration reform.
It was apparent that these positions would be attacked in a Republican primary. But I believe that they were the right votes for the country, and I stand by them without regrets, as I have throughout the campaign.
From time to time during the last two years I heard from well-meaning individuals who suggested that I ought to consider running as an independent. My response was always the same: I am a Republican now and always have been. I have no desire to run as anything else. All my life, I have believed in the Republican principles of small government, low taxes, a strong national defense, free enterprise, and trade expansion. According to Congressional Quarterly vote studies, I supported President Reagan more often than any other Senator. I want to see a Republican elected President, and I want to see a Republican majority in the Congress. I hope my opponent wins in November to help give my friend Mitch McConnell a majority.
If Mr. Mourdock is elected, I want him to be a good Senator. But that will require him to revise his stated goal of bringing more partisanship to Washington. He and I share many positions, but his embrace of an unrelenting partisan mindset is irreconcilable with my philosophy of governance and my experience of what brings results for Hoosiers in the Senate. In effect, what he has promised in this campaign is reflexive votes for a rejectionist orthodoxy and rigid opposition to the actions and proposals of the other party. His answer to the inevitable roadblocks he will encounter in Congress is merely to campaign for more Republicans who embrace the same partisan outlook. He has pledged his support to groups whose prime mission is to cleanse the Republican party of those who stray from orthodoxy as they see it.
This is not conducive to problem solving and governance. And he will find that unless he modifies his approach, he will achieve little as a legislator. Worse, he will help delay solutions that are totally beyond the capacity of partisan majorities to achieve. The most consequential of these is stabilizing and reversing the Federal debt in an era when millions of baby boomers are retiring. There is little likelihood that either party will be able to impose their favored budget solutions on the other without some degree of compromise.
Unfortunately, we have an increasing number of legislators in both parties who have adopted an unrelenting partisan viewpoint. This shows up in countless vote studies that find diminishing intersections between Democrat and Republican positions. Partisans at both ends of the political spectrum are dominating the political debate in our country. And partisan groups, including outside groups that spent millions against me in this race, are determined to see that this continues. They have worked to make it as difficult as possible for a legislator of either party to hold independent views or engage in constructive compromise. If that attitude prevails in American politics, our government will remain mired in the dysfunction we have witnessed during the last several years. And I believe that if this attitude expands in the Republican Party, we will be relegated to minority status. Parties don't succeed for long if they stop appealing to voters who may disagree with them on some issues.
Legislators should have an ideological grounding and strong beliefs identifiable to their constituents. I believe I have offered that throughout my career. But ideology cannot be a substitute for a determination to think for yourself, for a willingness to study an issue objectively, and for the fortitude to sometimes disagree with your party or even your constituents. Like Edmund Burke, I believe leaders owe the people they represent their best judgment.
Too often bipartisanship is equated with centrism or deal cutting. Bipartisanship is not the opposite of principle. One can be very conservative or very liberal and still have a bipartisan mindset. Such a mindset acknowledges that the other party is also patriotic and may have some good ideas. It acknowledges that national unity is important, and that aggressive partisanship deepens cynicism, sharpens political vendettas, and depletes the national reserve of good will that is critical to our survival in hard times. Certainly this was understood by President Reagan, who worked with Democrats frequently and showed flexibility that would be ridiculed today - from assenting to tax increases in the 1983 Social Security fix, to compromising on landmark tax reform legislation in 1986, to advancing arms control agreements in his second term.
I don't remember a time when so many topics have become politically unmentionable in one party or the other. Republicans cannot admit to any nuance in policy on climate change. Republican members are now expected to take pledges against any tax increases. For two consecutive Presidential nomination cycles, GOP candidates competed with one another to express the most strident anti-immigration view, even at the risk of alienating a huge voting bloc. Similarly, most Democrats are constrained when talking about such issues as entitlement cuts, tort reform, and trade agreements. Our political system is losing its ability to even explore alternatives. If fealty to these pledges continues to expand, legislators may pledge their way into irrelevance. Voters will be electing a slate of inflexible positions rather than a leader.
I hope that as a nation we aspire to more than that. I hope we will demand judgment from our leaders. I continue to believe that Hoosiers value constructive leadership. I would not have run for office if I did not believe that.
As someone who has seen much in the politics of our country and our state, I am able to take the long view. I have not lost my enthusiasm for the role played by the United States Senate. Nor has my belief in conservative principles been diminished. I expect great things from my party and my country. I hope all who participated in this election share in this optimism.
Leave a Comment:
Good Bye Senator Lugar: I didn't alway agree with you, but you are a gentleman and a scholar. In politics the best man does not always win.
Sorry for your loss Ron, and I am sorry your state went RTW too.
What the hell has happened to Indiana?
A win for the TeaParty in May pretty much guarantees a win for the Democrats in November. The Tea Party is slowly, but surely, driving moderates and independents away from the Republican Party. Keep up the good work!
Lugar was and still liberal scum...
Good bye and good riddance...
Richard Lugar liberal scum...
Good bye and good riddance...
Kick all these GD "BUMS" out.. look what they have done to this country !
A real Republican voice crying in the wilderness but they aren't listening Dick Lugar. I find it interesting that for all the touting of "rugged individualism" Republicans seem quite content to demand a extreme purist collectivist mindset and boarders on being BORG.
@juandos...seek help...it was senators like Lugar who helped your jackass traitors in the Senate filibuster everything that might have been beneficial for the majority of the country. Lugar's warm and fuzzy good-bye would have seemed much more sincere if he hadn't helped the turtle-fossil McConnell commit treason. So why do you hate your country so much?
Lugar should run as an independent - and I bet he would win his seat back - screw the GOP, they have become a total whore to the 1%, with the rank and file Reps hoping to live off the crumbs left on the floor by the rich. What a bunch of dumbasses...
Once again Senator Lugar shows that he is a rational, intelligent, and pragmatic gentleman. But these are the traits of old-school Republicans - the traits of Republicans from the era when I was a Republican. They have no place in the current Republican party.
The reason Lugar was voted out was because he thought it was more important to get along and be seen as a nice person rather than vote for the good of the country. Heck, his letter points out why the voters were right to get rid of him. Instead of a graceful exit and admitting that his opponent had run a great campaign he decides it's better to shoot the guy in the foot before he's even started. For the past 2 years, after the conservative steamrolling of Congress, all we've seen from the repub establishment, of which Lugar is a part, is capitulation after capitulation to the dems. He, like the other RINOs, haven't figured out that the dem definition of "bipartisanship" is that "you agree with us!" If you don't, then you are an evil racist!
With the country being driven off the cliff, we don't need "nice" people in Congress. We need people who are going to stop the destruction express and get our government under control and start following the supreme law of the land, the Constitution.
Don't let the door hit you on the way out !
"my votes for the TARP program, for government support of the auto industry, for the START Treaty, and for the confirmations of Justices Sotomayor and Kagan."
He wonders why he didn't get my vote???
And as far as being obstructionists and partisan, there are a slew of bills that have been brought to the Senate floor for debate, only to be tabled by the head Democrat in the Senate.
I am not an extremist and a die hard Republican by any means, but working together means BOTH SIDES must be willing to work together in order to get this Great Nation back on track.
This has gotten WAY OUT OF HAND!
Wow!! You need some therapy witchrunner. Did you sleep through civics class? But you're a really good teabagger/Redeemer. A democracy- or democratic republic- can only survive by all sides being willing to compromise. Governing is coming together and making compromises that are in the best interests of the most people. You have very succinctly expressed the POV of the teabaggers/redeemers..." it's my way or the highway. F*** everybody but me".
It should be self-evident to anyone with an IQ over about 75 that if everyone had your sour, selfish, acid attitude that the nation would collapse. And I don't just mean economically. I mean it would cease to exist as a sovereign entity. I will point out to you, since you seem to be challenged in the area of civics, that we have already fought one war over the issue of one group trying to impose their definition of the union on all others and the south-pro slavery cabal- lost. You will lose again. And if you insist on escalating your treason and treachery and selfishness to the level of violence and rebellion, you will lose again. The south paid a heavy price for their rebellion, though apparently, not heavy enough, otherwise people like you wouldn't speak as you do.
Please, seek help...therapy, anger-management, empathy for others...I'm here for you, you poor thing. But I'm not here just for you to use.
I'm not familiar with Lugar's political history, but he points out some very valid facts in this letter. Of course, these issues are pretty well known among educated folk. Stonewalling legislation that you don't fully agree with is stupid; they aren't doing this country any favors if they can't compromise.
Too bad Indiana lost a senator who understood leadership also includes compromise; now Washingtom might get another politico parttisian who defines compromise Republican style: my way period or just say no. We have met the enemy and he is us.
blue: I haven't seen the dems willing to compromise. conservs want to cut spending. libs want to increase spending. Where would you suggest they compromise. All you have to do is look at what has really been happening. The spending has increased. You may want to call that compromise, but all that is is caving in to the dems. Now, if you want to use your terminology, we conservs are willing to compromise. As Ron Paul has said, he can cut $1 trillion in the first year. He's been made fun of because of that, but it would be easy to accomplish. With porkulous and all the other spending that's been going on, government spending has been out of control and could easily be cut back. So, let's compromise and agree to, say a $500 billion cut next year.
That's right,zoobeast. I am confident that the Redeemers will fail to hold down the rest of the nation and shove their aganda down our throats. They are truly delusional. One of two things will happen...either the rest of us will crush them like roaches and move on our they will learn to compromise in order to exist. Of corse, one other option is that the nation collapses. But it that occurs, it will still go very badly for them in that event. But without compromise, governance will be impossible. It's a shame and a marvel that these dinosaurs have gotten so far in life and not learned this. It isn't just their country. It's mine and yours too.
The best thing about Lugar losing is that Mourdock will probably lose too. The "Party of No" is a cancer that will destroy our great nation if it continues. And yes, the dems aren't much better. We seem to have lost sight of the greater goal of continuing to build our great nation and maintaining our lead in the world. May God bless America with a miracle that brings us to our senses.
witchrunner - Don't remember the number off hand, but didn't the Dems agree to cutting billions back last summer to get the debt ceiling done? Didn't Dems end up giving in and extending the Bush tax cuts? I could go on, but how about you state something Republicans have compromised on? Republicans are the ones who try to shove loose gun laws into highway bills or education spending, thats compromise?
Our taxes are at the lowest rate in 60+ years. I suggest that the first thing to do is start by looking at increasing revenue. Spending cuts alone will not fix our problem. Compromise. I will compromise on spending cuts. You must be willing to admit that we must increase the revenue. Why weren't you railing against bushco while he was flushing our money down the toilet? This problem- the deficit and debt- has two sides to the equation. BOTH MUST BE ATTACKED. fURTHER, IT'S WORTH POINTING OUT THAT THE DEBT AFTER WWII WAS WORSE than this. We can do it. Also, the tax rate was way higher in the 50's than now yet we had growth, job growth, and some level of prosperity. It's nonsense, this foolishness about trickle-down and job creators.
I must give the devil his due. The Redeemers are exceptionally accomplished at 2 things
1-a disciplined -though untrue- message and getting everyone to stick to it
2- framing issues, though,again, usually in a false light.
But they are now like the wizard of Oz after the curtain was pulled back.
At least the Republicans are cleaning their house. When will the Democrats?
Luger voted the way he felt he should vote but it wasn't the way the people who elected him wanted him to vote. Good to see him gone. This upcoming election is going to be very interesting. I hope the progressives get shellacked again. They are the cancer that will destroy America.
"The TeaBaggers are destroying the GOP"
there are no more statesmen -- only boneheads from both extremes. no wonder the great experiment of our forefathers has failed, after more than 200 years of smashing success.
@ JH-479998.. I think you need to read below, you don't get it either. The GOP are the destroyers of all things Liberty, Freedoms and Sanity..
Finally Lugar is a GOPer who gets its. Maybe the other hateful sheep of the Teabagger & Goofy Old Parties will get the hint as well. They want nothing but total control over EVERYTHING. The GOP has been on a anti-woman, anti-minority and anti-rights campaign for over 30 years. They still can't stand that blacks, and women have the right to vote and work. The GOP will stop at nothing until they own every branch of government. They want to rule with the iron fists of religion. They'll have a babble in one hand and a automatic rifle in the other. Rule with fear, tyranny and oppression.
Americans need to make a serious decision in November. Re-Elect President Obama and continue moving our nation forward, rebuilding our nation. Or elect Willard "the dog asked to ride on the roof" Romney, who'll cut corporate tax rates to almost zero. Raise taxes on low and middle income earners to pre-Reagan corporate tax rates which were up to 79%. Romney will invade Iran, who is a sovereign nation, just like America. By invading Iran, gas prices will double or triple to $8-$14/gallon. Not to mention Russia and China, both owners of American debt and staunch defenders of Iran will get involved, then what? You see, the GOP doesn't think of the long term consequences of the invasion of Iran. Can we afford that war? China could throw upwards of 500,000,000 people at us to protect its interests, aka $$$$. America is $15 Trillion in debt, a World War will break us. Can America afford the GOP? No!!
From what I've seen, for the last 12 years the definition of "working together" is both parties get to spend whatever they want without really trying to increase revenue or having offsetting spending cuts. So, for me, I don't want this form of "working together"...I'd rather have gridlock. At least with gridlock, people are not getting their new spending plans passed.
What I would prefer is politicians from both sides working together to implement something like the recommendations from presidents debt commission, the gang of 6, or the Ryan budget - those are the only 3 real solutions I've seen proposed. I don't agree with all aspects of any of them, but at least they are real starting points for discussion. Unfortunately, none of the party leaders seem to want to actually try and deal with our deficit/debt issues.
Lugar's votes for the auto industry was totally a pro Indiana vote. Without that help from the federal government several Indiana towns like Kokomo would have turned into Gary Indiana like ghetto ghost towns. Those votes saved thousands of Indiana jobs and businesses. Any politician that places ideology ahead of people doesn't get my vote. Historically when our government employees (politicians) fail to compromise and take a centrist path the country stumbles. Example the US Civil War. While I had a problem with Lugar on two issues: his length of time served and the fact that he basically no longer lived in Indiana I voted for him. If all the politicians stop compromising expect the government to get even less done.
The real crybaby losers have entered both parties. Guess they haven't lived up to their parents' expectations of them. Poor Luger, can't beat the dumb vote in his party. And Democrats are no better at all.
420 Frees
Keep smoking whatever it is you smoke. The world is passing you by.
1/20/2013 - the end of an error
The partisan divide continues - and the country will continue to suffer for it. And don't forget that Lugar is complicit in this too. He chose not to run as an independent - he supported the extremists within his party. So now he gets to sleep in the bed he helped to make.
GOP Voters are walking away from their party because of the TeaBaggers, the Baggres are not just destroying the GOP, they are destroying our Country !
witchrunner, PLEASE provide proof of when the reps have capitulated to the Dems???? I can think of ONE time in the past three years and that was a recent bill because the people have finally figured out and blamed the right party for the lack of action in Congress.
As for Lugar just "saying his opponent ran a great campaign", that is malarky. Outside PAC groups ran the campaign with their bazillion dollars. I don't care which side you or I are on, this outside money is going to destroy the political process. We can of course thank SCOTUS for this.
Lugar said it all very well. He got a lot done that helped the "Hoosiers" as well as the country.
Man! He's one long winded sumbich! One down and several to go.
Obama/Biden 2012
Both parties including Obama and past Presidents along with a crooked Congress have been steadily destroying this country. Using and abusing taxpayer dollars for their selfish goals and that of their master$. Our national debt is proof that neither party is willing to take steps to reduce the debt and stop the flow of $ from our pockets to theirs.
Lugar is one of many that needed to retire decades ago unwilling to give up their greed and power.
What I find enlightening is that every time a GOP Senator has decided to not run or has been defeated in the primary, they have railed against the very things the Republican party is demanding of them. Most of them have been serving their constituants faithfully for 20 years or more. They hold to the the basics of conservativism. Yet they get "Tea Partied" because they choose to govern.
The Tea Party fanatics fail to realize that in the Senate, it takes 61 votes to break the inevitable filibusters and 51 votes to support a position. The Tea Party represents 20% of the electorate, at best. In this country, 20% does not make up a majority. The majority is made up of people who are sane.
The Tea Party rails against idealogues on the left. Ronald Reagan would have been called a West Coast liberal fanatic by today's Republican Tea Party. President Reagan raised taxes and signed nuclear reduction treaties with the USSR. There are very few true leftist idealogues in Congress.
The fanatacism from the right is so extreme that anyone who does not take a position that is in total opposition the Democrat president on each and every issue they are labled RINO.
When President Obama wins reelection, he'll either have a Democratic majority Congress, or he will teach the Republicans the meaning of governance through the power of the VETO. The veto was put in place to prevent extremists from taking over. I hope President Obama does not have to use it.
Hey "Blue" where do you get the authority to prescribe medicine attention for anyone? This BS you purvey could easily get your dumb ass put in jail for practicing medicine without a brain.
Don't overestimate the "POWER OF STUPIDITY" in US on November.
Lesson learned !
Country at stake,Nothing can be taken for granted anymore !
Actions to be taken !
Wow. I agree with Ron. Lugar is a good man.
TO: lemp-1487085 who wrote:
Now that he's gone, he looks even better huh?
Obama/Biden 2012
Time for ALL career politicians to go!
I'm not of Republican flavor, but it saddens me that men of Lugar's quality are being forced out because of this ever increasing Republican extremism.
That's a shame for our country. His calm and realistic perspective will be missed.
Thomas Blue: All this so called compromise is the crap that got us here in the first place. You see these are people that are willing to compromise us, the US citizens, their principals, our principals and the constitution. If you and all your liberal friends don't wake up you'll soon be in France or the Soviet Union hoping and praying for your freedom. Hows that for some hope and change?
420 Frees the Mind
Wow....And you think other people are hateful, inflexible, and evil.
Looking at your diatribe without acknowledgement that intransigence is on both sides of the aisle, and that it has been growing on both sides since late in Bush's 1st term, is fatuous at best, and destructive at worst.
Until folks admit this 2-sided issue, there won't be any solutions.
We're doomed to repeat the nationalist, anti-minority, uncompromising absolutist mistakes of the 1930s and 1940s. Only this time we have the technology to make humanity extinct. Christians now follow the greedy capitalist, materialistic devil. They are now the anti-Christ.
@Josh Brogan, throwing simple insults at people is very easy to do, requires no brain power and proves nothing. If you disagree with Thomas Blue's points, why can't you address each one with facts and and substance and intelligently thought out arguments?
Mike Davis-433554: Is that really what you see. You must be blind. I see people picking on Christians that are pretty much minding their own business. This onslaught is happening every day pick, pick and yet we yield. One day all will realize that is was not the Christians that were the evil but the people that spoke out against them. What kind of mischief are you trying to spread?
This letter shows that the man has class. Our government is, more and more it seems, being run by foaming-at-the-mouth extremists on both sides. However, when leaders of a certain political party state publicly that their sole purpose is make president Obama a one-term president, that tears it for me. Say what you want about our current political system, but to me the Democrats at least appear to be trying to fix this country's problems. I don't get the same feeling from the Republicans.
And I firmly believe that regardless how much the Republicans idolize Reagan, they would not acknowledge him as one of their own if he were still alive and politically active. He really was way too "liberal" by current Republican standards.
The time for change is long overdue. Lugar, having been in the Senate 36 years was part of the problem, nor part of the solution. Thank you for your service and enjoy retirement. Please don't write a book about how you were "jobbed", that nobody but your kids will read.
You were beaten by the attitude that no matter how bloated and inefficient you grew the government, more taxes were needed. We don't need you. Run along now.
Republicans have gone off the rails on a crazy train!
Mourdock said earlier today his definition of bipartisanship is Democrats doing what HE wants... he is uncompromising and extreme. Sorry Lugar, your worst fears have come true and your seat may be taken by a radical Teabagger bent on further obstructionism and corruption of government. Let's just hope Indiana voters are smart enough to elect the democrat... but I wouldn't hold my breath considering it is Indiana.
So your position is that it doesn't matter what the majority wants, it's you duty to impose your own views and will on everyone else.
Democracy is a quaint and outdated concept, right?
@ Severed Head
You're not kidding. When did the word "compromise" become a dirty word?
LOL...my "liberal friends". That's cute. You're a cute boy. My "liberal friends" call me a moderate or conservative because I don't unconditionally support President Obama. Isn't that how it goes? Nevertheless, even a logic challenged troglodyte should be able to recognize that when you have a large group of people who are completely unwilling to compromise or come together for the common good, you no longer have a nation. Just a big group of people ready to be taken over. That's what happened in Germany in 1932. Is that what you want here? If we cannot compromise for the common good, we will fail to exist as a nation. The problem with DC for the last 30+ years has nothing to do with compromise. It has to do with the surrender of morality. Nixon was willing to do ANYTHING to win the 72 election. He should have gone to jail. LBJ and JFK and Eisenhower illegally made war without a declaration of war from Congress. Washington has, for decades, been about expedience and money. That's quite different from compromise. Don't mistake compromis with compromising positions. The problem isn't compromise. It's that we haven't put enough politicians and lobbyists in prison for betraying public trust. Raygun betrayed us. Maybe Bush did as well. Clinton sold us out in favor of the banks and big businesses. Boy George? Don't even get me started on that black-and-white little peacock with his cabal of traitors and criminals. Without Compromise, we may as well all pack up and head for our favorite foreign destination because we are through as a nation. Are you really ready to kowtow to Serbia? They can likely whip any single of our states. I'd hate to be intimidated by a piss-ant POS country like Serbia. I guess you're okay with it though and you're ready for all of us to be 50 different 3rd world states?
How do you compromise with a communist?
When the TP hijacked the GOP and assumed they had a mandate for "My way or the highway."
They regard the ability to compromise as a weakness to be exploited.
Some of them are even calling for armed revolution of Obama wins in November.
dirp...another good post.Thanks.
How do you compromise with Libertarians? You can't. It isn't in their nature.
Well stated Thomas Blue @ 10:51.
Greg Shep
@420 Frees the Mind
Greg, you make a good point and I will acknowledge that you are correct on that point, but I will say that it wasn't at the end of bush's 1st term. Bushco started it-his first term- by referring to his "mandate" which was a joke because the only place he got a clear majority was in the SCOTUS. Futher proof of their bullying and intransigence is that he and Cheney managed to take a 50-50 Senate that they controlled by virtue of the chainy one's tie breaking vote and through sheer bullying, one of their own Senators, Jim Jeffords, told them to shove it changed his affiliation from (R) to (I). So from day one, it was all about bushco being the BIG BOSS. " JUST SHUT UP AND VOTE LIKE WE SAY. And ,again, as I already stated, this was a Republican Senator that told them to shove it. And by 2004, I'd say opposition to bush was very justified when you look at 2 tax cuts over the objection of their own Sec. of Treas., 2 wars- one unprovoked based on provable lies-, unfunded Medicare "reform" that was a gift to Pharma, firing their Sec. of Treasury because he made too much sense,their own NSA guy,Richard Clarke outing their Iraq War scam, the list just goes on and on. The real surprise isn't why dems rebelled. It's why his own party didn't follow the lead of Jim Jeffords, Richard Clarke, and Paul O'Neill. That Boy George was a fool and Cheney was a megalomaniac was the worst kept secret in Washington. So, again, why didn't the GOP stand up to bush? In 1975, Goldwater had the sand to go see Nixon face-to-face and say, "it's time to leave". Why did not a single Republican have the stones to go speak truth to Bush,Rove,Cheney, and Rumsfeld? And oddly, bush himself, by 2004, realized that Cheney would indeed march the whole bush cabal off a cliff and ,according to Cheney's own account, bush no longer listened to him. And yet, still, no Republican had the honor, courage, or commitment to confront them and say,"stop it now or I'll stop you." If they had, the dems wouldn't have had to rebel. The GOP failed to police themselves and so when the dems attempted it, they get accused of partisan politics. Patently absurd. Was it politics? I'm sure it was to some extent. But it was caused by the actions and inactions of, mostly, GWB ( and yes, to a lesser extent, Clinton, Bush I, and Raygun).
Thomas Blue, There is more than one meaning to the definition of "compromise" and the more there is this avantgarde "compromise" the more our freedoms are diminished. Not all compromise is useful, beneficial or required to the majority of Americans. Some compromise can be beneficial but most of the time it costs Americans money or time or freedom. It is these non beneficial laws that were a result of your so called compromise that I object to. Compromise should be a battle by our Representatives or we will surly be compromised in ways that hurt the people, the constitution and the republic. Is that what you want? The definition of "Compromise" is below please read it so that you know the difference between the negative and positive connotations of the word. You obviously don't know both sides of the word compromise.
1.
a. A settlement of differences in which each side makes concessions.
b. The result of such a settlement.
2. Something that combines qualities or elements of different things: The incongruous design is a compromise between high tech and early American.
3. A concession to something detrimental or pejorative: a compromise of morality.
v. com·pro·mised, com·pro·mis·ing, com·pro·mis·es
v.intr.
1. To arrive at a settlement by making concessions.
2. To reduce the quality, value, or degree of something.
v.tr.
1.
a. To expose or make liable to danger, suspicion, or disrepute: a secret mission that was compromised and had to be abandoned; compromise one's standing in the community.
b. To reduce in quality, value, or degree; weaken or lower.
2. To impair by disease or injury: an immune system that was compromised by a virus.
3. To settle by mutual concessions: a dispute that was compromised.
Thanks, Alex.
@Citizen911
You going in circles like a dog chasing its tail. Is this going somewhere? I don't see it. As Ben Franklin said, "We all hang together or we all hang separately." So I guess you're ready to hand separately rather than work together to cheat the hangman?
We won't, because Democrats were smart enough to rig their primaries to keep out the fanatics.
Blue-Dog's like Cuomo [who will almost certainly be the face of the Democratic Party in a few years] are the future of the Democratic party.
At the end of the day, population growth will doom the GOP. Anyone else note McCain only get 52% of Texas in 2008? I'm REALLY interested to see if the GOP can top 55% this time, as long term, Texas is going to start being considered a toss up within the next 20 years or so.
thomas blue or is it thomas bull, just what does Ben Franklin's statement have to do with compromising on issues that will in the end destroy our country.
I am a liberal and I agree with a lot that he said. Compromise. That is key. You can't just vote against something because you don't like the 'other side'. We are one country and the dividing is coming from too many people that we need to kick to the curb. The good of the country comes before the selfish, greedy narcissism that is our congress and lawmakers. I didn't know what I was going to think when I read this...but he is right about the fact that they need to listen to the people of this country and try to compromise instead of just shooting something to the ground because of being either a REPUBLICAN or DEMOCRAT. We are all Americans and need to start acting better or we are going to screw ourselves to the wall.
I'm far less optimistic. I suspect nothing gets done for the next two years, regardless of who wins, because you will have a Senate that will have a smaller majority then you have now [IE: no way to break a fillabuster] and a house with a smaller GOP majority.
Point being, nothing is getting done either way. At least an Obama loss would set up Cuomo in 2016 though...
Cooperation and capitulation mean 2 different things genius.
Thomas Blue: Sorry you couldn't follow my post. Please give me some examples of where you are having trouble and I'll try to help you out.
John-2032532:
OK, using your own logic, How do you compromise with a fascist(s)?
Isn't that what Teabagger's and the rest of the GOP have become? Corporatist fascists.
Let's see.... the loser is now telling the winner that the winner had better be more like the loser or the winner will lose. Perhaps if the loser had been more like the winner the loser might have won instead of losing and would now be the winner instead of the loser.
What a Dick.
Ron Indiana "Good Bye Senator Lugar: I didn't alway agree with you, but you are a gentleman and a scholar"
I concur. What we need in politics are more people who put what's best for the country ahead of what's best for a political party. These party line votes on both sides are not in our best interest of the country.
If the Republicans win both the White House and Congress this year, which is likely, then they will either have to govern from the center with bipartisanship, or have a quick exit in leadership.
Its funny that all of those on the left see extremism of the right but can't seem to see the exact same extremism from the left. Extreme left or extreme right is still extreme. It is exactly whats killing this country.
@ Bigfinn - Welfare babies totally reliant on others for their existence, isn't that what the left has become? How do you like stupid generalities?
Mourdock only won the primary. We'll see what happens in the general election. Mourdock may be the loser there.
Ed, I'm NOT reliant on anyone but myself. I own my own business (I'm a headhunter), I eat only what I kill HARDLY even remotely close to what you're describing someone from the "left" as being. Stop listening to Fox or Rush, or wherever your getting your info. The so-called left has done nothing BUT capitulate. There should be a public option on heathcare - screw the insurance companies - what do they do anyway except take my premiums each and every month and then when you use it they don't pay or worse they drop you. Whats wrong with public education? I happen to like driving across bridges that had an inspector inspect it (regulation) or knowing that my food is safe. If that's extremism for you then you need to move to Somalia - no taxes, regulation, etc. At the end of the day that's what you people really want our country to become.
John-2032532
How do you compromise with a communist?
Me:
You discuss issues as if you were talking to an adult. You do not name call or make insulting remarks about their spouses or heritage.
You do some research to find out what they want as opposed to what a talkinghead tells you they want. You use some common sense to filter out the lies and hyperbole of the Limbaughs and Becks and Hannity etc etc DO NOT TRUST FOX NEWS - they recently won a lawsuit that said they don't have to report the truth, and they are banned in Canada.
You understand what a communist is, then understand that your implication that Obama is a communist is wrong. Labeling people with little or no evidence is dangerous and leads to misunderstanding their motives and intent. They say one thing and you hear something else because you have labeled them.
@blearyeyed
I really, TRULY hate to say it friend, but common sense has gone out the window lately when it comes to politics.
I concur 100% with what you say. The bummer is, based on what I read in these discussions, most people are completely polarized, politically speaking. And not enough of us have the capacity to think for ourselves. Well, at least if not lacking the capacity, then the WILL to think for ourselves.
We need to think for ourselves and not, as you say, let the talking heads do it for us.
And one more thing. What happened to the "United" in the "United States of America"?
@Bigfinn, more generalities! You're ignorant to that fact I was making the same generalities you made of the people on the right. I don't listen to Fox or Rush so get off the scripted response!
Thomas Blue,
A lot of really good posts. And I will also say there are many good posts from people in the center and from the left. The reason is that we realize that we elect our leaders to represent all of us, whether we voted for them or not. We realize that the segment who was defeated in an election, still has a point of view that can't be ignored. The side who gets defeated still deserves representation, albeit put in the perspective of where they fall within majority opinion.
Dick Lugar was one of those old school Senators that really understood his job. He knew that although Indiana looks like a Red State on the surface, in reality it is really fairly evenly split with a slight advantage to conservatives. When you look at Indiana's history of Governors and Presidential picks, it should be obvious that from time to time, those in the middle will swing one way or the other. If you are elected as a Senator in such a State, (a job that represents millions of people, one of only 100 positions in the country who's job is to represent their State's entire community), how can you in good conscience be anything but a moderate?
Those of us in the middle and on the left, recognize that this is how a government functions. It is what our founders recognized. They wrote a Constitution designed to serve all the people and to protect those in the minority from being run over by the majority. They clearly did not want a situation where the majority rules and the minority obeys.
What we see from the far right is a winner take all attitude, unless of course they don't win, in which case they will do everything in their power to block any progress. I see statements like all of Congress has become like this, but it is simply not true. There are some extremists on the left, but they are very few and although they may get some support from the broader Democratic base, they don't survive very long and they clearly don't rule the party. The reason is because the majority on the left and the center do not support extremism. A good example is former Representative Allen Grayson. He lasted one term. Although to some of us, we liked to hear him talk and throw back at the right wing exactly the same tactics they use, we also realized that he was too far out on the fringe for most of our tastes. He lost because he didn't have the full support of his own party and those who seek middle ground.
The right likes to point to Nancy Pelosi as another far left example, but in reality, she talks an extreme story, but has always been willing to deal when that was the only way forward. She actually partnered with Newt Gingrich when it served the purpose!
But it isn't necessarily all that out of bounds when a Congressional House Representative espouses some extreme views because they come from relatively small districts. If their district is 90% left or right, they are obligated to serve their constituents. But either way, they still need to compromise if anything is going to get accomplished.
The Senate is entirely different than the House. The accountability of Senators is to their entire State. They are supposed to be the adults in the room who can see the greater good. Dick Lugar behaved as an adult and it got him the boot.
Over the last decade, there has been a very specific plan by Republican backing interests to gain power not so much in the Senate but in the House and in State legislatures. Indiana is a good example where because of redistricting, their State legislature is dominated by the right even though that really doesn't reflect the population. Once you run the State, you can also manipulate the Congressional districts. There is a lot of thought and effort that goes into the redistricting effort designed to oust strong voices of the opposition. Often subtle manipulation changes the demographics enough to gain an advantage. This isn't really new, however what is new is the outside interests and money that goes into capturing these seats.
But even now, the Senate is at risk too. Many millions of outside money was used to defeat Lugar. Millions spent to accentuate his weaknesses and to make mountains out of molehills, not to mention flat out lies and deception.
We have reached a point where a small minority is speaking with a dominating voice, and this has been made possible by huge amounts of cash being injected into elections. What makes it even worse is that this minority voice takes the position that when you win, you get to punish the losers. I sit in amazement when I read posts from those on the right claiming to be Patriots and Constitutionalists and in the very same post, decry compromise as the root of all evil. How does one not realize that compromise and the blending of different ideas is what this country has always been about and what has taken us from being a bunch of upstart rebels to the most powerful nation on earth?
As I read these posts, I take note of not only the content, but the overall bigger trend in opinions and what I have seen over the last year is a trend indicating that the majority is beginning to wake up. I think the antics of the Tea Party revolution has turned off most Americans. We may be pretty grounded in our opinions, but we can see that the only way forward is to find middle ground. But as the far right gets smaller, it also gets even more determined. Thankfully, they are delusional in thinking they are the majority, but I just hope the real majority doesn't sit back and watch our country get destroyed by a small few fed with enormous amounts of money by people with entirely different interests in mind. I would also hope that this minority would wake up and see how they are being manipulated, but I just don't see that as being in their nature. This really is about how different people's minds work.
A most excellent post, 1NewDay. Very eloquent and well said.
One fewer classy Republican. One more ideological moron emerges on Team Elephant. Ugly stuff.
boy, nice of you to give the new guy a chance!
Hey Eric,
Sounds like you're "classy" if you're in agreement with your ideas and a "moron" if you don't. Your whole outlook is a bit too moronic for me. Try to look at the big picture. The whole country is going to hell and who is in charge? Get rid of the whole damn bunch and start over with some fresh ideas.
When will there be classy democrats? That concept might be a paradox.
Oxymoron!
Another moderate (sensible) Republican voted out by neocons. The anti-science, anti-immigrant, anti-gay, anti-women's rights, anti-Keynesian Republican party is truly destined for insignificance, as it should be. Such nonsensical views do not pass the sanity test and I believe an overall majority of voters are more intelligent than that.
"The TheBaggers live by the Koran"
What the heck is wrong with saying "give the new guy a chance"?
LOL @ OldSchool.. There are NO classy politicians, they died when the GOP and the Texass Police had a hand in killing President Kennedy.
The GOP are hell bent on total control of the government from the Federal Courts, to the State Governments to the House & Senate and the WH.. The GOP want to rule America with religion and guns. They are trashing a womans right to make ANY choice for her personage. The GOP are deciding who is a valid citizen and who can choose what person they can be in a relationship with. The GOP are deciding that they are the ones who can dole our personal freedoms just because they don't like someones personal lifestyles. The GOP are deciding to make an entire class of American citizens illegal, such as gays and non-Christian believing people. The GOP want to make America a 1 religion only nation and all others will be extinguished. The GOP want to rule the world claiming to make America better at the same time.
Keep electing politicians who beLIEve that segregating people is still a good idea, then we are certain to end up in a Civil War part 2.. . We can't continue to have a group of people, aka the GOP who advocate acceptance, yet their policies who are very divisive. They preach tolerance, yet they practice hatred.
The GOP have NO classy people in their ranks. They are the worst kind of hypocrites that live. Do as We say, Not As we Do!! Should be their new national campaign motto.
It's not like the world has never seen this before. And, I'm sorry, we can learn from those lessons when they are accurate and when we really understand them. From the 1930s - 1940s we learned how economic hardships can bring about radical views which are nationalist and require uncompromising absolutism. We've seen how these nationalist groups can then focus on passing laws to exclude and remove minorities and their rights. We know the outcome when a charismatic leader emerges and focuses that anger toward other countries. Really, that's all they need. A few more years and 1 charismatic leader to stoke these flames of anger and hate, and we've got a real threat to humanity. I'm sorry. I know we're not suppose to make these comparisons, but it is what it is.
Nothing's wrong with saying it, the problem is that he has already laid out his agenda. He has already committed to "my way or the highway". Just a Mitt Romney has committed himself to the far-right wing agenda. Mitt is trying to "moderate" his stands, the problem is when your stand keeps changing...you have no stand. The demographics in this country are changing rapidly. The Republican/TeaParty has this election to win or lose. Next election there will be too many former minorities voting for the Republicans to remain relevant.
420: thanks for adding your evidence to prove my point. Keep up the insults and namecalling!
TO: eric-2645575 who wrote:
This was the "Primary Election" NOT the General!
The new guy won't be elected until November, and I bet the Democrat is gonna win.
Obama/Biden 2012
American Girl,
Not likely, we're talking about Indiana here, the place where the KKK found a home and saw their greatest expansion. They are driven by hate, and who better reflects their hate than the Teabagger Party? Murdoch is pretty much assured a victory in the general election, it's an inevitability. I'd be pleasantly surprised if the Democratic candidate (anyone know who that is?) pulled off a victory as the Republicans/ Teabaggers have shown us that the only way the Senate can be effective is if the GOP has a membership of 40 or less Senators.
The Teabagger Party? What does tea have to do with bagging. Oh you mean The Tea Party............
The Libbies are like canned corn, peas and green beans well cooked and over done.
Maybe not. The Tea Party already feels that too many of the "wrong" type of people are allowed to vote, and they'd like to do something about that.
To Rob: actually, paradox is more accurate, the two concepts: class and democrat simply can't exist at the same time. That's more powerful a description than the contradiction implicit in the term oxymoron.
Viginia Democrat...it only takes 51 votes for the Senate to change procedural rules and the filibuster is a procedural rule. They could literally change that tomorrow if Reid had the intelligence and stones to do it. The GOP was scum to misuse the filibuster as they have but Reid is a feckless fool for allowing it. He could stop it and proceed with business any time he wants. The threshold of 60 to break a filibuster is, in fact, a relatively new rule. Reid is an idiot. If the dems were serious about governing, they would re-caucus and dump Reid.
Virginia, give it a rest. And give us Hoosiers a chance to make the right or wrong decission before you decree what our votes will be based on ancient history (not to be forgotten history, but history that has nothing to do with most of us living in the state now) that never was as black and white as you want to make it out to be in the first place. That's like saying everyone in Virginia is incredibly racist because the state once held slaves and fought for the South in order to keep that "right." Sure, it is true, but does that history define who you are? Are you proud of it? The entire state of Indiana is NOT driven by hate, thank you very much. And a great many of us are not Republicans. Sure, you may find that a bit of a surprise given your apparent bigotry. Even if Murdoch does eventually win, it will be by a small margin and the rest of us should not be tarred and feathered for it. And by the way, if you bothered to do any research whatsoever, the Democrat candidate is Joe Donnelly.
One more thing, Virgina. In Indiana, you have to declare a party in order to vote in a primary. Declared Republicans vote only on a Republican ticket, declared Democrats vote only on a Democratic ticket. So the election between Mourdoch and Lugar was voted on by only a fraction (low turn out) of registered Republicans in the state -- it has no bearing on the general election or the electibility of Donnelly. Those of us who do not vote on Republican primaries have not yet had our voices heard on this matter. And I am willing to bet the extreme position of Mourdoch will turn off more than a few moderate Republicans and independents in the state, too. It is not over yet, not by a long shot.
Just to clarify my previous post, the "truth" I was referring to was the slave holding history of the state, not the level of racism of current residents. Re-reading it, I realized my meaning could be misconstrued.
Wow, what a great and truthful speech, I don't understand why such a level headed guy would be beaten down so badly by all the fair minded, independent thinking, intelligent, conservative republicans in Indiana, for a guy that pretty much promises to go to Washington for the sole purpose of being a pain in the ass of reasonable governing of a nation with a two party system. It will be interesting to see if this is just a republican primary voter penchant or if all of Indiana feels this way in November. BTW be careful about calling somebody a Hoosier, in many parts of the USA it is definitely not considered a compliment, what some people consider a compliment many consider an insult, I found that to be both interesting and dangerous some years ago.
Lugar said it well, and he said it truthfully. It's too bad so many moderates are being pushed out of both Parties, especially the Republicans. Lugar joins Snowe as a person who will be respected.
For those Republicans who denounce Lugar as a liberal traitor - He understands that compromise is necessary for multiple people to get a goal accomplished. If that means not taking a hard stance, then so be it. At least something got done, unlike today's Republicans who take the "my way or no way" approach.
Forrest Grump, you said, "I don't understand why such a level headed guy would be beaten down so badly by all the fair minded, independent thinking, intelligent, conservative republicans in Indiana..."
It occurred to me that too many of the fair minded, independent thinking, intelligent conservatives stayed home -- and the narrow minded, ideological thinking, perhaps not quite as intellignent "conservatives" were the ones who showed up at the polls.
"The TeaBaggers are puppets for the Kocheads"
They will destroy this Country for the 1% !!!
I do think our primary system is helping the extremists in both parties. Not many people take the time to vote in primaries - but extremists are generally very energized, so they almost always vote. The result is, we often get a choice in the general election between the extremist candidates from each party...which, to me, is not a good choice at all.
I know some states are experimenting with things such as open primaries where the top 2 candidates run in the general election - regardless of their party (so, you could have 2 Dems/Reps in the general election)...hopefully some of these types of ideas will lead to a better election process.
I think extremism can exist in all cultures. In the Arab world there's Al Qaeda, in Afghanistan there's the Taliban, in Russia in 1917 there were the Bolsheviks etc. and today in the US, there is the Tea Party. The danger is when conditions are such that these extremist groups come into power. In most cultures where this happens, the populace is usually uneducated and ignorant and I would think that in the US that would not be the case but I'm beginning to worry a little but not too much. I think the Tea Party will be discovered by most as the toxic force they really are..I think American's are generally too smart for that but lately a significant number seemed to be undergoing a collective Brain Fart.
I think people like Obama, Pelosi and Reed are also extremists...
I don't agree with all of the TP reps, but I like having them there as a counter to the "spend whatever you want" culture that currently exists in DC (in both parties).
Excuse me, but I really want to know why conservatives think Pelosi Reed and Obama are extreme. They do carry out a democratic agenda, which their constituents elected them to do, but how are they extreme?
It seems that whenever it is pointedly clear that conservatives are obstructionists, or that they are becoming more and more exreme, the response is that both parties are uncompromising and extreme.
Both parties are not to blame for the obstruction in congress. One party compromises until their supporters are mad at them, and the other party threatens filibusters until they get their way.
The liberals in government are no more liberal- and in fact are less liberal than they have been in recent history. It is only from the point of view of those on the far right that they seem to be moving to the left. Conservatives are moving to the right, and we all know this.
@ Ron how is Obama or Pelosi or Reid extremists? I think Santorum is an extremist and Ill give an example. In Jan 2012 in a CNN story, he stated that he wanted to rule America with Judea-Christian Sharia law. http://articles.cnn.com/2012-01-05/opinion/opinion_obeidallah-santorum-sharia_1_rick-santorum-santorum-two-santorum-one?_s=PM:OPINION
Willard Romney and Newton Gingrich are extremists. Example: Both have stated, while running for a nomination that they would both invade Iran, who is also a sovereign nation, just like America. Both have stated it is their duty to defend Israel. What about defending America and taking care of the American people? A war with Iran cripples America.
Did you notice that gas prices are starting to fall? Here is a simple answer to that question. During the months of December, January and February, Willard, Newton and Ricky were saber rattling Iran and threatening war. Iran was postulating which caused the price of oil to spike. When cooler heads prevailed, like President Obama calling for tougher sanctions and communication, instead of threatening war, Iran and tensions have eased off.
But yeah Ron, I see your points, Obama, Pelosi and Reid are extremists. I mean you gave a ton of related information to back up your scathing diatribe.
The TP want to live in the 1780's Ron, where only white, rich land owners had the power, like to vote, own slaves, etc. Except for a few rich blacks who also voted for President Washington, because they owned slaves and have land. But hey, the TP part doesn't really know why they are barking anyways. Spending is just now a problem? Where were they 10 years ago, when Bush was handing out payments in his first 2 years. Where were they when Bush was adding $5 Trillion to the debt, while Cheney was making millions off his oil stocks because of the artificially inflated gas prices. Bush started 3 wars that cost thousands their lives, and over 50,000 wounded for life. America needs to rebuild OUR nation and take care of OUR citizens for once.
Renee,
The definition of extreme is relative to one's beliefs. Based on my beliefs, I believe Obama, Reed and Pelosi are extremists on many issues. Other people have different beliefs and don't view them as extreme. As an example, I have a friend that thinks they are fairly extreme to the right.
As to conservatives being obstructionists, again, this depends on a person's individual beliefs. All politicians compromise to some extent - even the TP. As an example, when the TP offers to discuss how to cut spending, they are offering a compromise on the place spending is cut. If the other person isn't willing to accept the notion of spending cuts, who is being an obstructionist? Personally, I think both parties are guilty of intentionally only offering "compromise" be attacking sacred cows they know the other party will not agree to.
It sounds like you feel you have some indisputable truths...personally, I don't think that way. My world view doesn't recognize black & white...only shades of grey.
By the way, I view Obama, Reed and Pelosi as equivalent to people like Cheney - they obviously have different viewpoints, but in the end they believe their views are ultimate truths that should be forced on everyone else if they can't be made to see "reason".
420,
I suggest actually trying to listen to alternative viewpoints instead of just dismissing them. I'm not a TP person myself, but I've talked to some, and they are nothing like you describe.
As to extremism, see my 3.9 post for my views on the subject. I could give specific examples of why I think certain politicians are extremists, but the examples I use would not be considered extreme to some others, and I think the discussion would quickly degenerate into a "he said/she said" debate - which is pointless.
Also, I don't post to try and convince anyone that I'm correct...I'm just posting my views for others to consider. (just as I try and honestly evaluate the opinions of others - especially the people with opinions that differ from mine)
History is an indisputable truth, Ron, and Republicans are currently moving to the extreme right from a historical perspective, regardless of one's "beliefs."
Beliefs are simply the thoughts we keep thinking until they seem to describe our reality. Far right extremist seem to lack the ability to change conscious beliefs when new information presents itself. Thus, why "the left" are known as "Progressives".
At this point in time, Republicans are pushing extremely regressive policies, nationwide, regardless of one's "belief" that they are not.
I'm with Ron-1861300 on this one. It is a matter of perspective. Same argument can be held on both extremes and by both extremes I mean Tea Party Vs Progressives not Democrat Vs Republican.
The problem with your statement onemanvolt is that Democrats are doing the same thing. Look at the number of bills tabled in the Senate for a great example. Instead of bringing up a bill, passing it to committee, and sending a reformed version back to the House, the Democratic party has been tabling bills so that they won't have to vote on them.
The reason for this tactic is that they don't want a vote on record that the Super PACs can use against them in campaigns. So instead of doing their job, they just prevent any job from getting done. You can likewise say things like pushing a healthcare law through when the majority of American's polled at the time disagreed with the law is extreme.
Both the extreme right and extreme left have abandoned all pretext of working together and instead seek to blame the other party. You can see this in any given post on the vine. Terms like "far right extremists" and accusing one party of pushing "regressive policies" are not helpful to the debate.
You should also know that the term "Progressive" does not refer to the ability to change conscious beliefs when new information presents itself. The progressive movement grew out of social activism - where the stated goal was to progress to a more equal society. Progressives have at times in the past proved just as conservative in some issues as "Conservatives". For example, it was actually the progressive party that fought for prohibition, not the conservative party.
Personally, I hate terms like liberal, conservative, progressive, etc. because they carry too many connotations. I'd rather debate the merits of individual ideas.
Onemanvolt - for me, there is no such thing as an "indisputable truth" when it comes to the merits (or lack thereof) of ideas. While I agree Republican politicians have been moving to the right on a number of issues (especially non-defense spending), I think at the same time Democratic politicians have been moving to the left.
As to extremists seemingly lack the ability to change conscious beliefs, I agree with this statement. I think extremists generally lack the ability to empathize with other viewpoints. However, I view extremism as a problem on both the right and the left. Just because one group calls themselves "progressives", doesn't mean they are not extremists - it just means they have chosen a label that makes them sound like they are open to other ideas.
I know people that call themselves conservatives and others that call themselves progressives - and they are all open to considering other viewpoints - these are not extremists in my book.
Unfortunately, based on my experience, most people that call themselves progressives are no more open to alternative viewpoints than those that call themselves conservative (and vice versa).
Ron just for argument sake please provide specific examples by Obama, Reed, and Pelosi of decisions or policies you thought were extreme. If others can list what they felt was extreme at least you can do the same. And please DO NOT list any GOP talking points but ACTUAL policies or decisions there were involved in.
Just asking so I can understand.
Ron,
It may be a perspective issue, but it helps to make your point if you can give examples and not just opinion. What actual policies are you labeling as extreme?
Good point, Renee. I'm in my 60's and always considered myself to be a moderate conservative. Now I discover that I'm considered to be a left-wing liberal.
And my views haven't changed in that time.
Right wingers and the Fox News gullible constantly claim Democrats are just as bad as Republicans when it comes to extremism.
Bullcrap!
Checking Numbers and Ron:
We're still waiting for you to list all the examples of "extremist" policy coming from the left.
!-crickets-!
I have several friends who are self proclaimed tea party members and...
- One of them is on welfare, gets food stamps but wants less government intrusion into his life.
- One is a welder for GE, in a big union, but thinks federal and state labor laws are over reaching.
- One is more of a repub / TP person but regularly quotes Ted Nuggent and seriously believes he would be a good president. He sincerely believes that.
and lastly one that thinks the government is far over reaching but in the same breath thinks there should be a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
LOL!
GC & vwTerry, (onemanvolt - I didn't respond quickly because I was heading out to lunch and I wanted to think about my reply)
Fair enough, and thanks for the civil requests. Keep in mind I tend to think at a macro, not micro level - so I tend to focus on overall perceptions - I don't try and memorize specific details (i.e.; I don't keep a running history of actions by person).
Also, since no politician can do exactly what they want, when evaluating a politician I consider what I think they would do if they had ultimate power - not what they actually propose. My evaluations may be wrong, but that's why we call them opinions :-).
Lastly, I do not think Obama is a bad person. I disagree strongly with a number of his positions, but I know someone that met him in a very awkward situation, and he was extremely helpful even though he didn’t need to be (and this happened after he became president)…I believe he has the best intentions, I just don’t agree with his opinions on some issues.
So, here are some examples of positions they have taken that concern me:
Attacking opposing viewpoints - I'm fine with disagreeing with people like Rush (I do it constantly), but, especially in early 2009, the administration directly attacked Rush and even attempted to keep Fox from having access to White House press conferences. They have also been the most active administration in recent memory to go after media leaks (this opinion is based on an article I read on MSNBC awhile back). In my mind, they appear to want to aggressively stifle free speech if it disagrees with any of their positions.
Health care reform - I think most everyone agrees that changes are needed, but the impression I have is they would have implemented a state-run option and (almost?) completely removed the private sector component. This isn't what was passed, but it was supported at various times by Pelosi during the discussions and by Obama prior to running for office.
General attitude towards business - the administration, and especially Obama, constantly attacks businesses from a variety of angles (ex: worker compensation, regulatory, taxation), and have spent billions on trying to pick market winners/losers via federal funding. I believe, given the opportunity, they would take over large portions of the economy (ex: oil and finance industries).
Concerning the last 2 points, I think it's due to a general belief that government is better at resource allocation and efficiency than private industry.
Mike,
That is a problem with anecdotal evidence...if the sample size is small it can be very misleading. I don't know who's experience more accurately represents the TP crowd...but it would be interesting to find out. From my experience in general, people seem more comfortable applying rules to others than they are applying them to themselves. I know lots of conservatives like you listed (i.e.; cut government spending, but don't cut the programs I use), and I know lots of liberals that are the same (i.e.; don't allow trees to be cut down - except for the ones in my yard).
Didn't we have 8 years of the GOP and GW spending and forcing an extremist agenda down our throats? It's really rich to read these posts about Pelosi and Reed and their extremist policies. We just had a Republican administration wipe out surpluses left for the 1st time (Clinton), suspend hebeas corpus, openly condone torture, lie about wars, out undercover CIA agents for political purposes, fall asleep at the wheel and saw us attacked (remember, focus went to invading Iraq, not watching Bin Laden) - on and on.
And the liberal Democrats are extremeists? Pleeeeeease, cry us another river.
Still nothing but generalities and opinion. Where is all the extreme legislation?
Rush Limbaugh is an uneducated dolt. Do you seriously consider him relevant?
As far as your healthcare opinion goes: There should be no profit motive in healthcare insurance, period.
Still waiting for that extreme legislation list by Democrats.
bigfinn - I think the GOP from 2000 to 2006 was just as bad as the Democrats have been since then. I'm an independent - I'm not tied to either party. If a politician does something I like (ex: Obama coming out in favor of gay marriage), I applaud them. If they do something I don't like (ex: Obama continuing with Bush-era domestic spying rules), I try to explain why I don't agree. By the way, we haven't had an actual surplus for about 50 or 60 years...the "surplus" was achieved by raiding SS funds. Between Clinton and the 1994 to 2000 Republican congress they came close to a surplus, but they never quite go there...still, I applaud their efforts - they did a great job working together.
onemanvolt - again, extremism is relative to the individual. I realize the items I listed may not be extreme to you, but they are to me. I also realize you may completely disagree with my position on some items (ex: healthcare profit motive). This doesn't make either of us right or wrong - we just have different views.
I'm not sure why you wouldn't consider Rush relevant. He has the largest audience on talk radio, and the administration considered him important enough to comment on directly on numerous occasions. I can see not agreeing with his opinions, but I can't see why anyone wouldn't consider him relevant.
Extremism in politics is relative to our human history of governance and its progression thereof. In the United States, the future bends toward equal rights for all. Being against gay marriage is an extreme and regressive position, relative to where we are historically regarding human rights.
Using you logic of what is or isn't extreme, Ron: I'm sure a child molester likely would not consider what he or she does as extreme either even though most of us would be repulsed by such acts. Does that mean neither are right or wrong, just have differing opinions?
I'd be ashamed to quote Rush in any forum, other than in a disdainful sense (like President Obama did). For someone to believe that Rush Limbaugh is learned in economics (or any other subject) or has anything positive to add to our political discourse, one would have to be less intelligent than he.
Although I find child molesting extremely despicable behavior, I suspect child molesters do not think it's wrong. However, their views do not have any affect on my views. I realize the concept of "no absolute moral truths" is uncomfortable for some, but yes, that is how I think. For me, I'm fine with pretty much anything someone else does as long as it doesn't directly negatively impact someone else. Using your example, child molestation directly adversely affects the molested child, therefore I am against it.
I think everyone has good and bad ideas, and I try hard to listen to all ideas - even when they come from people I disagree with 99% of the time (ex: Robert Reich or Dick Cheney).
This letter is Dick Lugar's rather pathetic effort to ingratiate himself with liberals, so he can get a job in his home, Washington, DC. Maybe in the Obama Administration.
The spin that Reagan was a bipartisan RINO is especially pathetic. Libs eat up that ridiculous notion.
Ha compared to the tea party types, Reagan was a bipartisan RINO, they would have called him Tip O'Neil's bitch!
Be serious Bob the man is the only president to grant 11 million illegal aliens unconditional amnesty, and the first to really explode the deficit. Reagan is now most certainly a RINO, face it Bob.
Hiya Forrest: hope all is well with you and Mrs. Grump and all the Grumpsters! Haven't had a chance to say hello for awhile!
Bob, you are a complete fool if you don't know that Reagan and Tip O'Neill had a drink together at the end of the day, that Reagan raised taxes, and though a moron, was not the moron the current crop of Republicans are.
Senator Lugar: I didn't always agree with your positions. But, I always did believe you put country ahead of party. You are too good for the culchies who call themselves Republicans now.
Have a great retirement, being mindful that you always did your best.
Hey Forrest,
Nice to see you on the boards. I hope you are mending well, and I hope you continue to bear the standard of Union employment here.
Unions have an eloquent advocate in you, and your words cut the other side deeply.
Just know you're appreciated.
Thank you Newday and GOPisextinct, I am doing better than I have a right to expect, it is Mrs. Grump's mother who could use a prayer or two if anyone is so inclined.
I am an advocate for the union because the union was an advocate for me, I have expanded past being just an hourly worker and was able to fulfill some other ventures such as my patents and consulting gigs. The truth though is that I would never have had the means to accomplish those things, if I did not have the security of a decent wage rate, health insurance, and a retirement fund. It's one thing to risk some time and money, it is another to risk the outright future and security of your wife and kids. The union I know is a bunch of talented men and women who work real hard, to make themselves and their employers successful, they do expect to be paid well and treated fairly for their efforts, but I got to tell you I do not know a single thug or mobster among them. I have no idea where the ridiculous notion that the guy that lives down the street from you and drives a truck, teaches your kids, delivers your mail, builds your car, lays your bricks, or installs your plumbing day in and day out is a mobster, or is in cahoots with mobsters, it's a damn stupid notion. It is almost as stupid as the notion that if somebody is paid well, and has health insurance, and a retirement plan it somehow weakens the nation. If people in right to work for less and less and less states want to put themselves in a position where they are competing with somebody that lives in a grass hut and does not wear shoes then I guess that is their choice, but it does not sound like nor will it ever lead to the American dream I am fortunate enough to have modestly lived. You can't do what I was able to do on $10.80 an hour and no benefits. I am grateful for my union and for the great American businessmen who employ my union brothers and sisters, it's a pleasure to work hard for people that appreciate the fact that they profit from your efforts, and show it by sharing a fair slice of that profit. Make no mistake about it, we are paying taxes, and we are not the ones who depend solely on government services when we get sick or grow old, we are responsible, we have bargained for, and earn our benefits so that after a lifetime of work we won't be a burden on society or our families, when we are no longer able to work. I just don't understand how that makes you a thug.
Unions wield far to much power in the political lancscape and are by their nature not good for government or the taxpayer . Who represents the taxpayer at the table when the union is handing over votes to the politician in exchange for benefits?
Amen, Forrest---your eloquent defense of unions always inspires me.
Special prayer for Mrs. Grump's mom and your whole family.
Bob is still in denial over Mickey D's vaginal probing...he doesn't like to talk much anymore
New Day: You are correct--Tip and Reagan did socialize "after hours." They fought like dogs in Congress, but NEVER resorted to the incessant name-calling that the left uses as its weapon of choice. (bigot, homophobe, racist, sexist, etc. etc.) That practice wears thin after a while and one reaps what is sown. The right has its share of this as well, but nowhere near the level of the left--not even close.
If one wants civility, shame the DailyKos, MediaMatters, and Moveon types into toning down their language. Take the first step. If someone on the left tried that, my guess is that they would be regarded as traitors to the cause...
Amen Forrest! By the way as a Government Employee (State) who pays taxes as well, have health care and pay out the wazoo from my salary to have it, have a 401K as well as pay into the state retirement I totally agree with you. And as a taxpayer I believe we need to not only cut spending but raise taxes to balance the budget especially on the top 1%. Everytime you hear people talk about cutting spending it's always the social programs, my opinion lets start with coporate welfare and yes I said it Corporate Welfare.
In respects to Lugar it takes comprise on both sides, however the GOP took the my way or the highway attitude when this Adminsitration took office you have to admit that. And during the Bush Administration is was "you are either with us or against us" and remember if we didn't agree with him you were "unpatriot". They are going to have to do some soul searching and ask themselves do they want to be inclusive or exclusive.
JMO (Just my opinion).
Bob,
I'll try to use smaller words for your benefit. Reagan was a great leader and well liked across the political spectrum because of the fact that he was willing to find compromise. Republicans of today love to invoke the name of Ronald Reagan, but damn if they don't hate it when you quote his words or cite his policies.
Reagan made the exact same argument as President Obama about taxes and the wealthy, even telling the story of a wealthy man who was astounded that he paid less in taxes than his secretary (yes, Ronald Reagan believed the rich needed to pay the same percentage as the rest of us.)
Ronald Reagan made another move that today's Republicans would hang him for when he signed the bill supported by the late Ted Kennedy, giving 100% blanket amnesty to 3,000,000 illegal immigrants. How would that go over today?
The simple fact is that Republicans have given in to their evil instincts and decided to live their lives as evil people. As Obi Wan Kenobi said "Only a Sith deals in absolutes." And it's quite clear the Republicans/ Teabaggers have adopted the evil "either you're with us or you're against us" mentality than will inevitably, as Mr. Lugar so eloquently said, lead to their utter insignificance.
Oh, and Bob, I forgot to extend to you my usual invitation to come watch the election results at my home. I'm still dying to see your face when the networks call Virginia for President Obama for the second time!!!!
@Bob in Virginia, do you really think he's trying to suck up to Dems for a job? You do know he's 80 and rich, right? The time in your life when you don't really care what other people think and just speak your mind?
Lugar's comments become particularly incisive in that he is a party insider. He sees the republic party not only from the inside but from the outside. His observations were offered from the perspective of one who knows. REALLY knows. I sense worry in his remarks; worry that there is a deep perversion of his party's purpose. It pains him to speak of it like this. This isn't the party he knew anymore. This criticism isn't coming from a Democrat.
He parses no words in describing the ugly thing the republic party has become. Many of the laws he lists as containing no Democratic compromise were signed into law BECAUSE the Democrats compromised: i.e.- "Free" trade agreements. How many have been signed by Democratic presidents, and how many by republic party presidents?
It seems hard for Lugar to envision how history's greatest democracy will survive what it has mutated into. Fascists have taken over America, and extremists put their foot in Lugar's behind and shoved him out. There is only one way to deal with an implacable extremist.
Lugar may be among the last of his kind. He is a eye-witness to the decline of the moderate governance that made ours the best system on earth. There is no longer room for gentlemen like Lugar in Washington.
Behold the barbarian savages are at the gate.
In repelling the advancing hordes,...... may fortune favor the foolish.
I think it is interesting that you ignore the real point he was making, that partisanship is being taken up by both sides. It was recently pointed out that two blue-dog democrats in Penn. are being challenged by ultra left candidates and while I don't know what the outcome is, it points out that the extreme of the left is working just as well as the extreme of the right.
Blue dogs lost
TO: MUGTECH who wrote:
Good! They weren't anything but a bunch of closet Republicans anyway!
Obama/Biden 2012
While we watch France tax their wealthy at 75%, we struggle to get our elite to pay more than 15%.
The greed CAN'T continue...Reps are walking down a dangerous trail if they will not help the middle class. We don't believe the trickle down garbage any more and know we are being ripped off
---------------------Vote Them All Out-------------------
And Obama, the private company and illegal immigrant lover, is no better ----------
GOP,
That moderate view has disappeared from both sides of the aisle.
I think you also gloss over the other point, that you must hold internal convictions. Neither sides of the current crop of seem to have personally held convictions from which to start a dialog.
Examples (both sides)?
Republicans: The Debt Limit - Republican leadership let those in their party know they would have no support in their future legislative efforts and reelections if they "broke ranks."
Democrats: Healthcare - Democratic leadership let those in their party know they would have no support in their future legislative efforts and reelections if they "broke ranks."
It's pathetic on both sides right now.
I'm still waiting for examples of all the extremism supposedly coming from the left and supposedly justifying all the extremism coming from the right, like papers please laws, gay marriage bans, and anti-women's health. Big government is always bad when it regulates polluters and Wall Streets robber barons, according to Neocons, but big government is great when it comes to women's health, gay people, or immigrants.
Hypocrites!
Don't even try to list Healthcare Reform as some example of left wing extremism since the controversial parts are originally Republican proposals, not to mention a carbon copy of healthcare reform enacted by Romney.
You just keep trying to blur the line between Republicans and Democrats if you think that is a winning strategy for you. Fortunately, most people are wise to that nonsense.
Dick Lugar was a class act. He will be missed. If Mourdock turns out to be a bumbling bagger, the Democrats may pick up the seat.
TO: Diogenes-3976835 who wrote:
Well I guess, but one poster reminded me that Lugar is also part of the cancer that made up the "culture of corruption" during the Bush Administration, and Lugar was an "enabler".
So, Lugar may sound nice now that he's been kicked out of office, but there was a time when Lugar was just a deaf as GWB himself, and he did refuse to hear the voices of his own people who put him in office in the first place.
Whenever a politician becomes "self-employed" and no longer listens to the people he represents, it's time to go.
So, they kicked Lugar to the curb, and now Lugar can sit home and write books.
Obama/Biden 2012
Good ridance to his foul soul, a traitor to the people he was supposed to represent and care about... heads up ALL RINOS.....
So, Art, if you're not a right-wing extremest you're not a Republican?
Will the last Republican centrist in Washington please turn out the lights?
Mr. Lugar, I believe you have earned that honor. Men of your character and dedication to bi-partisan cooperation may never be seen in Washington again.
Thank you for your service to your country. Well done, good and faithful servant.
Good bye RINO.
The sad fact that Lugar refuses to admit is that the Republican party left him. It is poisoned and poisonous. To criticize it's tactics while at the same time refusing to leave the party, is to condone those tactics. One need only see what was done to Bennett in Utah and Crist in Florida. There replacements are slash and burn politicians, the politics of destruction. I'm not sure whether sane people should be praying every night for both a GOP president and congress. That maybe if they have the power, they will lose interest and moderate voices will have a chance. Because the alternative may be worse, Obama is re-elected (as I hope) and the Democrats maintain a slim majority. My fear is that the GOP will be even more intransigent and obstructionist no matter who gets hurt in the process. I feel sorry for Sen. Lugar, but he is seriously deluded as to the danger within his beloved party.
Denial is a powerful emotion. At least it shows that he (and other targets of the Tea Party) is still human.
Just like Specter.
Pulitzer prize winning novelist Booth Tarkington wrote many years ago the novel The Gentleman from Indiana. Richard Lugar truly was and is the gentleman from Indiana. It is highly unlikely that any senator from Indiana will ever again be
able to match his record of service and integrity. With this vote, the Senate will lose one its brightest members, and Indiana will loose one of its most effective senators ever. If Senator Lugar is a Republican in name only, then I am not sure what the name Republican means anymore. I only hope that the Senator's comments in
this farewell about the future of American politics and the Republican party are incorrect, but I fear they prophetic. Thank you Senator Lugar for your lifetime of public service. May God bless you and your family for your commitment to the country and may others like you somehow find their way through the politics of today to help the country see its way through the challenges of tomorrow.
Glad we got rid of that democrat (sic)
That's OK, he'll be replaced by a REAL DEMOCRAT...NOT some dumbass palinite. THANK YOU JESUS!
Farewell to Senator Richard Lugar, a true patriot; this is a huge loss to the promotion of the American ideal.
HOW MUCH DID LUGAR HURT UNEMPLOYED AMERICANS? LET ME COUNT THE WAYS
NumbersUSA rated Sen. Lugar on 85 immigration actions since 1989.
When each action was weighted according to the numerical impact, we found that he acted 81% of the time in favor of foreign workers and dependents over the interests of U.S. workers and dependents.
That earned him a D-minus over his career, making him the worst Republican in the Senate (Sen. John McCain of Arizona is runner-up).
•He acted 84% of the time in favor of the Chain Migration of extended family of immigrants over the interests of U.S. workers.
•He acted 100% of the time in favor of foreign workers brought in through a random lottery.
•He acted 98% of the time for amnesty enticements and 76% of the time for other rewards for illegal aliens.
•And in 30 votes and co-sponsorships that were about direct importation of workers, he acted more than 99% of the time for more immigrant competition for U.S. workers.
He did give tepid support to secure borders (C+) and interior enforcement (C) but tried to kill a pilot E-Verify program to keep illegal aliens from getting jobs back in 1996.
REMEMBER TO VOTE AGAINST ALL WHO SUPPORT ILLEGAL ALIENS OVER CITIZENS.
What exactly is 99% of 30 votes? How could he vote 29.7 times in favor of "immigrant competition?"
The major obstructionist in the E-Verify program has been the US Chamber of Commerce. Rather that get rid of the illegals they want to keep them here to hold down wages and talk about patrolling the borders which is too costly to enforce rather than E-Verify which would stop the illegals dead in their tracks at the timeclock
Magyart, when is the last time you or anybody you know competed against an illegal alien for a job? I suspect none. Illegal aliens may cause some problems in this country but unemployment for natural citizens is not one of them. Illegals generally take only those jobs that 99% of Americans would not take.
Reasonable22, Illegal aliens are working in amost every industry, construction, healthcare, hospitality, maintenance, etc. Ony a few are actually working as migrant field hands. They may start out in the field, but as they learn the system, they also move to better jobs.
Jose Godinez-Samperio's story is not typical. He's an undocumented immigrant from Mexico — and now he's fighting to be admitted to the Florida bar.
Jose Antonio Vargas is one of the most well-known illegal immigrants in the country, worked for the "Washington Post" and won a Pulitzer Prize.
We need federal E-Verify legislation, which Dave Camp (R) has bottled up in committee.
Does that mean that you'll take a job at minimum wage changing adult diapers in a nursing home?
Great work Tea Party people.
Just remember how successful your efforts were in winning the Senate seat in Delaware in 2010. A sure GOP gain went to the Democrats.
You allow us to hope for a similar result in Indiana. We had none earlier.
Thank!!!!!
Better a real Democrat than a RINO,at least then you know who has your back.
Goodbye, Lugar. Another casualty in the War on Ideas.
A casualty in the war on intelligence ... Lugar's words paraphrased; teabaggers are empty headed, rabid @!$%#s who care not a whit about real people or country but only about doing the bidding of the rich and powerful. And in doing so, are not bright enough to recognize that they vote against their own self interests and that of the country.
It was time for Lugar to go. He has been in office for 35 years and is 80 years old. I hope Lugar enjoys his long overdue retirement.
lugar should be obama's vp, he is for illegal wars, the ndaa and bigger intrusive gov. obama/lugar 2012 bendover for status quo establishment. sarcasm. bye bye lugar anymore republicans think bailouts and bigger gov is good. let the door hit you in the AZZ to.
My comment below would, apparently, apply here.
Judging from some of the vitriolic and angry comments made here about Sen Lugar, it is obvious that some do not know Sen Lugar as I do. He is a man of integrity, ability and dedication, with a long and distinguished record of public service. When I read ugly comments about a person which are undeserved and incorrect, I feel compelled to add my voice to the discussion. Shame on those who are ignorant of the facts about Sen Lugar, yet judgemental and opinionated about matters they know little about. We don't have to agree on everything to respect one another. I wish him well and thank him for his service to our country in many areas over his lifetime. We will miss his wise counsel and experience in the days and years ahead.
Bill from Connecticut
Well compared to the Liar Blumenthal from Conn,I guess Lugar could be considered a better choice?
When the media has been bought off and brow beat into calling a right wing conservative like Lugar a moderate, you know the country has fallen off a cliff into madness.
desktop,
some here call him a right wing conservative, some call him a RINO and some think he should be VP with Pres. Obama. It sounds like most people here don't know what they are talking about.
Spot on Lugar. And done with class. Which is more than the tea pot blow hard who'll run now can ever say. And there you have it. The real problem with the tea pots. NO CLASS!
All that tirade is is sour grapes. Old and slow, time to go!
As evidenced by how many times Lugar used the word "I" in his letter, shows how much he had in common with Hussein Zero and how much he thought "more highly" of HIMSELF than he should or was deserved. Good Riddance to another self-absorbed American "career" politician. May All like him be sent packing Soon!
Bill from CT,
Actually, as an Indiana resident, I know Lugar very well. He's part of the generation of "statesmen" that brought us a $16,000,000,000,000 debt, "seperate but equal" healthcare and pensions for public sector workers, 10%+ true unemployment, millions of federal bureacrats that have jobs for life, answer to no one and issue edicts and mandates that punish anyone that tries to start or run a business.
He is big part of the problem of why whole parts of our country are dying while him and his ilk in DC live like royalty.
You also missed the "class act commercials" he bestowed upon us the last month. He showed his true class. It had nothing to do with his constituents and everything to do with him and his power.
that is hogwash
It's really not hogwash. I wish it were, but watching Senator Lugar launch his multitude of attack ads just blew up my opinion of him.
He was desperately clinging to power, in the end.
I want to be able to say otherwise, given the content of this letter; but Lugar really was desperate in this election.
Bart133: As an Indiana resident I submit that you have no idea what you are talking about. Lugar's track record is abominable and a democrat would be better than this RINO any day. He had some good qualities on an individual basis but for law making he sucked...
A very well thought and considerate statement.
The bottom line is that the neo/ultra conservative Right Wing radicals are insane.
The would dig this contry into a hole for the benefit of the 1%/plutocrat/power elite whose interests they represent.
Their obstructionist demagogue xenophobe posture had put this country into the hole it's in : Not OBAMA WHO HAS TRIED HIS BEST TO WORK AROUND THESE FACISTS!
The constitution states that government shall be for the "GENERAL WELFARE" IT does not say"CORPORATE WELFARE"
Look no further than Rupert Murdoch and Fox News and his morass of lying and deceit and bribery regarding the hacking and privacy scandal he is invloved in: Hey all you knee jerk reactionaries: it's happening here too.
We dont live in a democracy anymore: we live under the whip of a Cronyist Plutocracy: Government by the Rich., for the Rich and the Middle Class be dammned !
wow, such anger, Bart. Have a cup of decaf and relax a bit. You're going to constipate yourself.
Bart Look no further than the Harvard /White house connection. And look no further than the Goldman Sachs/ White house connection. Why are we not hearing about the Obama / John Corzine/ Barney Frank connections any longer. Hmmmmm amazing the influence the liberals have on the press when it comes to sweeping scandals under the rug!
Waaa,waaa. There you go being a victim of the "liberal media". "Oh, if only we weren't surrounded by those evil liberal reporters, the truth could be heard." I'll bet anything you watch FOX news, a whole station dedicated to conservatives, and yet you still whine that the media is liberal.
Ssmike what about the the Oil connection during the Bush Administration? And I promise you some of the ones you named also had connection with the Bush Administration or their foreign connection.
Dick Lugar sounds a lot like a sore loser, since he never really changed anything and seemed along for the ride. Any gentleman can do that without making waves.
Dick Lugar sounds to me like a patriot. More folks like him would draw me back to the Republican party.
When the spoiled brats stop running that party, then this country will get back on its feet and not before.
I like how retiring politicians come up with a whole manifesto on how their political party is going down a path that they feel does harm to the country. I would like a politician do that WHILE in office without the fear of being ostracized. Now you come up with this....???
that will never ever happen, David, because not one single politician out there has the courage to do it. They are much too concerned about getting re-elected so they can continue to feed at the trough of plenty they've discovered.
Face it, America, we need a lot more than just catchy campaign slogans. We are going to need some real and serious change before things start to improve. From the hysteria I hear and see every day, I wonder if we're even capable of pulling together to make our country great again. I really wonder.