The trouncing of Dick Lugar is a cry for all-out political war
Dick Lugar didn’t merely lose Tuesday night.
The Indiana Republican Party that he had led and served for parts of five decades thoroughly repudiated him, rejecting him and all he stands for by some 20 percentage points. It shouldn’t have ended that way for Lugar, Matthew Tully writes in the Indianapolis Star:
“… a lawmaker who spent decades diligently addressing big issues and tackling looming crises shouldn’t be treated as a pariah simply because he viewed the other side as fellow Americans, and not enemy combatants. But that’s what happened Tuesday night as one of the state’s most accomplished political careers crashed to an end.”
RIchard Mourdock
The man who defeated Lugar, Richard Mourdock, proposes to abolish the IRS and says he has a plan to cut federal spending by $7.6 trillion. But most of all, he promised Republican voters in Indiana that he had no interest in bipartisanship.
“Bipartisanship has taken us to the brink of bankruptcy,” he told a crowd Monday. “It is not bipartisanship we need, it is principle.”
And compromise? In Mourdock’s mind, politics is not the art of compromise. Politics is war.
“I’ve said it many times. This is a historic time, and the most powerful people in both parties are so opposed to one another that one side simply has to win out over the other.”
That is the vision that Indiana Republicans thoroughly embraced Tuesday. It is a vision that treats government not as a mechanism for making decisions and solving problems, but instead as a battlefield in which every vote, every action is an act of war against the enemy.
It is a mindset that does not bode well for our nation’s future.
UPDATE at 9:20: Here’s an excerpt from a statement released by Sen. Lugar that is right on point:
“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.”
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
536 comments Add your comment
Real Scootter
May 9th, 2012
6:50 am
First?
Charlie Harper
May 9th, 2012
6:53 am
Jay,
You wrote a great column a few weeks ago about Georgia politicians losing the fear of voters. You were dead on with that one. How is this any different from Richard Lugar?
The man hasn’t made any pretense of living in Indiana since the 70’s. He spent much of the campaign making statements that voters who wanted a Senator to be responsive to their problems instead of his pet issues were too stupid to understand what he was doing.
He reeks of entitlement of office.
He servered honorably for the 6 terms for which he was elected. But every office holder – Every One – must get up every morning and rememeber who they actually work for, lest they no longer have their employment retained.
Dick Lugar lost the fear of voters. Likewise, it was right and proper for the voters to no longer need him.
Real Scootter
May 9th, 2012
6:55 am
I’ve always heard that there is nothing worse than getting what you ask for.
Normal Free, Plain and Simple
May 9th, 2012
6:56 am
I personally think that Dick Lugar’s defeat will be a boon for the Democratic Party. In a general election, Mr. Mourdocks views/beliefs will put him at a big disadvantage with moderates and progressives.
Doggone/GA
May 9th, 2012
6:57 am
“Dick Lugar lost the fear of voters. Likewise, it was right and proper for the voters to no longer need him.”
And do you really think they’ve just chosen someone who DOES “fear” the voters? It doesn’t sound like it. He sounds just like someone who will follow his so-called “principles” regardless of what the voters want.
Jm
May 9th, 2012
6:58 am
3 reasons this column is silly:
1. Joe Lieberman
2. Joe Lieberman
3. Joe Lieberman
Normal Free, Plain and Simple
May 9th, 2012
6:58 am
…on the other hand, I am always sorry to see a moderate Republican lose to a Radical, ideologue. But…like I said, this does bode well for a gained Democtat seat in the Senate.
jconservative
May 9th, 2012
6:59 am
Republicans are not going to like this, but Mourdock is a fan of Big Government.
Lugar needed to go. Been there to long.
It would have been nice to see a true conservative replace him. But it will not happen.
Curious
May 9th, 2012
6:59 am
Sounds like the Nazi party; they weren’t big on bipartisanship, either.
Charlie Harper
May 9th, 2012
6:59 am
Given that he’s plainly and bluntly stated his principles and the voters chose him (and likely will in November – this is Indiana after all), I think it will be hard to make the case that if he votes how he campaigned he somehow isn’t following the will of the majority that elected him.
Normal Free, Plain and Simple
May 9th, 2012
7:00 am
Three more reasons this column is silly…
1. jm
2. jm
3. jm
Jm
May 9th, 2012
7:00 am
“but instead as a battlefield in which every vote, every action is an act of war against the enemy”
- The Democratic Mantra Since 1952
Jm
May 9th, 2012
7:03 am
Fire them all. Makes sense.
Jm
May 9th, 2012
7:04 am
Incumbency is so powerful that it’s good to see an incumbent turned out every so often.
Good job Indiana. The state that also picked one of the best Republican governors in the nation.
Stevie Ray...Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right here I am....
May 9th, 2012
7:09 am
JAY,
Lugar certainly overstayed his welcome as I often wonder how effective professional politicians are after so long a tenure…it must be difficult to represent the voters if you spent 30% or more of your time over 30 some odd years pandering for special interest cash.
Of course the new guy will suck as well. He will arrive like a bantam rooster and in short order become completely ineffectual.
This new guy scares me…not as much as another 4 years of President Trillion (would that equate to the deficit going from 17 trillion to 24 trillion?) but more fodder certainly for reform.
Tea party folks are idealogical nuts….99%’ers are uninformed nuts…nothing has or will get done until we get the cash out of DC where the only bi partisan activities are disrespect for our money and corruption….
What do you suppose will happen if GOP gets control of Congress and WH Jay? Do you suggest the DEM’s will be anxious to compromise????
Thomas Heyward Jr.
May 9th, 2012
7:09 am
Exit one NDAA,Patriot Act signing Warmonger monster.
.
Enter a potential nother.
.
At least Liberty-Loving Americans can catch a quick breath before Mourdock learns the fine art of reneging on campaign promises with a straight face.
.
The Progressive fleecing of wealth will continue.
.
Carry on.
Jay
May 9th, 2012
7:11 am
Charlie, I think it’s a little disingenuous not to put this into context.
Republican primary voters had earlier rejected Lisa Murkowski in Alaska, Bob Bennett in Utah and Mike Castle in Delaware for being insufficiently conservative, meaning that they had made the mistake of occasionally thinking it worthwhile to be bipartisan. They tried to do the same to Orrin Hatch, who has fended them off by becoming a caricature of his former self. In the cases of Murkowski and Castle, this new GOP nominated total nut cases in their stead (Christine O’Donnell, anyone?) In Nevada, they threw away a great chance to defeat Harry Reid by nominating the fruitcake Sharron Angle of “Second Amendment solutions” fame rather than a sensible conservative.
Lugar had been in Washington a long time, no doubt. It is possible that in a normal election cycle, he might have faced a stern challenge for re-election. But this was an election about about anger, and Mourdock made it quite clear that he shared that anger and would be a very different type of senator, with very different goals. He intends to try to shut Washington down, and that’s the message that gave him a 20-point margin.
Jay
May 9th, 2012
7:15 am
“Given that he’s plainly and bluntly stated his principles and the voters chose him (and likely will in November – this is Indiana after all), I think it will be hard to make the case that if he votes how he campaigned he somehow isn’t following the will of the majority that elected him.”
Well, we’ll have to see what happens come November. Lugar was a lock in the general election, but Mourdock is another story. Obama carried Indiana in 2008, so it’s hard to argue that Democrats have no chance there.
But certainly, should Mourdock win on that message, it will mean the voters endorsed it.
That was kinda my point.
Stevie Ray...Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right here I am....
May 9th, 2012
7:15 am
JAY,
Maybe Washington needs to be shut down..the scorecard relative to our financially and fiduciary bankruptcy is pretty poor….and no matter how hard you try, you can’t blame one party more than the other…the problems are systemic…well meaning (apparently sans this guy) folks arrive and find they must morph into money grubbers as a priority over our needs….this whole “professional political” class has to go…imagine….
ByteMe - Political thug
May 9th, 2012
7:21 am
Maybe Washington needs to be shut down..the scorecard relative to our financially and fiduciary bankruptcy is pretty poor
A disfunctional government does not give the financial markets that fund it a warm fuzzy. Even if we’re not running a deficit, the government uses the financial markets to manage its cash flow and low interest rates are currently in everyone’s best interest.
Jay
May 9th, 2012
7:21 am
Stevie Ray, one of the reasons that Mourdock won is because out-of-state special interests dumped millions of dollars into defeating Lugar through SuperPACS, etc. He is a creature of this system too.
The only way that you’re going to change it is by changing the system. You have to address the money. Are you willing to do that? Most Republicans and conservatives are not. They like to wail about the corruption and special interests, but they will fight tooth and nail to preserve the rights of those special interests to spend as much money as they want however they want.
Their actions render their rhetoric meaningless.
Ivan
May 9th, 2012
7:25 am
“- The Democratic Mantra Since 1952″
Pretty much.
For a self-proclaimed peace loving group, they sure are quick to throw out the war analogies.
I would think these peopleknow what war is really like.
To the left though, it doesn’t bother them to dimish the definition of the term and jobs of those who gave the ultimate sacrifice.
ByteMe - Political thug
May 9th, 2012
7:28 am
To the left though, it doesn’t bother them to dimish the definition of the term and jobs of those who gave the ultimate sacrifice.
Or to the right, it seems:
http://www.gop.com/index.php/research/comments/the_administrations_war_on_coal/
Or do you just look for confirmation of your point of view?
Richard
May 9th, 2012
7:28 am
Hoosiers deserve everything they get now.
Mary Elizabeth
May 9th, 2012
7:29 am
Here is an apt analogy. Think the Civil War. Southerners were bound and determined to secede from the Union (Some still have fantasies of it happening today). There was little the North could have done to have stopped that momentum from happening. Lincoln, as finely tuned a mind that he possessed, and as healing a force that he tried to be after the war, nevertheless realized that the only way to preserve the Union was through winning that war. And he did what it took to achieve that.
Last night on PBS, I saw a documentary on Bill Clinton’s tenure as president. Clinton started out his presidency believing that his magnetism and good will would allow him to work with Republicans to improve America, with policies he wanted to implement. After his friend, Vince Foster, committed suicide, as a result of observing the intense political hostility in DC, both both Bill and Hillary Clinton realized that Republicans were not interested in compromise. A leading Republican leader in Congress told Bill Clinton, precisely that – that Republicans were not interested in compromise with him and that they were committed only to winning.
This coming election is not simply about Obama. This intense ideological war, generated by rigid Republican ideologues, has been on their agenda for decades, as I have frequently written. I ask readers simply to imagine what your lives would be like, being governed by that kind of mind and that kind of temperament. It is totally competitive. It is totally hierarchial in vision. “You lose. I win.” That is the same mentality that could say to world leaders, “Bring it on.”
We must see what is happening straight on. And we must defeat this unbalanced force. It is dangerous. It is not in keeping with America’s original tenets, as perceived by our wise Founding Fathers. Your vote counts, and your voice matters.
SwamiDave
May 9th, 2012
7:29 am
Frankly, America has need of leaders who will revert 30-40 years of collectivist & redistributionist policies. For too long, the “war” has been between liberals advancing “progressivism” and their opponents who are satisfied to *slow* it.
American taxpayers pay too much. They have historically held their end of the bargain providing revenue. We have a myriad of fiscal issues & the onus is on the beneficiary class to take more responsibility for themselves AND OTHERS¡
Soon-to-be former Senator Lugar was simply another in a growing pool of politicians who quit representing the Americans who make America work. In the end, his advertising and campaign was relegated to Democratic talking-points of fear-mongering the elderly and whining about why we CANT do big things to promote growth & opportunity.
Unfortunately, our political system is in many cases a warzone of ideas. However, collectivists have made it so & been doing so for over two generations steadily gaining ground with much of their opposition (like Lugar) negotiating & compromising their losses.
Frankly Jay, your real issue & that of your liberal friends is the shock of opposition intent to retake ground and return to principles of growth & advancement. We are happy to work in a spirit of compromise & bipartisanship in support of the things that make America great. We’re simply not going to “work together” on policies that spread dependence & irresponsibility.
-SD
JohnnyReb
May 9th, 2012
7:32 am
Jay, you don’t get it. It’s not that we don’t love you. No, it’s that what you want to do is not best. Think of a partent whose kid wants to go to the sleezy side of town to party and drink. Compromise would be telling him/her its OK to go but don’t drink.
barking frog
May 9th, 2012
7:33 am
6 months and he’ll be
forgotten. The Republic
moves on. Political fame
is more fleeting than
Hollywood.
Jay
May 9th, 2012
7:35 am
I’m not your kid, JohnnyReb. You’re not my parent. We are adults and we should be able to come to some compromise. If there is no compromise and you insist that we fight it out, well, OK. We can do it that way too, if necessary. But it’s a pretty stupid way of handling things if you ask me.
ByteMe - Political thug
May 9th, 2012
7:36 am
I don’t mind that Lugar lost. He was well-regarded, but had definitely worn out his welcome with his own constituents. It does open up a chance for a moderate Democrat to take the seat, which is probably what Republicans in Indiana didn’t envision.
Lugar will make a really good Ambassador to Lithuania.
Mick
May 9th, 2012
7:39 am
Goodbye dick lugar, I will not shed a tear for you or your hard core party because in the end you pretty much voted for everything they asked you to, then cannabalized you as your reward. This progression or regression of the republican party has to play itself out, where do they go from here? They are not an attractive party, hostile to women, immigrants and minorities, their days are numbered and good riddance…
Gale
May 9th, 2012
7:39 am
Increasing partisan politics. And an off topic BOO! North Carolina!
Good morning to everyone else.
Mary Elizabeth
May 9th, 2012
7:40 am
This battle is not a matter of making America “dependent and irresponsible.” That is propaganda simply to win your voice and your vote. Most are for independence and responsiblity.
This is a battle of whether the few will dominate and control the many – or not. Those of power and wealth, who have the money to sway minds and votes, want to control this nation through a vision in which the corporate and the monied interests have the only voices that matter.
ByteMe - Political thug
May 9th, 2012
7:40 am
And an off topic BOO! North Carolina!
Don’t sweat it. The Supremes still have the final say and they aren’t talking yet.
Stevie Ray...Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right here I am....
May 9th, 2012
7:40 am
JAY,
OF COURSE I’M WILLING TO CHANGE IT! I’m at best an independent with left leaning human rights and related issues and conservative cash and size issues. Of course Mourdock is part of the system on and electorate basis….can you name me one Democrat or GOP who isn’t.
If I was making the rules, it would be simple…corporations are not people, public money only for elections, change lobby rules so to preserve representation but eliminate cash and gifts, prison time for insider trading, directing public funds to bundlers et al, land deals or any other enrichment using our tax dollars by congress….also, I would go the UK route and limit presidential campaigns to 6 months or so….
I keep sending my brilliant agenda to the likes of Pelosi, DopyBoehner, Reid, and McConnell but, and this may surprise you, I get no response excepting invitations to contribute…it’s like dealing with India based technical customer service…
Richard
May 9th, 2012
7:41 am
People think the Tea Party is the answer. They will never be the answer. Those of us that lived during the 60s remember the changes that came about. Anti-War movement, the Civil Rights movement. Those changes only were brought about because those causes began and nurtured from outside the system. The Tea Party will never make the changes as they are “part” of the system. The Tea Party talks a good game, but they do not talk about the things that are real important to the American people. If the Tea Party really wanted to tackle the big issues, let them start with Health Care. The health care system in the US is bankrupting the citizens and bankrupting the government but you never hear the Tea Party tackling that issue. That is because the Tea Party is part of the system and they do not want to alienate the lobbyists in trying to change that. So they say they want to abolish the IRS. It is to bad the American people are so idiotic that they buy into a group that is part of the very system the American people want to change? The Tea Party sells what every Republican has been selling for the last 32 years, ever since Ronald Reagan, they sell fear. They have no reasonable answers, they are afraid to tackle the big problems, but American people want change so bad that they will do anything to vote people in without consideration of what the group truly can deliver.
Aquagirl
May 9th, 2012
7:42 am
Sen. Lugar was a big player in getting Soviet WMD’s dismantled after their government collapse. For the Tea Potty, lowering the chances you’ll end up as a pile of glowing dust is a sign of weakness.
So long Mr. Lugar, and thank you for your service.
ByteMe - Political thug
May 9th, 2012
7:42 am
it’s like dealing with India based technical customer service…
Nominated for thought of the day.
Thomas Heyward Jr.
May 9th, 2012
7:42 am
The Patriot Act was passed in the House by 357 to 66 (of 435) and in the Senate by 98 to 1.
About the same for the NDAA of 2012.
About the same for various recent wars.
.
There is ALOT of bi-partisonship going on.
It just isn’t prudent for the state-sponsored media to mention it.
ByteMe - Political thug
May 9th, 2012
7:43 am
That is because the Tea Party is part of the system and they do not want to alienate the lobbyists in trying to change that.
They can’t because they were created and funded by the very same lobbyists who are looking to control the system. Can’t bite your master without getting a swat across the nose.
Jay
May 9th, 2012
7:43 am
Well, Stevie Ray, you can certainly sign me up for your program.
We cannot change this by sending different people into the same system. We have to change the system.
Mick
May 9th, 2012
7:44 am
mary elizabeth
Yes, it does matter who becomes president, I agree with you on that. What I was pointing out is that this real estate crash has to play itself out, which it will, no matter who becomes president. Naturally, and for many other reasons, obama is the right man to see it through. Romney would be the president of the haves, closing his eyes to all the have nots..
ByteMe - Political thug
May 9th, 2012
7:44 am
It just isn’t prudent for the state-sponsored media to mention it.
the word you wanted was “profitable”, not prudent.
Paul
May 9th, 2012
7:45 am
My no compromise, everything’s a battle to be won and an ideology to reign supreme is good.
The Taliban’s ideology is bad.
Yeah, right -
Stevie Ray...Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right here I am....
May 9th, 2012
7:45 am
GALE, I couldn’t agree more regarding NCarolina..another example of the similarity between workers’ unions and religions…both fighting tooth and nail to remain relevant in a world that is passing them by….it’s just a matter of time before folks don’t care about same sex issues…heck, same sex has been around at least as long as the traditional variety….religion continues to retard social evolution…
Gale
May 9th, 2012
7:47 am
Jay @7:43 So true.
Stevie Ray...Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right here I am....
May 9th, 2012
7:47 am
JAY,
I actually have a response from that crybaby Boehner’s office inviting me to donate and to make an effort to visit his office if in DC….you believe that? I’d go on a Dennis Milleresque rant and get tossed out of there faster than a CEO at a 99% rally.
Normal Free, Plain and Simple
May 9th, 2012
7:48 am
“Romney would be the president of the haves, closing his eyes to all the have nots.”
Truth!
stands for decibels
May 9th, 2012
7:49 am
they sure are quick to throw out the war analogies.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=50854
stands for decibels
May 9th, 2012
7:50 am
also this Republican-named “war”:
http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/04/obamas-senseless-war-on-catholics/
Finn McCool (The System Isn't Broken; It's Fixed ~ from an Occupy sign)
May 9th, 2012
7:51 am
America has need of leaders who will revert 30-40 years of collectivist & redistributionist policies
I agree Swami, we need to stop the wealthy from taking more of our money.
stands for decibels
May 9th, 2012
7:51 am
and this “war” also too
http://www.gop.com/index.php/research/comments/obamas_war_on_appalachia/
stands for decibels
May 9th, 2012
7:52 am
Anyway, I’m fine with primary challengers, and it would seem Jay is too, and per usual those attacking Jay are clueless poopie-heads.
stands for decibels
May 9th, 2012
7:53 am
Indiana Gooper voters are pretty a-holish, is my take-away.
carlosgvv
May 9th, 2012
7:53 am
The dumbing down of America and global warming have something in common. You hope its not as bad as it appears but, deep down, you know it is accelerating with each passing year.
We face the prospect of Romney as President with a Tea Party majority in both the House and Senate. While this will certainly give the dumbed down the Govt. they deserve, it will give the rest of us what we definitely don’t deserve.
Our only hope is that we can get Obama for at least one more term before this dumbing down reaches the point of no return.
Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette
May 9th, 2012
7:53 am
did some one call for political war?
A monthly newsletter published by the Greene County Republican Committee in Virginia is raising eyebrows for including a column in its March edition that calls for an “armed revolution” if President Barack Obama is elected to a second term in November.
Like Jay I think fighting it out would not be the smart thing to do…
but if they insist….
That Black Guy who is a "con" and a Vet. STOP SPITTING ON ME!!!!!
May 9th, 2012
7:53 am
Curious May 9th, 2012 6:59 am
Sounds like the Nazi party; they weren’t big on bipartisanship, either.
_________________________________
Well THAT didn’t take long.
stands for decibels
May 9th, 2012
7:54 am
but.. are IN Gooper primary voters actually more a-holish than North Carolina referendum voters?
Discuss.
Mary Elizabeth
May 9th, 2012
7:56 am
Hi Mick, Good Morning!
I was referring to SwamiDave’s remarks at 7:29 am – not yours. More often than not, I agree with your remarks.
BTW, yesterday, my remarks were not meant to be a gentle “slap to Mick’s wrists” but a call for Americans to see that there is a stark difference in direction our nation will take between the visions of Obama and Romney (or better stated, the forces behind each candidate) – and to choose well.
Your remarks yesterday had simply given me the means to make that case. (I try to stay away from the personal. But for the record, you’re a good guy, imo!
)
bob
May 9th, 2012
7:58 am
Jay, lets face it, if you moved to Indiana you would vote for the dem over Luger if Luger was the nominee. So don’t whine if repubs did not vote for him.
barking frog
May 9th, 2012
7:58 am
I won’t throw stones at
Indiana as long as I live
in Georgia.
Peadawg
May 9th, 2012
7:59 am
“and this “war” also too”
Oh quit whining, stands.
stands for decibels
May 9th, 2012
8:00 am
Granny @ 7.53, check out the actual newsletter itself being cited, STILL ONLINE! …
http://gcrcgop.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/march2012.pdf
one f-cknutter after another. It’s actually hard to separate the “armed insurrection” guy from the rest of the f-cknuttery in this Gooper publication.
bob
May 9th, 2012
8:00 am
Finn, how do wealthy people take your money ? Do they rob you at gunpoint ?
stands for decibels
May 9th, 2012
8:00 am
I won’t throw stones at
Indiana as long as I live
in Georgia.
Kinda feel the same away about North Carolinians, actually.
Peadawg
May 9th, 2012
8:01 am
“but.. are IN Gooper primary voters actually more a-holish than North Carolina referendum voters?
Discuss.”
blogspot.com is ready when you are, sport.
stands for decibels
May 9th, 2012
8:01 am
PD, you really don’t like it when I give multiple reasons for why someone’s assertion of nonsense as a “fact” is incorrect, do you?
stands for decibels
May 9th, 2012
8:02 am
And this?
blogspot.com is ready when you are, sport.
How is that not on-topic?
Peadawg
May 9th, 2012
8:02 am
On topic, it certainly does seem like Lugar over-stayed his welcome. It’s just a shame Republicans voted for someone so far Right to replace him.
Adam
May 9th, 2012
8:02 am
The man who defeated Lugar, Richard Mourdock, proposes to abolish the IRS
And this is exactly why he will never get ANYWHERE.
JKL2
May 9th, 2012
8:03 am
-“… a lawmaker who spent decades
Sounds like the poster boy for term limits. Time to drain the swamp.
It’s a shame Nancy Pelosi is just an old windbag and doesn’t even believe in the crap she puts out. I guess she she have read it first…
AU Liberal in ATL
May 9th, 2012
8:04 am
Indiana is now officially a southern state. Those poor, stupid people.
Jm
May 9th, 2012
8:06 am
Ivan
To democrats compromise means: accept higher taxes and higher spending
Adam
May 9th, 2012
8:06 am
You gotta laugh at the righties getting offended over the term “war” when it was all they were spouting about tons of stuff the Democrats did before they got caught with their pants down over their policy positions that affect women so harshly.
ByteMe - Political thug
May 9th, 2012
8:07 am
To democrats compromise means: accept higher taxes and higher spending
#LIE
Peadawg
May 9th, 2012
8:09 am
Hell Adam, these days I laugh at anybody whining about one side using the term “war”. Everything is a “war” these days.
ByteMe - Political thug
May 9th, 2012
8:09 am
Hell Adam, these days I laugh at anybody whining about one side using the term “war”.Everything is a “war” these days.
Who started the war on drugs anyway? I’m clear on who started the neverending war on poverty.
JKL2
May 9th, 2012
8:10 am
curious- Sounds like the Nazi party; they weren’t big on bipartisanship, either.
Is that why the American Nazi’s are firmly behind obama and all your peace-loving friends at OWS?
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2011/10/more-support-from-the-american-nazi-party-for-obama-endorsed-ows.html
Finn McCool (The System Isn't Broken; It's Fixed ~ from an Occupy sign)
May 9th, 2012
8:11 am
Sure, Bob, all these years later we can see the poor getting richer and the rich getting poorer. Do you Cons even understand what the term “redistribution” means?
If you can’t understand how it’s happening to you, your savings, your 401k’s, then just keep bending over and humming a tune to drown it all out.
Jay
May 9th, 2012
8:11 am
Jay, lets face it, if you moved to Indiana you would vote for the dem over Luger if Luger was the nominee. So don’t whine if repubs did not vote for him.
Well Bob, I’m not sure that’s true. Lugar was elected to the Senate in 1976, the same year that Jimmy Carter got elected. It also happened to be the first election year in which I could vote. I voted for Gerald Ford, because I thought of myself as a moderate Republican back then. I identified with guys like Lugar and that wing of the GOP.
Then Reagan came into office, bringing the anti-choice religious right with him, peddling the nonsense that he could cut taxes AND raise revenue, attacking environmental protection, etc. From then on, voting Republican required a willing suspension of disbelief that I could not pull off.
Finn McCool (The System Isn't Broken; It's Fixed ~ from an Occupy sign)
May 9th, 2012
8:12 am
JKL2 posts discussions from atlasshrugs2000? LOL!
Yeah, those are some verified factoids you got there!
Recon 0311 2533
May 9th, 2012
8:12 am
It was long overdo for Lugar to depart Congress. Mourdock is right about bipartisanship with Democrats. Bipartisanship in the minds of Democrats is to go along with everything they want. Lugar to often caved and finally paid the price.
godless heathen
May 9th, 2012
8:13 am
At least pronounce it properly. It’s wawher done here.
Aquagirl
May 9th, 2012
8:16 am
Who started the war on drugs anyway?
Richard Nixon. You’d think by now America would have figured out this is a bad idea.
TGT
May 9th, 2012
8:16 am
I would think the dems would be more concerned about this voter result being a declaration for “all out war:” Felon beats Obama in several West Virginia counties.
Jm
May 9th, 2012
8:17 am
Re public funding for elections: doesn’t fix primaries folks
Which is what this column is about
The system is the system
Get used to it
Use elections to fire bad politicians and don’t accept incumbent with a rubber stamp
ByteMe - Political thug
May 9th, 2012
8:17 am
Richard Nixon.
Thanks. I figured it was either him or Reagan, but Reagan seemed later than when I remember hearing about it.
Mick
May 9th, 2012
8:18 am
mary elizabeth
In another era, romney might be OK, but with this intransigent, scortched earth version of the republican party, electing him would be like throwing gas on a fire…bad for him and most certainly bad for america.
JKL2
May 9th, 2012
8:18 am
byteme- Who started the war on drugs anyway?
I would say Betty Ford, but it was actually Nixon.
Recon 0311 2533
May 9th, 2012
8:18 am
“Then Reagan came into office, bringing the anti-choice religious right with him, peddling the nonsense that he could cut taxes AND raise revenue,”
My, my, my just a few days ago Jay was describing Ronald Reagan as unacceptable to today’s GOP and implying that he was a Lugar type Republican.
Finn McCool (The System Isn't Broken; It's Fixed ~ from an Occupy sign)
May 9th, 2012
8:18 am
MAn, I have got to start my own right wing, hate women, hate gays, hate children, hate christmas, hate anybody not white and protestant web site.
Conservanuts chew it up like cornflakes! Believe it all, repost it all, send emails to their kith and kin with links in it.
There’s money in them thar hateful hills!
ByteMe - Political thug
May 9th, 2012
8:19 am
My, my, my just a few days ago Jay was describing Ronald Reagan as unacceptable to today’s GOP and implying that he was a Lugar type Republican.
How exactly are the two statements incompatible?
Adam
May 9th, 2012
8:20 am
Is that why the American Nazi’s are firmly behind obama and all your peace-loving friends at OWS?
LOL. Even the Heartland Institute knows this kind of argument sucks. “The Unabomber believes in global warming, WHAT ABOUT YOU?”
Geez..
May 9th, 2012
8:20 am
I love a good war….
Jm
May 9th, 2012
8:20 am
Hashtag LIE
that was funny even if wrong
Adam
May 9th, 2012
8:21 am
Hey JKL2, Drag Queens endorse Chick-Fil-A? You don’t, DO YOU?
ByteMe - Political thug
May 9th, 2012
8:21 am
There’s money in them thar hateful hills!
It has always been thus. Stoopid people are willing to funnel money to people who will talk a good game and make them feel better about their sorry lives. See TV evangelists.
Recon 0311 2533
May 9th, 2012
8:21 am
It’s looking like it might be getting time for Obama to get ready for the shellac.
Federal Inmate Keith Judd Receiving Sizable Percent of Vote in West Virginia Democratic Primary
May 9th, 2012
8:21 am
Barack Obama was not the only Democrat on the ballot on Tuesday in West Virginia’s Democratic Presidential Primary. Keith Judd – also known as Inmate No. 11593-051 at the Federal Correctional Institution in Texarkana, Texas – was running against him.
Judd, who is serving out a 17.5 year sentence for extortion, currently has received 40 percent of the vote, with 83 percent of precincts reporting, according to The Associated Press. Obama currently has received 60 percent of the vote.
http://news.yahoo.com/federal-inmate-keith-judd-receiving-sizable-percent-vote-031637339–abc-news-politics.html
Finn McCool (The System Isn't Broken; It's Fixed ~ from an Occupy sign)
May 9th, 2012
8:21 am
Obama caught in bed with aliens!
Send this link to your grandma, yokels!