If there's a term limit, and he can't be re-elected regardless of the will of the voters, how is that true democracy?

Good - vote out every incumbent from Obama on down.

Thomas you are correct...some of those folks have been there since the seventies....

Yeah, I never liked him much anyway. I don't know much about Mourdock though, other than that he was backed by the Tea Party which will surely have many liberal's panties in bunches. I agree about the term limits.

SI

Beezle, it's the will of the voters to have term limits.......

now let's pray the GOP establishment doesn't blow it again for another Tea Party candidate - GET BEHIND THE CONSERVATIVE FOR A CHANGE, GOP!!!!

What Luger need to do is run as an independent like Murkowski did in Alaska. That is what he really needs to do. He will get a lot of support if he does that.

Beezle, it's the will of the voters to have term limits.......

If that were true, an amendment should be created to establish it.

It's interesting that the definiton of true democracy now involves the minority of voters who show up at Republican primaries dictating who the candidate will be. I guess that is consistent with the idea that the GOP minority in the Senate has the ability to prevent any legislation from even being debated, or that a president elected by a majority of the voters is somehow illegitimate, or that a Health Care Law that was passed by majority in the House and by 60 duly elected senators was rammed down our throats. Consistent... incredibly twisted, but consistent.

Hopefully its just you in the car as you cross that crumbling bridge and not your whole family. Keep that Tea Party sticker on your cars bumper so we know who's A$$ to kick in four years or sooner when the ECONOMY Crashes, for GOOD.

Vote all the crooks out, BOTH PARTIES, both sides of Congress. Congress has exempted themselves from the rules they want their "sheep" to play by! Congress should be tried for TREASON!

It's interesting that the definiton of true democracy now involves the minority of voters who show up at Republican primaries dictating who the candidate will be. I guess that is consistent with the idea that the GOP minority in the Senate has the ability to prevent any legislation from even being debated, or that a president elected by a majority of the voters is somehow illegitimate, or that a Health Care Law that was passed by majority in the House and by 60 duly elected senators was rammed down our throats. Consistent... incredibly twisted, but consistent.

Hi. The United States is a republic. It has been that way since its founding. Consistently.

spelled his name wrong... other than that great post Dee!

some sanity please,

You realize of course the all incumbents would include: Ron Paul, Boehner, McConnell, Cantor, Sessions, and in fact all House Republicans.

If the local and state goverments would have used the money they have collected from Gas taxes we would have money! they kept stealing out of the kitty. Another reminder that only home owners realize Our house taxes pay our police,fire and schools not the federal goverment or Biden and Obama if we had to rely on them personally with their charities we would be extinct ...Get your big noses out Federal goverment needs to take a 4 year vacation. Their job is defending our borders and country from peril such as wars,extreme weather, and keeping their hands off our private lives

I don't know about needing more partisanship in DC, but we definately need less compromise. Compromise is what got us into the fix we are in where most Americans get enough free stuff from the government that they want to continue to vote for it, or for more of it. Compromise is what gets us 80,000 pages of new regulations a year since Congress keeps giving someone else, or something else, the power to do their job. Compromise is what has us at the point where even a ONE PERCENT reduction in the rate of government growth compared to the projected rate of growth has the left in a tizzy, calling it extreme and draconian.

If we can elect more people who are less willing to compromise so that Congress does less, over time, we will all be better for it. But if we are going to compromise, let's at least compromise towards, not away from, the enumerated powers in the Constitution.

Lugar was a fine man, but he didn't fight hard enough to stop the massive, and it has been a truly massive event, expansion of the scope and depth of the federal government's involvement in your life. His defeat is proof, if nothing else, that term limits already exist: Voters simply have to exert their own power.

@ Thomas: First of All, the United States is not a "True Democracy". In fact, we are not even a democracy at all, but a republic. If we were a true democracy, we would have daily direct involvement in the government, but we elect officials to do it for us. That being said, bring on the term limits and dethrone those Moderates; and congratulations to Mr. Mourdock on his primary win.

Well Dee - I guess your going to decline your Medicare and Social Security check too???

Excellent! Now Joe Donnelly (D-IN) has an easier chance of winning since the latest poll has them tied at 35% head-to-head.
Google: Christine Matthews: Senate race key will be primary composition

Donnelly 2012!

Vote out all that have robbed more than 2 terms.

Keith, that is probably true, and I guess we should be glad for it, but seeing Senator Lugar go is watching the loyal opposition continue to fade away.

Our government needs true liberals and true conservatives to hash out the issues and provide the best legislation to serve us all. Losing people like Senators Lugar and Snowe deprives us of the true conservatives and leaves us with the kind of people Rich and DeeJan seem to prefer -- ideologues who will not participate in the give and take of a representative government.

You folks who are talking about term limits -- this election proves that the people will vote out even long-term incumbents they are not happy with. Term limits exist -- they are called elections. By choosing Mourdock over Lugar, Republicans are making a clear statement about who they want representing them.

Hopefully everyone in the country will understand that statement, they will see exactly where Republicans stand, and they will reject that stance.

another long term freeloader on the gov dole says goodby .... he got away with it for 60% of his life ... but wont help his constituants get affordable health care

Regarding democracy,why do you think there is a limit on presidents? To prevent anyone person from gaining too much power and control. These carreer crooks should be allowed two 4 year terms and thats it.

Way to go Indiana - we will continue to kick the incumbents out of Congress all the way through Nov.

We are sick and tired of the do nothing, finger pointing Bull@!$%# up there!

Hey Morrigan,

We've been compromising ourselves away from limited government for a very long time. It accelerated in the 30s, and again in the 60s, and now once again. But it never stopped its inexorable drift towards more and more government, rather than more constitutional government. If being ideological is so bad, and compromising so good, then how are we at this point? Please don't run the "Bush Ruined Everything Flag" up the pole again. The problems we face TODAY have been building for decades. Bush didn't create the environment which brought us a government dominated by entitlement spending. That frog was cooked very slowly.

Bush didn't bring us a tax code so counter-productive as it is. It took decades to get it this way. Reagan, with TEFRA, helped clean it up, but this was a hiccup, not a trend. Bush didn't bring us dozens of departments and agencies all eager to expand their turf (not a one of them operates a single program which would cause the elimination of their agency by actually fixing problems). This has taken decades to develop.

So I don't know what you think would work, other than you think ideology doesn't, this despite you having your own ideology. But I think the evidence is in: Our society, if we want to retain our constitutional heritage, isn't compatible with the modern welfare state. We are struggling to figure out how to fix this problem, with people like Obama wanting more of a welfare state to make the transition complete (that is HIS ideology) and people like me who regard our constitution with more reverence and want government confined to those powers granted to it therein (that is MY ideology). What do you want?

CAL USA ...(#1.9)..."It's interesting that the definiton of true democracy now involves the minority of voters who show up at Republican primaries dictating who the candidate will be."

Same process got Obama the nomination in 2008...Funny though...cause it was in Indiana that they had to fudge the signatures to even get Obama on the Primary Ballot....he didn't even have enough support from that minority of Democrat primary voters to sign his ballot petitions....

Hehehe, Go tea party!!!

so let's start with spending cuts by chopping 50% out of the MYTHICAL "defense" budget. Is there ANY reason the USA needs to spend a much on "defense" as EVERY OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WHOLE WORLD?? IF that is DEFENSE then we have become what Eisenhower TOLD US TO BEWARE!

THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX - IT WANTS YOU AND YOUR MONEY

Republican Teabaggers: going off the rails on a crazy train.

The right-wing wants a militant party with NO compromise on anything. My way or the highway. This is incredibly naive and dangerous in a democracy. Oh yea, they are against democracy as well... this is a Republic and NOT a democracy they love to insist. Nonsense of course, but it fits their anti-democracy agenda.

I'm sorry to say that Republicans are now manifestly not just a political party, they are the enemy. Sad day but this is how sane people need to start viewing the hard right turn the Teabaggers have introduced into our politics. They will not settle until the entire country is run by billionaires and corporations and they absolutely will not tolerate giving even a penny to a poor person.

There is only one way to defeat an enemy... war, all-out political war on the right-wing Republicans. If the war is lost we will be living in the 1930's.

How ironic to hear a conservative talking about term limits for a GOP candidate. How many Republicans lied their way into office by pretending to espouse term limits, then conveniently forgot their promises when their two terms were up?

Conservatives are despicable. They will tell any lie to get elected. They refuse to work the system by seeking compromise and the middle ground. They polarize the political process and damage the nation in doing so.

How sad that there is no longer room in the political process for people like Luger who find the middle ground. Imagine what our nation would look like if the Framers had not had the ability to compromise, an art that is lost on right-wingers. These people are so narrow, so small.

If Lugar ran independent like Lieberman did he'd probably win, who votes in primaries anyway, yawn

@overlord, The USA is a republic, considering you do not know that, clearly, you were given an education in the public school system at the expense of all the people that own property in the town/city in which you grew up. To bad you did not take advantage of the education the tax paying community gave you. With that said, I beleive public education is great, it's just sad that alot of people choose to not be educated.

I'm not an advocate of career politicians, but Lugar was a voice of reason and the people of Indiana must have their heads up their asses. I don't look forward to 4 more years of school yard bickering between the parties but those Tea Party weasels freak me out. While they say they will get government out of your daily lives-they want to replace it with evangelical nonsense. You are never free of these people.

Scale down that defense to 1/3 of it's size, close those 741 military bases on foreign soil, stop killing and disabling our young with your damned wars. Peace and prosperity are hand in hand--unless you're an arms manufacturer.

Rich, thank you for your thoughtful response.

One problem with the 'limited government' argument is that the proponents of limited government only want it limited their way.

They have no problems with laws that make it hard or impossible for some citizens to vote, or laws that invade women's bodies, or laws that affirm corporations as people. So I don't buy this talk about limited government.

In the 1930's, one of my grandfathers saw Roosevelt as the devil incarnate. The other grandfather saw him as a savior. Roosevelt's programs existed to help the people. His opponents saw those programs as interfering with what today would be called the free market. Roosevelt was right, the corporatists were wrong. The Great Depression was a tough time for many Americans, but it would have been way tougher without the New Deal.

Under Eisenhower in the 1950's, taxes were high. If we reinstated Eisenhower's tax framework for a few years, the deficit would come under control pretty quickly. Also the GI Bill allowed lots of people to acquire the skills and the education they needed to create the postwar economy -- that brought increased prosperity to many Americans, and to America itself.

Lyndon Johnson wanted to be remembered for his domestic policies -- but found himself embroiled in foreign affairs through our involvement in Vietnam. His Great Society initiative recognized the disparity between the haves and the have-nots, and produced programs from Sesame Street to Medicare to address those disparities. You may or may not remember, at that time the newspapers were covering elderly people living in garages and eating cat food... Government programs were created to try to stop such things from happening.

I will not blame G.W. Bush for everything. The momentum began under Ronald Reagan, who began dismantling the government and privatizing wherever he could. That continued through George H.W. Bush and to some extent even under Clinton -- though it was not really recognized under the prosperity of the dot com boom. But it came back with a vengeance under G.W. Bush, and haunts us to this day.

Corporations as they are defined today are like psychpaths. They exist for one purpose and one purpose only, and that is to make money. They do not understand long-term issues, just short-term profit. Deregulation has caused much of what we see today. Those problems we have seen building for decades have been caused by the decreased regulation and increased greed of corporations, not by bigger government.

Already, much of government is outsourced. Perhaps our government needs to take that back. Do our own work. Not hire one big corporation to write government checks, another to keep government records, and another to do the training of troops. Become smaller by becoming more centralized. I don't know.

But I do know that this 'small government' idea is what Kurt Vonnegut called in one of his novels, a "granfalloon.' Something that a lot of people may believe in, but is essentially meaningless.

sorry -- psychopaths, not psychpaths

And I appreciate your respect for the Constitution. I respect the Constitution also; but I believe that the programs that exist to help people are in line with the spirit, if not the language, of the Constitution.

assuming that Democracy is a good thing....

I don't like angry mobs personally.

Now the Dem has a shot at this seat in Nov.

Whoa, the teapubs are giddy with excitement. Hope the the bagger candidates lose in November and take down Romney with them. Independents will never vote for the crazies.

Sickofthieves-841667@overlord, The USA is a republic, considering you do not know that, clearly, you were given an education in the public school system at the expense of all the people that own property in the town/city in which you grew up. To bad you did not take advantage of the education the tax paying community gave you.

Blah, blah, blah, standard issue hyperbolic rhetoric whipped-up by Fox News ilk corporate political hacks and honestly you've gone to that well so many times it just sounds silly. Republicans are convinced this is a Republic because of course "Republic"ans and they hate democracy because "Democra"ts are socialist, hippy commies. Evil democracy! Of course attacking democracy has nice benefits to multi-billionaires as well so there are numerous reasons the Republicans like to subvert government and democracy.

Being a Republic and being a democracy are not mutually exclusive and anyone that reads the Constitution can see for themselves that in fact we are both. We are a representative democracy and that was laid out very specifically and in great detail in the Constitution.

Of course my response isn't for your benefit because we both know that your diatribe is just serving a greater agenda and is designed to distract from constructive public discourse.

Treasurer Richard Mourdock, who was backed by conservatives ranging from the National Rifle Association to local Tea Party activists to the Washington-based fiscal conservative group the Club for Growth and Freedom Works. How's that no government involvement in our businesses going.? Just buy your way into the White House . Buy the elections, pay them to vote, and then tell us about our "Freedom of choice" . Why doesn't this group just cut through the chase and pay all the experienced establishment senators to get out and pay the stooges whom have zero experience but take orders well to replace them while the rest of America sits and watches a fake democracy. Corruption and greed. Paid for by your local Freedom works, neo conservatives and the good old NRA. Always count on the NRA. We need more gun sales since the threat of Obama is gone so what else can they do to sell more guns??? What are the plans to create fear??

Could this end up with a Democratic pick up in the Senate??

Richard Lugar,battling Richard Mourdock,

the battle of dicks. Who won? the shorter of the two

Good riddance

Term limits a L-O-N-G overdue.

This plea about "public service" is a crock we should NEVER have allowed the situation to arise where anyone can spend their whole 'working' life at a public trough.

But how do the American public force the professional troughers to change the law on this?

If Jim DeMented is supporting someone you know they are an extremist loon.

DeMint makes me embarrassed to be from SC.

Run to the right Republicans, see where you end up.

Here is where I get lost - the radicals want everyone thrown out - but when they post on individual policy, they want the status quo or return to something even more backwards... you guys/gals keep me amused to say the least.

I don't see why a Senator or Congressperson is opposed to term limits - hell, they make more as a lobbyist when they leave office. If we are going to be dumping these guys - at least form a party that likes US citizens, this backing of obstructionists is anti American.

The Tea Part wants to restrict every right you have - they would probably even want to outlaw thong undies.

@pedagoguish-1262191 Your entire post is such a load of brain-dead, brain-washed, kool-aid guzzling horsesh!t; oh, nevermind, you're just staying in step with the rest of the liberal half-wits posting here. Same old same old, still trying to blame the right for everything the demoncrats have screwed up since they were hatched. Too bad for the marxist lefties, which is most of the idiots libtards here, that the majority of the american public has finally woken up and stopped buying your crap. So blame the tea party and everyone else your glorious leaders have instructed you to blame, since you're unable to think for yourselves, then sit back and cwy your widdle eyes out in November.

Morrigan,

Some really good comments. I actually hate to see Lugar go, even though he was Republican. Lugar was one of the old school Senators who served all the State's citizens and not just those who voted for him. Indiana is a Red State, but it isn't that red. Indiana is a case of the classic Urban/Rural divide. They don't have a lot of big metropolitan areas, but the ones they have tend to be pretty blue. The rest of the State is deep Red. But taken in total, it's probably a 55/45 split or maybe a bit closer. So whether a Republican or a Democrat holds a Senate position, representing the entire State, he/she should by definition be moderate leaning slightly left or right based upon his party.

But that isn't how the far right views things. They see any victory meaning the other side must lose as an outcome. They want the people they elect to only represent them and the rest be damned. This is simply wrong minded. It might makes sense for a House Representative to be staunchly left or right because their district may very well be that way. But it is simply wrong for a US Senator to take that approach when he represents a State that is fairly closely divided. This was one of the reasons for the concept of two houses of Congress.

Lugar was a Senator for a very long time because he represented the entire State. He did the job as he is supposed to. Centrists and even Democrats voted for Lugar because he gave them fair representation. That is why he was around for so long. But he didn't get those votes in this primary and the whole State will lose because of it. Election results should not divide the voters into winners and losers, but that is exactly how some see it. Election results should divide the voters into those who won and those who didn't win. To some, they see this as the same thing, but it isn't. Lugar saw the later view and that is what made him a pretty good Senator.

Wouldn't single term, term limits for ALL public officials be great (provided the limit had real teeth and prevented lobbyists from simply enjoying a system of changing their last puppet for the next)?

The only thing term limits accomplish is to make the revolving door go faster.

We already have term limits. They are called elections and this one proves that.

GREATNEWS .. THE SELF SERVING LUGAR IS GONE ... one of the worst partisan senators in history

Unfortunately Lugar has over the years supported the Democratic Party drive to create a nanny state. Where cradle to grave entitlements keep people voting for Democrats at the detriment to our once great nation. It is not about the nation it is about power and the anything to get elected mentality of liberals.

The Democrats have been buying votes with entitlements throughout our nations history. They start a massive spending program that runs way over projections, never do any oversight, and then block all attempts to reform them before they go bankrupt or the nation does.

I say good riddance to Lugar, it is long overdue. Now we need to clean up the rest of the mess and start over. Washington has been failing this country for decades, and nothing going on there now suggests it is going to change until the voters take it back.

Kick all incumbents out so they can live lavishly off the perks and benefits they afforded themselves at taxpayer expense, but maybe then the bleeding can be stopped. We can no longer afford Washington as it is today. Anymore then we should be electing the same people but expecting different results.

I think that this was really an anti-incumbent vote the likes of which we have been seeing around the world. People are fed up with the Professional Politicians that have spent, squandered, borrowed from the future, and collected big money to write laws that benefited special interests, supporters, friends, lobbyist, and contributors while draining the public treasury for their benefit.

This is what the original beginnings of the Tea Party were about; holding Washington accountable and responsible for what they do. That is why the professional politicians label them as "extremest" because to hold Washington accountable for the first time in 70 years would definitely be "Extreme" in their eyes.

Rick, you've drunk the Kool-Aid. Where do you get that "information?"

1) the 'nanny state' is in your imagination. What exists is a safety net for those who need it.

2) and who is it that buys votes? Good programs exist to help people, not to buy votes. Those who blatantly buy votes are certain corporations and wealthy people.

3) this whole bankruptcy thing will happen only if those corporations and wealthy people are allowed to hold sway. They want the money. And you are helping them. (Of course, there is also the possibility that you are one of them. If you're not, you're not going to see any of that money.)

4) Lugar was one of the few Republicans left with the intelligence, integrity and commitment to the democratic process. My Democratic Representative has the same viewpoint, and I applaud them for that (even when I do not agree with them.)

5) Creating a revolving door of newbies will achieve little more than making outside influence even more important. Who will employ them after their term? The folks for whom they obtained the greatest profit...

And Chris --

Even if the Tea Party started out as an organization to hold Washington accountable, it has morphed -- with the help of certain key people -- into an organization of irrationality and extremism. This is not good for anyone.

TO: DeeJan who wrote:

"This is the beginning of taking over the GOP Party..."

The devil has already "taken over the GOP Party."

Even the stalwart Senator Lugar (R) couldn't get through to the crazies in the Republican Party, and I believe that Senator Lugar sees those who call themselves "Republican" today, are just a bunch of ignorant nut jobs.

Obama/Biden 2012

TO: Bill Marvell who wrote:

some sanity please, You realize of course that all incumbents would include: Ron Paul, Boehner, McConnell, Cantor, Sessions, and in fact all House Republicans.

Boy would I love for them to be gone!

Obama/Biden 2012

I wonder if these dumb ass rednecks really understand what the Tea baggers agenda is. Hopefully they can live without social security and medicare.

Time for new blood in Washington on both sides. The career politicians need to go! All of them!

Personally, I'm pleased to see the Republicans spend so much just to win, and loose, a primary. Mourdock spent his last dime on this and now he has to go to the general election and try to win. With empty pockets to start with.

Lugar is now out, and with him the financial gravy train that came with his seniority to Indiana (there is an upside to pork in politics). In doing this, the Republican's are showing just how much they live in the world of "political fantasy" and not in the real world of the "politically possible".

Republican's should have been more strategic. Leaving Lugar in place, though bitter as that may be, so to keep their seats in Congress that they desperately need thus placing their fights in places where they can make gains, not risk seats they already have. Indeed, it's the Congress that has the real power in DC.

With Lugar out, who could have easily defeated a Democrat, Indiana will have to start from scratch on that seat, literally and figuratively. Now they risk loosing that seat to a Democrat.

Rick-3416939,

Though what you say may sound good and well, but the reality is this:

As the Republican's are fighting with the Tea Party (both of them) over seats they already have, and spending huge sums in the process (Mourdock and Lugar as a good example), Democrats are not challenging the seats they already have.

Democrats are taking the "political reality" view on this: "Don't challenge seats we already hold and only go after those that are held by Republican's, Tea Party'ers, Blue dogs and Independents where we can make gains."

"Throw all the bums out" sound good and makes headlines. But to win, you should be saying, "Throw the other guys bums out first."

As long as Republican's and Tea Party'ers are in a knock down slug-fest, you don't stand a chance.

Rick-3416939,

Ok, let's talk about entitlements and politics.

You state, "...Democrats have been buying votes with entitlements throughout our nations history. They start a massive spending program that runs way over projections, never do any oversight, and then block all attempts to reform them before they go bankrupt or the nation does..."

Here are some entitlements you might have forgotten about...

Let's consider just the oil industry. As of the last 30 years (since 1981) they have been posing record profits year after year. Yet, they receive a yearly government welfare check of $4 Billion. Right now, we have a surplus of oil in the USA and we are enjoying the highest fuel prices in our history. In those years since 1981, the oil industry has given money to campaigns to Republican's 98% of the time.

1995 Savings and Loan bail out cost tax payers $87.9 Billion and only one man went to jail. Done by Republican's (Newt Gingrich)

2008 Wall Street/Bank bail out cost the tax payers $1.8 Trillion. Nobody is in jail or even under indictment. Again, by Republican's (George Bush and Henry Paulson).

I can go on, but you get the picture.

So,... to blame the working person for getting an entitlement is like accusing a drowning man as being wet. It's so far off the mark of reality.

Rick,

The Democrats have been buying votes with entitlements throughout our nations history

Really? So why is it that the States that get the most Federal money from these programs, compared to what they contribute, are predominantly Red States? Is that because they inadvertently neglected to mention who they were buying votes for? It is Red States that have the highest percentages of their population on government programs. I guess buying votes is a lousy investment!

Has it ever occured to you that just maybe Democrats think it is appropriate to help people in need regardless of what their politics are? Do you really think they are trying to sway these people's votes? Why would you even bother when in Red States, buying some votes means you lose by 19% instead of losing by 20%. I'm fairly sure that even you don't think anyone is that stupid.

Travel a bit across the country and talk to different people. Do a bit of your own research and not just what some propaganda tells you. Use statistical government and educational institution provided data and not just what is posted on some agenda based website. Look at the whole picture and not just what somebody "highlights" as "key" data.

We don't have a Nanny State, what we have is nanny corporations who make decisions for you and who do what is best for you. These wealth backed institutions are the ones who shape your opinions and it takes the form of everything from making you crave a Big Mac, to deciding who you should vote for.

Vote against each and every tea party candidate. The tea party is owned by the Koch brothers, they are the Koch slaves. But they are to stupid to know it.

S in Indy: I'm sure the nation will be relieved to know that, come November, the government will be turned over to such sensitive and articulate individuals as yourself.

Richard, you can pick your firearm up at the coat check on your way out. See ya.

Over 60% of his life has been devoted to makeing his own life easy ... with all the free Gov Perks and health care ..

Yes, Indiana now has a much better chance of a Democratic Senator. Yeah!

Richard Lugar,battling Richard Mourdock,

the battle of two dicks. Who won? the worse of the two dicks.

I agree with Pigotry, the less experienced won, Romney has lost the great foreign relations experience of two men within two weeks. Mourdock experience is totally foreign for the position. All these Yes Tea party men are going to be attending the school of Corruption and bribes , backed not big money but HUGE money.

For a clue as to what will happen in Novemeber take a France - the left/center won while the hard core rigfht wingers grew stronger with somtehing like 25 per cent of the vote.

How funny is it to read the less experienced person won, when we have the most unqualified person ever to sit in the oval office. Obama cannot lead, he cannot compromise, he cannot negotiate, and he has done nothing right for this nation. So it seems funny to hear that now experience matters for a senate race.

Enterprise to Rick .... Enterprise to Rick .... It's no goood captain.... I can't reach him!!! he's tooo far out for anyone to reach him!!!!!!

'Fraid so.

Most unqualified person ever. Hmmm -- probably GWB, although Warren G. Harding does come to mind. Or maybe Andrew jackson.

Obama has been the kind of leader our country needs -- he takes everyone into account. If you look at someone like Chris Christie, that's not a leader, that's a bully.

Compromise? Negotiate? That is what Obama has tried to do -- repeatedly -- and has failed because of the unwillingness of the Republicans to compromise or negotiate. This reminds me of what schoolkids say -- "When you point your finger at someone, three of your other fingers are pointing back at you."

Some say Obama has moved too far RIGHT. But I believe he has done the best possible job for this country under the circumstances. We would be in deep, deep #!*@ if a Republican with obligations to the radical right had been running things these past four years.

morrigan-1568233

Obama has been the kind of leader our country needs -- he takes everyone into account.

I will disagree with you here. A leader is a person who can get people whit diverging views to come together and all pull in the same direction. That he has not done. Since my time in the Marine Corps, I have believe that General Dwight Eisenhower was right when he said (on the eve of the Normandy landings):

Leadership is the art of getting others to do what you want done because you make them WANT to do it.

You have to "get down in the mud with the pigs" in order to make that happen and he, IMO, has been unwilling to do so, but rather sent his staff to do it for him (Rahm, David, Joe, etc). THAT, IMO, is a failure in leadership. I heard a pundit on MSNBC about a year ago say the reason that the president did this is that he "didn't like the members of congress." I don't like the bastards either, but it isn't my job to lead them; it is his. If you want to lead you have to get in the middle of the fight like Henry V, not stay above the fray and send surrogates to do the dirty work.

I voted for President Obama in 2008 because I wanted a change from what we had with Bush / Chaney. I expected President Obama to lead and IMO, he did not. He allowed Pelosi, Reid, and Biden to run with their agendas and that caused a stunning defeat in 2010 for the Democrats. I think we will see a major anti-incumbent action in the upcoming election, and even if the president wins re-election, he will have an even harder uphill battle because I think that the congress will become even more "red".

Compromise? Negotiate? That is what Obama has tried to do -- repeatedly -- and has failed because of the unwillingness of the Republicans to compromise or negotiate.

I think both parties are responsible; the parties are the problem. The Ideologues run both parties and they are both unwilling to compromise. Or, have you forgotten Ms. Pelosi's "We can do what we want, we don't need your vote" and "We Won, Get over it" remarks? Statements like that do not get overlooked or forgotten quickly.

Right now, with the Ideologues in charge, there can be no compromise. Ideologues believe that they are the only ones that know what is right; their way is the only way. These Ideologues convert people that would normally just disagree into hated enemies. You can make a deal with someone you disagree with, you can't with a hated enemy. With a hated enemy, it is winner take all, no quarter, and Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius! That is where we are today and leadership is the only thing that will pull us back from the brink.

Chris, I wonder if anyone could have made those ideologues in Congress want to work with them. Even President Eisenhower!

Remember, the Communist witch hunt took place under Eisenhower's watch. I don't know if he tried to quash them, but it was not until they took on the U.S Army that they defeated themselves with their insanity. I was just a little kid during the Army-McCarthy hearings, but even so I remember hearing about them.

Lyndon Johnson wasn't afraid to "get in the mud with the pigs" -- in fact, I think I read that he loved that kind of politics. He might have been able to deal with those folks... But maybe not.

I can see the right-wing ideology of the Tea Party people pretty clearly, but I don't really see that kind of ideology among the Democrats. The language has gotten crazy. The great majority of Democrats are centrists, not liberals; many of Ronald Reagan's actions would today have him branded as a liberal. That is crazy! This 'both sides are responsible for the mess' really misrepresents what is happening.

I see the defeat of 2010 as less the result of Pelosi, Reid and Biden pushing their agendas than of the terrible economic troubles America was contending with. Those comments were ill-advised but understandable from people who had spent eight years dealing with the Bush/Cheney administration. Remember, Harry Truman said, "The buck stops here." Lots of people were angry and scared about the economic debacle and voted for the Tea Party because of their anger and their fear.

I guess America has had to contend with ideologues since the beginning. And there have been times when the 'other side' has become the hated enemy. That is sad, because -- you are right -- then there can then be no compromise. And without compromise there can be no real progress.

We need people like Richard Lugar and Olympia Snowe representing the conservative side of questions, and people like Ted Kennedy (yes, I know he is gone but people with similar convictions) representing the liberal side. People who are intelligent, who have integrity, who know how to debate and compromise.

I hear what you are saying about leadership. It takes time, experience and a particular combination of wheeler-dealer and evangelist to do the job right. Obama really has done a credible job, and I think he deserves a chance to continue. I don't see anybody else on the radar who could do the job better than our President has. Not Mitt Romney, telling Detroit that they have him to thank for the auto industry's comeback when actually he was one of the people speaking against the bailout. Not Ron Paul, whose anti-government stance should probably disqualify him for the highest job in our government, the Presidency. Not any of the other Republican candidates or wannabes.

I appreciate your thoughtful and thought-provoking comments. And I wonder where you are going to go from here!

morrigan-1568233

I too remember the witch hunts of Nutcase Joe, as well as LBJ (He is the one who sent me my travel orders to Vietnam). But I still believe that both major parties are responsible for the mess we are in and that it started long before the Bush / Chaney years. The seeds of this hatred go back to the Nixon and Carter Years, IMO. Richard Nixon was one mean SOB and his administration's concept of anything goes put the key into the ignition of this train wreck. His administration's concept,s eloquently put by H.R Harderman's sign ("When you have a man by his balls, his heart and soul will truly follow!") started the"I'm gonna hate you back" mentality.

Ford didn't do anything to change the players and what was going on and by the time Carter took office, the Democrats were ready for some revenge. They had a veto proof majority and took it out for a spin. Back then I was a Democrat (I was raised a democrat) but that is the first time I ever heard someone in congress say "We have a mandate with this election." I admit that I voted for Carter (to my eternal shame) because I wanted a change from the Nixon Years. I did NOT vote to give anyone a mandate for any damned thing. That, to me is when things really went to hell in a hand basket and it is when the "I'll hate you back" mentality really got rolling. But it is also when the ultra liberal Ideologues managed to take control of the Democratic Party in NC. I didn't leave the party, they left me, and the far left have never relinquished control.I became an Independent 2 years ago whne the Theological nutjobs took control of the Republican Party.

Example, in 2010, Senator Burr (R-NC) was up for re-election. The State Democratic party chose Elaine Marshall who is slightly to the left of Bernie Saunders in her ideas. Had they picked someone anywhere near center, Burr would have been out of a job. This is what I mean by the Ideologues controlling the party. You must be one of them or you can't get on the ballot. That mentality is what gave the Republicans control of both the State House and Senate for the first time in 140 years. There is a good chance that they will keep the houses in the next election and, quite probably get the Governor's Office too.

The problem is that the Ideologues of both parties are running the show and they pit one group against another (George Soros and Michael More on the left and Grover Norquist and Rush Lindbaugh on the right). They have changed people from being opponents into enemies and it has just gotten worse with each election cycle. Today, we are almost at the point we were in 1856 when Preston Brooks (D-SC) beat Charles Sumner (R-MA) nearly to death on the Senate Floor with a walking stick.

We need people like Richard Lugar and Olympia Snowe representing the conservative side of questions, and people like Ted Kennedy (yes, I know he is gone but people with similar convictions) representing the liberal side. People who are intelligent, who have integrity, who know how to debate and compromise.

And there in lies the problem, no integrity. When I was on the Marine Corps, one of my leadership manuals defined integrity as follows:

Integrity is what you are when no one is looking; when no one but you will ever know.

It also said that without Integrity, you cannot lead. That, IMO, is why we have no leadership in Washington. We quit electing people with integrity 30 years ago. We chose people for their ideology and not what they were. When it became too expensive to get re-elected without doling out favors, those that originally had integrity put it away in a steamer trunk. All we now have is pr-purchased professional politicians no different than Senator Jack S. Phogbound from Dogpatch.

I don't share your thoughts about Ted Kennedy. While I agree with many of his principles, I hold his integrity wanting simply because he couldn't keep his pants up. I once heard someone say that he would 'Screw a Snake if you would hold it out straight. If you hold yourself up to be the pillar of virtue, you need to keep the nicks in the armor to a minimum. Otherwise, you are just another John Edwards.

I don't see anybody else on the radar who could do the job better than our President has. Not Mitt Romney, telling Detroit that they have him to thank for the auto industry's comeback when actually he was one of the people speaking against the bailout. Not Ron Paul, whose anti-government stance should probably disqualify him for the highest job in our government, the Presidency. Not any of the other Republican candidates or wannabes.

I was a Huntsman Supporter. I thought he was the only one from either party with good sense.

Morrigan, here is a little indigestion for you. It is an email I received a few days back,

Obama is victim of Bush's failed
promises. By a
democrat reporter, Chuck Green.

I think it is time that we asked George
Bush to step aside so that Obama can get his presidency going.

Here's an opinion piece by Chuck Green who
writes "Greener Pastures" for the Denver Post Aurora Sentinel...one of the more
liberal papers in the country. Additionally, Mr. Green is a lifelong
Democrat...so this is rather a stunning piece...

Obama is victim of
Bush's failed promises!

Barack Obama is setting a record-setting
number of records during his first term in office:

Largest budget ever. Largest deficit ever.
Largest number of broken promises ever.

Most self-serving speeches ever. Largest
number of agenda-setting failures ever. Fastest dive in popularity
ever!

Wow! Talk about change.

Just over two years ago, fresh from
his inauguration celebrations, President Obama was flying high. After one of the
nation's most inspiring political campaigns, the election of America’s first
black president had captured the hopes and dreams of millions. To his devout
followers, it was inconceivable that a year later his administration would be
gripped in self-imposed crisis.

Of course, they don't see it as
self-imposed. It's all George Bush's fault!

George Bush, who doesn't have
a vote in congress and who no longer occupies

The White House is to blame for it
all.

He broke Obama's promise, to put all bills on the White House web
site for five days before signing them.

He broke Obama's promise, to have
the congressional health care negotiations broadcast live on C-SPAN.

He
broke Obama's promise, to end earmarks.

He broke Obama's promise, to keep
unemployment from rising above 8 percent.

He broke Obama's promise, to
close the detention center at Guantanamo in the first year.

He broke
Obama's promise, to make peace with direct; no precondition talks with America’s
most hate-filled enemies during his first year in office, ushering in a new era
of global cooperation.

He broke Obama's promise, to end the hiring of
former lobbyists into high White House jobs.

He broke Obama's promise, to
end no-compete contracts with the government.

He broke Obama's promise,
to disclose the names of all attendees at closed White House meetings.

He
broke Obama's promise, for a new era of bipartisan cooperation in all
matters.

He broke Obama's promise, to have chosen a home church to attend
Sunday services with his family by Easter.

Yes, it's all George Bush's
fault! President Obama is nothing more than a puppet in the never-ending failed
Bush administration. If only George Bush wasn't still in charge, all of
President Obama's problems would be solved. His promises would have been kept,
the economy would be back on track, Iran would have stopped its work on
developing a nuclear bomb and would be negotiating a peace treaty with Israel.
North Korea would have ended its tyrannical regime, and integrity would have
been restored to the federal government.

Oh, and did I mention what it
would be like, if the Democrats, under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi and Harry
Reid, didn't have the heavy yoke of George Bush around their necks? There would
be no ear marks, no closed-door drafting of bills, no increase in deficit
spending, no special-interest influence (unions), no vote buying ( Nebraska,
Louisiana ).

If only George Bush wasn't still in charge, we'd have real
change by now.

All the broken promises, all the failed legislation and
delay (health care reform, immigration reform) is not President Obama's fault or
the fault of the Democrat-controlled Congress. It's all George Bush's
fault!

Take for example the attempt of Eric Holder, the president's attorney general,
to hold terrorists' trials in New York City. Or his decision to try the
Christmas Day underpants bomber as a civilian.

Two disastrous
decisions.

Certainly those were bad judgments based on poor advice from
George Bush!

Need more proof?

You might recall
when Scott Brown won the election to the U.S. Senate from Massachusetts,
capturing "The Ted Kennedy Seat", President Obama said, Brown's victory was the
result of the same voter anger that propelled Obama into office in 2008. People
were still angry about George Bush and the policies of the past 10 years. And
they wanted change.

Yes, according to the president, the voter rebellion
in Massachusetts, was George Bush's fault.

Therefore, in retaliation,
they elected a Republican to the Ted Kennedy seat, ending a half-century of
domination by Democrats. It is all George Bush's fault!

Will the failed administration of George
Bush ever end, and the time for hope and change ever arrive???

Will
President Obama ever accept responsibility for something / anything?

(Chuck Green is a veteran Colorado
journalist and former editor-in-chief of The Denver Post.)

It's Bush's Fault!

Chris --

We didn't get a very long or very deep look at Huntsman. Perhaps you are right about him...

Before he was a candidate, John McCain was a fairly consistent and reasonable Senator. Even saddled with Sarah Palin and the expectations of the extreme Right, he managed to speak with a certain amount of honor (although I disagreed heartily with his stance on most issues). Mitt Romney does not come across as reasonable, consistent or honorable.

I understand what you are saying about Ted Kennedy, and it took me a long time to be able to recognize the value of his political gifts because his personal issues were so glaring. I don't think he ever held himself up to be a pillar of virtue. I think some public figures do that; but we often place them on a pedestal ourselves.

I remember Richard Nixon and his "enemies list" and his general creepy behavior, and I agree that that was the beginning of this mess. I don't remember what Carter's (I voted for him too) veto-proof majority did with their 'mandate.' Did they pass laws that were intended to promote one group of Americans over another? Certainly from Reagan on, the Republicans in office have made no bones about their loyalty to the corporate sector. Clinton had troubles with the Republican Congress shutting the government down at one point; his administration may have paid some attention to the public sector, but with the good economy it was for the most part less of an issue.

My take is that when one side starts making a lot of noise, the other side has to, as well. Imagine the dynamics if the Tea Party kept on forcing their issues, with no Bernie Sanders to hold the line.

You are an Independent. Clearly you are looking carefully at the issues and the candidates to make up your mind. What I wonder is whether the people of North Carolina will do the same, or will they take the 'enemies' position and do a knee-jerk party line vote, or will they simply sit at home?

It's not indigestion, Paul, it's a headache.

I read it but most of it did not make sense to me at all. Perhaps I need to turn off the computer and hit the sack.

morrigan-1568233

Mitt Romney does not come across as reasonable, consistent or honorable.

And therein lies the issue of the ideologues controlling the parties such that we end up with candidates that are not the "Best for the Job" but the lesser of the evils. I think it's a combination of the money, PACs, Party Management (notice I didn't say leadership), and the media. The unlimited money, PACs, and the lust for profits from the media have really been the anchors that have gotten us where we are. We can't get a good candidate because no one taht cares about their reputation will run.

I would never run for national office (I have held local offices like School Board). In my almost 65 years, I am sure that I done something that I wouldn't want either my Late wife or mother to know about. But, were I to run for a major office, someone that didn't like my stance on an issue could collect money from like minded bastards and build a PAC. The PAC could then hire a sleazebag Private Investigator to delve into my past and find something from when I was 17, young and stupid, take it out of context, put it on a blog and we now have instant character assassination. They would then leak it to the slime-ball media as "news" and in 2 weeks I could elected to the office held by the guy that euthanizes little homeless kittens. Because of that, the only people that run are those that don't give a damn about what people think of them. There goes integrity down the tubes.

What I wonder is whether the people of North Carolina will do the same, or will they take the 'enemies' position and do a knee-jerk party line vote, or will they simply sit at home?

I hope they will but I fear that they will do the same as they did with the marriage amendment. I personally think that gays should be required to marry and suffer like the rest of us have. There should be no free pass just because you are gay! But the money that is being funneled into the campaigns is obscene and will buy the elections just like was done in the early 1800's with a "twist of Tobacco" buy some unscrupulous politicians.

You are an Independent. Clearly you are looking carefully at the issues and the candidates to make up your mind.

I am really more of a Libertarian, but not the Ron Paul Radical Libertarian. I believe that government is responsible to the people not the corporations. I require responsibility and accountability of myself and don't ask anything more of anyone else. I will cheerfully help someone that can't help themselves, but I draw the line on someone that won't help themselves (and that includes corporations too). I refuse to be the constant enabler of bad decisions and bad choices be either people or businesses. But most of all a I fear big government and those that would give it total control so that they don't have to take responsibility for themselves. That is my definition of Libertarianism.

That makes a lot of sense.

You would think that all Libertarians would support gay marriage -- the freedom of individuals to marry the person they love, whatever sex they are. (I'm reading your comment about marriage as tongue in cheek. I don't think a real Libertarian would require anybody to marry anybody!)

There are just a few things I have trouble with. I agree that digging up more or less irrelevant dirt on a candidate and then smearing it all over the media is, simply, wrong. Who cares if you used a fake ID to get some beer when you were in high school, or smoked marijuana as a college student? But if it is relevant, that's another story. For example, the nature of Romney's work at Bain is relevant. The problem here is not PACs, it is the immorality of lying or twisting the truth about another person.

Second, while I understand your fear of big government, the 'big government' everyone is talking about is becoming scarily hollow. Read Naomi Klein's book, "The Shock Doctrine." She talks a lot about other countries, but toward the end she talks about the US. So much of our government is outsourced that in some cases it's really the corporations who are running things! I am WAY more afraid of the corporatists than I am of the government. I get to have some say about what the government does. If the corporatists take over all the way, I get no say at all. I think we should take back some of the things we outsource, and the rest needs to be real partnership.

I'm still mulling over your saying that if you find my wallet, you'll return it to me -- but without any money I might have had inside it. I wonder -- would you also take/use the credit cards? What about my checkbook?

morrigan-1568233

As for the PACs, I have a problem when they just dig up dirt for dirt's sake. I'm not expecting a Saint to run for office, but I would like to know if the had done something really egregious. I think the line should be drawn at personal attacks. or attacks on their family (like the latest one form the PAC supporting the President about Mitt Romney's Wife. That should be off limits just liek attacks on the first lady or Chelsy Clinton in the early 2000's.

I'm still mulling over your saying that if you find my wallet, you'll return it to me -- but without any money I might have had inside it. I wonder -- would you also take/use the credit cards? What about my checkbook?

That wasn't me. If I found your wallet, I would return it with everything I found in it. I'm one of those people that believes that if it isn't mine I don't want it.

Oops, I'm sorry Chris. I got mixed up... Those words were said, but absolutely not by you! Please accept my apology.

But I am glad that you corrected me on that. It just didn't seem consistent with the other things you have been saying.

Wow, Republican teabaggers will believe anything Fox news tells them to. May they go down in flaming crap in November.

Berndog, ummm, last time I looked at the top of this page it said "MSNBC."

Cheese! Lugar was Obama's favorite Republican Senator. He even said so! Sooo! I believe that's proof enough! Lugar hasn't voted for the people of Indiana in years. He has a record and it's very easy to read and notice that. He's gone, good!

sweaver209,

Richard Lugar has served the state of Indiana AND the nation well for 35+ years. Mourdock managed to misplace over $1/2billion dollars in four years, as State Treasurer. Richard Lugar understands the purpose of government is to serve the public good and to conduct the people's business, responsibilities actually outlined in the real Constitution, not that vague dream construct so often quoted by the Tea Party. The same vagueness quoted by Mourdock, regarding smaller government, maybe like the small staff of auditors watching over the Indiana Department of Revenue and the Treasury.

And just as the teahadists shall be voted out in november.

Nothing goes on in the teabagger mind.....they don't have minds. They're just robots who do the bidding of Fixed Nooze and the violent fairytale groups...otherwise known as organized religion.

Would Tbags vote for that ultra radical liberal.....What's his name?.... oh yea, Jesus

crazy.. no, because they think their savior is Ayn Rand.

Randy,

Put down the crack pipe.

crazy after all these years,

Obviously you know nothing about Jesus.

Canary-in-the-coal-mine,

Brilliant post, once again you add absolutely nothing of value.

starguy; Yes there are a few Democrats here.

The Teabaggers should go play in their rooms.

fool2 it's always good to see a person admit they are a fool then prove it.

From what I see, teabaggers gave very little going on in their heads, and what is going on is pretty scary. As a lifelong democrat, I've never been in love with Dick Lugar, but to see his own party run him out of office for being "too liberal" is simply unbelievable. He was the most qualified legislator this country has in the relatively important area of foreign relations. While he was always basically conservative, he also always examined the facts and voted his conscience, (and he worked well with others, regardless of party) which just doesn't sit with the tea baggers. I've always been embarassed by my state's overall lack of progressive thinking, but this takes it to a whole new, previously unthinkable, level. Dick Lugar out because he's too liberal. Indiana is truly an idiocracy.

Post thought: Even Mitch Daniels (again, never one of my favorites) supported Lugar. I guess this means "The Blade" is also too liberal.

I see Sally, so starguy is suspended while you liberal dip@!$%#s continually use the term 'teabaggers' though I doubt you have the presence of mind to even know what that term means. So I'll tell you what, go ahead and suspend starguy for a day, then you can suspend me for life while you go @!$%# yourself, hypocrite.

That's it, cry like a baby! Get used to it.

Agree... they've been hijacked by the Dick Army and Michelle Bachmans of the GOP. See sheep, fleece sheep.

The teaparty did exactly what they were elected to do, stop the insane spending by the dems.

Awww,butthurt are we?I believe pols should NOT be paid,and have LESS power than an inmate in prison.THEN you go home after two terms,and have to use SSI like the rest of us.99.999% of politicians would evaporate overnight,from the planet.In this configuration,we actually could reduce governement to a barbones config,running the military and coinage(and no,they don't get to draw a check or interest),and NOTHING else.Oh,to dream.

The teaparty did exactly what they were elected to do, stop the insane spending by the dems.

Another teabaggen liar. If you voted republican you created the insane spending. You did it, take some responsibility for once in your life.

The tea party is doing exactly what all republicans want. Strip women of their rights. Strip children of their educations. Strip workers of their rights. Strip workers of their pay. Strip workers of their insurances. Strip the nation of it's dignity. Force the nation to live by their warped idea of what they believe christianity is. They are in fact, true communists in every sense. They are the american taliban.

Zombiequest

... instead of a freak-show Circus Troupe"

You mean like Obama's Occupy fellows?

The teaparty did exactly what they were elected to do, stop the insane spending by the dems.

Thus holding the economu in a continued depressed state. Great job, you're screwing your country. Go pat yourself on the back... or walk in to oncoming traffic.

You're absolutely right, Mike. They vote against their own interests and are completely clueless about it. It's bizarre behavior to observe, watching people advocate for the hand that holds them down.

Sweaver... you must be one of those tea party weekend rambos I see on the internet with your gattling guns, rocket launchers, grenades and machine guns and all blowing up cars at the same time? Or are you one of those tea partiers that want to execute women that have miscarriages? Probably because you were never properly educated, you really haven't been paying attention to what your right wing taliban like party members have been saying huh?

Here's a taste of what you terrorists are actually all about. And I quote!

U.S. Lawmaker Wants Death Penalty for Miscarriages

An anti-abortion bill introduced by Rep. Bobby Franklin (Republican) would
enable a death penalty for women who had a miscarriage.

The bill describes abortion as "prenatal murder" and excludes miscarriage only
under the condition that the woman in question can prove that no human
involvement caused the event.

The bill does not provide details on how such proof can be provided.
Miscarriages are quite common within the first 20 weeks of a pregnancy and are
usually a sign that the pregnancy didn´t develop normally.

Every women and parent across america should look at these tea party members very seriously and not wait until they have taken over the government like the Taliban did in Afghanistan before they react. Laws like this one are just the tip of the iceberg of what these homegrown terrorists have planned should we allow them to have control of our lives.

The Tea Party doesn't exist. The Tea Party doesn't exist. Keep telling yourself that. Keep telling yourself that. If you forget, the media will tell you, the Tea Party doesn't exist. The Tea Party doesn't exist. Bye bye Lugar. About 15 more to go. The Tea Party doesn't exist. The Tea Party doesn't exist.

to those who want lugar to run as an independent- listen and learn:

Indiana has an election law called a "sore loser" law...IF you lose your primary YOU CAN NOT run as an independent in that fall's election. Lugar will quietly leave the seante...he made his choice and now must pay the piper! :D:D

Funny how on these boards the most derisive and least substantial comments are made by the Tea Party Adherents:

Sweaver: Now go outside and ride your skateboard.

LibsRNuts: Looks like the whining of the leftist/statist are in full BLOOM!! Sux to be YOU!!!!

Starguy: Cheese, go outside and play. Big people are talking.

Lee: That's it, cry like a baby! Get used to it.

Jeffersonwasright: Put down the crack pipe.

Yes, of course, The Tea Party types do not have a monopoly on immature discourse, but they seem to excel at it. Children this is not a playground, be civil or there will be no milk and cookies for you.

On this I know both normal Republicans and Democrats can agree. Be respectful.

Rac08: He made his choice to be an intelligent, sane conservative and paid for it.

But Sen. Lugar never lost as much as his country lost.

If you stop to consider the argument for and against term limits, you will come to understand that most of the peoples problems with government lies down the path of allowing incumbents to run for re-election.

If you fail to understand that idea You are wasting every-bodies time posting here.

Do your homework first.

DR. Strange (I actually had a physic professor by that name.);

When Teabagggers say "socialism" it just mean something or everything I don't like.' If they really don't like something, it's usually Marxist or Communist.'

Of course, they have no idea what the words mean, but it makes them feel good to say them.

offtheirheads

Dream on. Lugar is out because he was one of Obama's favorite Republicans, going along with him too many times. Time for new Republican blood in Washington. We don't need any Democrats unless they are new ones with a brain and no Socailist tendencies. Got any of those to offer?

You wouldn't know socialism if it slapped you in the face. Too many syllables for your head to comprehend.

he cant... he lives in Virginia.

Mandron and you would expect him to commute back and forth from Indiana on a daily basis?

See I doubt there are many in congress that don't have a home near DC. And it is a full time job for most, so naturally they would be there much of the time. How silly of you.

@franklytrue

Lugar was voting from the house he sold 30 years ago, his only "residence" is his family farm, which has a house on the property, but he does not live in it. Obviously Congress does not commute from their home state on a day to day basis, but it is really hard to be in touch with the issues of your home state if you havent lived there in 30 years.

www.thisinstead.info

Even worse than that SactoJD is the fact that there is a multi-billion dollar propaganda campaign being conducted by Corporate (mostly) Republicans to spread untruths and ignorance. Good luck to the average American (with a poor education to begin with) in weeding out the chafe in their quest to become informed.

More and more it's about going to the internet/media to reinforce your bias and never have to entertain a thought to the contrary.

Sorry snake...we won't have him.

No, thanks.

Van...good dream, But remember the party OF No? Yea the same one's that block anything and everything they can to prove a point. (Obama must go Or We won't play nice) As long as we have the now morphed Teapulicans cannibalizing on the youth, woman, poor, working class,sick and Evan their own..this country's is in great turmoil. A vote for any of "these" people is a vote against America

Spare me praysalot. Are you sure you're not talking about your own "Hope and Change" boy? Obama is the champion of class warfare and his "most open and transparent administration in history" is starting to make Richard Nixon look like the Pope by comparison. Open your eyes! The Fast and Furious scandal is worse than Watergate ever was. It's Watergate with murder and All Obama's Men are stalling and covering it up. It ranks right up there with Hitler blaming the Reichstag fire on the Communists as a ploy to seize power.

Democrats are the big gun control advocates who want to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, but look what happens when they have control. They sold them to criminals knowing innocent people would be murdered so they could claim they need tougher restrictions on law-abiding Americans. They can claim all the incompetence they want in this case, but it's obvious what their goal was. Anyone with an IQ larger than their waistband or bra size can see it for what it was. If this is how the party of the poor and downtrodden take care of the common people, the world is better off without their kind in power.

HAHA

Just because your ultra-right Teatards have commandeered the GOP in Indiana does not mean the rest of the general population will go with it. The Teatards will be kicked to the curb throughout the house, and the senate will be taken back to 61 Dems. You fools have no chance.

And you have a mealy mouthed., flipflopping, patriarchical, religiouslypompus assh0le for a Pres candidate. Good luck with that. I see the majority of GOP voters staying home with the fingers on their noses waiting for the stench that is the current GOP to pass. Unfortunately for you, that means that the GOP and dumbsh|t conservatism will be put out to pasture for a generation or more. YEAHHHH!!!!!!

Down with Conservatism and conservative mindfvcks.

...another one thrown under the Bus for not being a RWNJ or a TP Drone.. When will GOP'er realize that if everyone is litmus tested for being "conservative" there will only be one person left & they will have alienated everyone who could have voted for the one person ?

EVERY Conservative is nothing more than a place holder for the next toss under the bus.... no matter how CONSERVATIVE you are there is alway someone who is more so & you will become the NEW RINO ...

you just have to love the stupidity of their perception that THEY will never be accused of being a RINO....

the line to be thrown under the Bus forms on THE RIGHT .

So having standards for the way one is governed is now 'throwing our supreme leaders under the bus'?

I would hope the Democrat party would take the same approach in vetting their elected authority. At what point do we stop making excuses for poor government? At what point do they lose the benefit of the doubt?

starguy; President Obama is neither a Kenyan or a Marxist. If you actually believe that b.s. you're an extraordinarily ignorant person, a sheeple as you right wing nutjobs like to say.

Forget it HOODIE...

these people break bubbles in the bathtub to see if they still stink .

You can see their immature & infantile abilities in the rhetorical come-backs that they muster... it's like they never got past 9 years old or off the sandlot .

"You can see their immature & infantile abilities in the rhetorical come-backs that they muster..."

Kinda like:

"these people break bubbles in the bathtub to see if they still stink"?

Your wisdom is unequaled.

Starguy,

One of these days, "birther" comments are going to either be outlawed or found to be libellous and subject to legal action. But one way or the other, the ship has sailed. Barrack Obama is the President of the United States, regardless of your meaningless, but irritating opinion.

starguy must be a birther - he sounds like a quack, thinks like a quack and evidently associates with other quacks...er...I mean DUCKS, DUCKS (not to disparage the University of Oregon).

The next step after Obama is reelected in November will be for the starguy to become an AFTER-BIRTHER

vunnable - I accidentally voted up your POS comment.

I was actually going for assigning it "no value" because it has the same content as oats having been thru the HORSE (and even that has value as FERTILIZER.

Well at least you were energetic enough to follow up with such a value-laden piece of authorship yourself.

As such, I bow before thee and thy flowing robes of knowledge, experience, grace, and understanding. "Oats thru the horse"... Brilliant!

May we all aspire to grow in a way befitting the great canary-in-the-coal-mine. What a role model.

Canary I would vote it down as no value...However he does have a point, you cannot lambast someone for immature commentary and at the same time engage in it yourself.

FYI I am a Democrat, Definitely a moderate one though. I do not vote single party. Mike Bloomberg and I have a lot of the same ideals. Go Yankees

HAHA

Just because your ultra-right Teatards have commandeered the GOP in Indiana does not mean the rest of the general population will go with it. The Teatards will be kicked to the curb throughout the house, and the senate will be taken back to 61 Dems. You fools have no chance.

And you have a mealy mouthed., flipflopping, patriarchical, religiouslypompus assh0le for a Pres candidate. Good luck with that. I see the majority of GOP voters staying home with the fingers on their noses waiting for the stench that is the current GOP to pass. Unfortunately for you, that means that the GOP and dumbsh|t conservatism will be put out to pasture for a generation or more. YEAHHHH!!!!!!

Down with Conservatism and conservative mindfvcks.

Much more than a generation. They have this election to win or lose...the national demographics are changing rapidly...and the change won't make them happy!

True conservative ideals have almost nothing in common with Republican philosophy. The principles of conservatism are fairly simply and it's hard to imagine that anyone would find fault with them. Unfortunately, the Republican party is nearly indistinquishable from the Democrat party. The essential principles of conservatism are:

1. Limited government - national defense, protection of our rights and property as enumerated by the consitution

2. Individual liberty - a person is free to do as he or she sees fit as long as it does not infringe on the rights or property of others.

There are more, but these two serve the primary basis for a true conservative philosophy. Unless you are dependent on the government for your survival, then it's difficult to see how anyone could be anything other than conservative. A true conservative should be able to win a sweeping victory in an election every time.

Most of the current federal government functions should be handled at the state level (i.e. education). The federal government's budget could be reduced to a fraction of what it currently is. Our federal income taxes would be reduced accordingly. State taxes (income, sales, property) would likely increase but each state would be free to decide what programs they want, how big they should be and how to fund them. The people would have much more control over spending and their governments would be much more accountable to it's state's citizens than the federal government can ever be.

Enough with the TREASON b.s. from either side. Treason is the only crime mentioned and DEFINED in the Constitution. It requires one to make war upon the government and citizens of the United States, or to materially or physically assist those who are waging war on the government and citizens.

Disagreeing about policy, or even election fraud is NOT treason. Nor is making laws that the right disagrees with, or that offend liberals. Get a grip, treason is high crime, not a Rush Limbaugh or Glen Beck talking point.

I am always amazed at the limited sight so many people have when it comes to education. It should be handled by the states, they say. So what kind of a roller coaster would that cause. Wealthy states could offer great education to the people who could afford it. Poor states, like the southern US, would have virtually no education. But that would provide the 3rd world workers that the conservatives apparently want. They don't want abortions and think all women have the choice to stay home with their children. But they don't want programs that help under privileged women with day care, food and health care assistance. So they refuse abortion and also refuse to make sure that those same children are taken care of. The despise killing except in the great military complex when it is fine and glorified. I could go on but it wouldn't do any good. The people who will be most affected by the Republican platform in a negative way are many of the ones who scream for them the loudest.

around the block: As with most "liberal" ideas, the reality never follows the theory. All that spreading around of the wealth has been going on for decades. The only results that we've seen is the entire educational system going down hill. In fact, your argument makes this self-evident. The first issue that needs to be addressed is just a minor inconvenience for libs. That is a little document that is the "Supreme Law of the Land." IE: The Constitution. The Constitution clearly limits the powers of the Federal Government. The fact that libs fail to see that is the first indication that their education has failed them.

Of course, the other problem with your philosophy is that you seem to think that everyone is "entitled" to everything. If your money isn't your money to do with as you please, then it isn't your money and you should complain if someone takes it from you. The reality is that it makes no difference if it is taken by the government or someone with a gun to your head. The rational is the same: someone else needs it. Of course they don't, but that is besides the point, apparently.

A hundred years ago, the literacy rate was higher in t US than it is today. Why? The state and federal government stuck it's nose in where it was not needed and spent tons of money on everything but education.

We don't need to get the feds to let the states take over. They do an even worst job.

Return education to the community. Spend our taxpayer dollars on classrooms and teachers.

Wake Up America; What a CROCK!

What you are really fighting for is A Corporate Oligarchy / Theocratic Police State.

Witchrunner,

There were 127 filibusters in the Senate in the last couple of years, every one supported by 100% of the Republican Senators, including Lugar. Almost everything that President Obama has proposed, including many things originally proposed by Republicans, has been blocked by the GOP. How do you reconcile that with your statement that Obama got everything he wanted? If you are so far off the reservation, how much value should we place on your opinions?

cal: Obamacare - check

Stimulus - check

Deficit spending - check

Arrest and hold Americans without trial - check

Jobs - ?

Ok, you got me there.

Wake Up America,

So how does true conservatism look at same sex couple marriage.? Shouldn't these folks be able to do what they want as long as they don't infringe on the rights of others. I once was a homophobe, but then grew up, got educated, and experienced life. Gays are just people with the same attributes and frailties as you and me. Following your definition they should have the same rights as everyone else.

North Carolina should be ashamed of itself. Basic human rights like the right to love and commit to who you want should be beyond the tyranny of the majority. However, North Carolina is only a speed bump in the wave that is going to wash over stupid decisions like this one. You can see it happening already. Mankind is slowly getting smarter, perhaps too slow for some but it is happening. The days of decisions like this are numbered.

eeyore: The problem here is with definitions. The majority of those who oppose gay marriage are in the "Chrisian right" category. To them the major issues are related to what they've been told the bible tells them. They deal predominantly with social issues. Although a number of the Chrisitan right are also fiscal conservatives, that' not necessarily the case. The fiscal conservatives are the ones who are concerned with the run-a-way spending and the increasing power of the government. Obviously, those who are both will try to jump all of their issues on the band wagon. The Tea Party movement started by those who ordinarily don't get involved in politics, but have decided that they can't keep quiet any long about the fiscal irresponsibility of the politicians and the government. Contrary to what libs and RINOs would have you believe, it is the Tea Party like people, which consists of a majority of the American public, which has been the force for change in the political landscape. The RINOs haven't figured out that there would not have been any takeover of the House and a near takeover of the Senate without the Tea Party. The RINOs think Angle and O'Donnell cost the GOP the Senate. Actually, it was the RINOs own decision to not back them and other conservative candidates that prevent even more wins. If there had been no Tea Party then the House would still be in dem hands and the Senate could have been a dem bulletproof chamber.

LN.... You are the whole enchilada as why the "Teaparty" is so hated and disrespected. You are the cherry on the cake that shows why we need to educate ...not "dumb down" the American people. And lastly you are the "Nut" on the top of the NRA's macho DE macho sundae. And I thought we had our fruitcakes in the west? Anyone but a GOPer/Tea in Nov.

praysalot.....you are the reason folks out here in the Heartland really support abortion, so lets start with you. Someone as stupid as you needs to do the muslim thing and go visit Allah on a full time basis. get a life, loser.

for over 20 years he served NO ONE but Republicans, now he is nothing but garbage, is it any wonder that the GOP is running to imbeciles for leadership ?

Devote a lifetime to a conservative cause & in the end they call you traitor....

gee I wonder why so many of them have retired or are quitting like Sarah Payme...

the base has lost their mind .

Keep banging your head it'll hurt WORSE when O'blamer is gone!

Fids - you assume that they ever HAD MINDS to begin with...

Bachman, Frothy and Failin' are proof of that premise

What we need to do is stand our ground with Tea Queda - that what we need to do.

..what we need to do is have the TP designated as the TERRORIST ORGANIZATION that it is so that everyone who ever signed their name to a TP LIST can be rounded up & jailed for being ANTI USA.... they are nothing short of Jidhadists who would burn the country to the ground to keep a liberal out of office .

WE already know the Dimocrat party has been full of home grown communists for DECADES!

What exactly is the point of pulling up the MSNBC website and regurgitating the transcript from the afternoon MSNBC broadcast?

Do you enjoy providing the world a window into the frail reality that is your complete lack of objective research? Do you actually know anything about your country or it's history? Have you ever read a non-fiction, non-subjective book or opinionated article?

Consider for a brief moment the possibility that childishly judging things about which you know absolutely nothing will ultimately fail in making you happier, and that, believe it or not, media outlets WILL lie to you if it means higher ratings - Fox included. No matter how much I disagree with the nanny-state agenda, I will NOT refer to it as terrorist, nor entertain the idea if fed to me by a 'respectable' TV station.

Consider for a moment that you may be wrong on an issue - and that your uneducated rants only further the cause against which you rage by exposing the true enemy - a complete ignorance of reality, and a burning anger from your past that you believe everyone should suffer because mommy didn't love you.

I pray for this generation of fools. I pray because I am a part of it and have to watch us squander our freedoms for the cause of profound, self-justified laziness.

The tea party are the slaves of the Koch brothers. Tea party members lack brains. They are overgrown bullies, and anti American.

I will miss this gentleman. He was one of the very few on the Republican side that seem understand that we have an obligaton as human beings to try to put our personal and collective differences aside and work together for the common good.

So you do not like having highways, public schools, health care, federal parks, police, firemen, the military. You want a weak, backward country that the very rich control. Why would you want your children to be slaves to the likes of the Koch brothers. Unless you are very rich, you are hurting yourself and your family.