Dick Lugar's Telling Anti-Limited-Government Concession Statement

It's simple in Dick's Mind: Conservatives are the Problem


By the Left Coast Rebel

Lot of great content here at LCR today from Dean L., Proof and RightKlik; nevertheless I thought I would jump in quickly with some salient analysis on "dirty" Dick Lugar's concession statement yesterday. I caught a few snippets of Lugar's speech on Fox last night and thought that it would make for an interesting post in that his honest words prove precisely why the statism-loving establishment within the Republican party has sucked so hard for so long and why it is a huge component of what is politically wrong with this country...

Fortunately, this CNN article has "dirty" Dick Lugar's concession statement in its entirety. For simpmlicity's sake, I've excerpted sections and provided analysis.

For example, Dick starts his concession speech with,

I knew that my work with then-Senator Barack Obama would be used against me, even if our relationship were overhyped. I also knew from the races in 2010 that I was a likely target of Club for Growth, FreedomWorks and other Super Pacs dedicated to defeating at least one Republican as a purification exercise to enhance their influence over other Republican legislators.

Ok, ahem, cough, cough, (clearing my throat to get started).

OK, better. Here we go. Are you ready?

So, Dick, what you are saying here is that Tea Partiers and limited-government PACs are only interested in "purification exercises"? Could it be that Tea Partiers and limited government PACs defeated you as a matter of holding up limited government principles? Hmm? Could it be that your 36-year record stinks to progressive high heaven and that Republican progressive power brokers such as yourself blur the delineation between what is now America's two statist political parties? Could it be that you are one of the many individuals responsible for the position this nation finds itself in today?

More:

I knew that I had cast recent votes that would be unpopular with some Republicans and that would be targeted by outside groups.These included my votes for the TARP program, for government support of the auto industry, for the START Treaty, and for the confirmations of Justices Sotomayor and Kagan. I also advanced several propositions that were considered heretical by some, including the thought that Congressional earmarks saved no money and turned spending power over to unelected bureaucrats and that the country should explore options for immigration reform.

OK, Dick; so what you are saying here is that you voted for TARP, for the auto bailouts, for START and for two leftist SCOTUS candidates and have no problem with pork barrel spending, and, I assume, are for amnesty for illegals? At least you're honest.

Or are you?...
All my life, I have believed in the Republican principles of small government, low taxes, a strong national defense, free enterprise, and trade expansion.

My liberty-loving ass. This is the line so many conservatives have gobbled up -- hook, line and sinker -- for far too long. Statist establishment GOPers say, "look at me, I'm for limited government!!!" Then they rule with a Progressive-Statist iron fist just like the Democrat-Socialists. They expect us to look the other way each time they beg for votes and money but the gig is up.

And to end things here as Dick ended things last night...
If Mr. Mourdock is elected, I want him to be a good Senator. But that will require him to revise his stated goal of bringing more partisanship to Washington. He and I share many positions, but his embrace of an unrelenting partisan mindset is irreconcilable with my philosophy of governance and my experience of what brings results for Hoosiers in the Senate. In effect, what he has promised in this campaign is reflexive votes for a rejectionist orthodoxy and rigid opposition to the actions and proposals of the other party. His answer to the inevitable roadblocks he will encounter in Congress is merely to campaign for more Republicans who embrace the same partisan outlook. He has pledged his support to groups whose prime mission is to cleanse the Republican party of those who stray from orthodoxy as they see it.

Ah, yes, the kit and caboodle; the whole enchilada (as we say here in California) -- this is the gist of what has been wrong with the Republican party for so long now. In Dirty Dick's establishment world, conservatives are the problem. "Rejectionists" (is that a new word? If so, clever, Dick) are simply those that dare to adhere to Constitutional principles of limited government -- lower government spending, scaling back Federal intrusion into every aspect of our lives, saving this nation from a near-certain third-world-like financial collapse scenario; savvy limited-government advocates that see Republican "compromise" as simply folding like a 20-dollar suit every time a tough decision presents itself -- those people, Dick?

"Orthodoxy, as they see it," Dick, is simply standing by the Republican party platform. Of course, to the establishment statists like you, Dick, the party platform is a political expediency mirage, thrown out each congressional session; used only to appease the conservative peasants every election season.

Via Memeorandum.

11 comments:

  1. As an elated Hoosier voter, I STAND AND APPLAUD your post! Why, oh why are people so blinded to these RINOS? Thank you LCR for this EXCELLENT and TIMELY post!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So, Sue, will you be voting for the Tea Party Candidate who defeated Lugar in the primary or his democratic challenger?

      Just curious.

      Delete
  2. That POS voted for Sotomayor and Kagan too? I didn't know that. Thank god he's gone!

    ReplyDelete
  3. "In Dirty Dick's establishment world, conservatives are the problem. "Rejectionists" (is that a new word? If so, clever, Dick) are simply those that dare to adhere to Constitutional principles of limited government -- lower government spending, scaling back Federal intrusion into every aspect of our lives, saving this nation from a near-certain third-world-like financial collapse scenario; savvy limited-government advocates that see Republican "compromise" as simply folding like a 20-dollar suit every time a tough decision presents itself -- those people, Dick?"
    ----------

    I honestly just didn't think I would see the day that Conservatives were a problem to and for the GOP. In the words of Artie Shaw via Laugh In: "Very eeeeenterestink..."

    ReplyDelete
  4. The "Purity" meme DRIVES ME MAD.

    WE CANNOT AFFORD big government business as usual anymore. The money isn't there. We don't have it.

    This isn't about purity. This is about national bankruptcy and financial ruin. Crapweasels like Lugar have been taking us down Zimbabwe Lane for decades.

    This simply must stop.

    Liberal and "moderate" Republicans use the word "purity" as a smear to portray conservatives as unreasonable and naive. We cannot allow them to continue to get away with that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well said, RK your comment would make for a great post!

      Delete
  5. "Rejectionist"

    Yes, very nice.

    So unless you're like Dick Lugar, continuously making compromises that ALWAYS grow government and ALWAYS reduce liberty, you're a "rejectionist."

    RINO compromises move us in ONE direction. It's high time for some compromise that moves in the other direction.

    Mourdock gets it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Guys like Dirty Dick have been in the Beltway power structure for so long that they don't even consider what uou mean here. Their vision is as bad as the Dems, just a slower path to socialism and financial ruin.

      Delete
  6. http://jenkuznicki.com/2012/05/well-theres-your-problem-dick/

    ReplyDelete

Commenting here is a privilege, not a right. Comments that contain cursing or insults and those failing to add to the discussion will be summarily deleted.