Indiana GOP lines up behind Lugar's primary challenger

[SvenssonRS]

...that was fast.

[SvenssonRS]

Can someone please explain to me what the supposed problem with Lugar is?

He doesn't believe Obama is Devil's spawn.

Could you kindly hold off on the arrogant pissweed act for one thread, px?

[SvenssonRS]

FWIW, Coats says he won't endorse Lugar.

Consistency would be nice, Dan.

[SvenssonRS]

As someone who has a dog in this Indiana race, while I do honor the good he has done, supporting radical liberal supreme court justices (looking at you Sotomayor,Kagen, Ginsburg) is in my personal opinion worth firing him over. I endorsed John Hostettler In the 2010 primary. I will endorse the most conservative individual in the GOP 2012 Senate primary. My party Chairman is endorsing Murodock. It's possible that feeblepizza's and Tmth county chairman's have as well.

1) There aren't any radical liberal (or for that matter any truly liberal) justices on the Supreme Court.  The Supreme Court is dominated by the far right.  Ginsberg, Sotomayor, Kagen, and Stephen Breyer are center-left.  For that matter, has Kagen even been on the court during any significant rulings?  Kennedy is very conservative and is only perceived as a "swing-vote" because the other Republican justices are far more extreme and the media likes to lump things into hyper-simplified categories (also if they pretend there is a swing vote it makes things sound more up-in-the-air than they are).  Alito is a generic (albeit quiet) right-winger (different than conservative).  Thomas and Scalia are hyper-partisan right-wing extremists.  John Roberts is essentially another Scalia, except worse because his agreeable, calm, non-dickish public image creates the perception that he is less extreme than he actually is and probably makes him more effective at moving the court towards his positions. 

2) Lugar is clearly a conservative, his problem (and for that matter Hatch's and Corker's problem) is that he seems to view the other side as people who have a different view on policy (good people can disagree, and there can be common ground).  Much of of the Republican party (or at least the tea-baggers) view the Democrats as an enemy that must be crushed at any cost and will vote against any candidate who doesn't share this culture war mentality.  In other words people like Luger, Hatch, Corker, and Lindsey Graham are the loyal opposition.  People like Limbaugh, DeMint, Palin,  and Bachmann are the disloyal opposition.  The disloyal opposition would rather see Obama's policies fail than see them help the country (regardless of whether or not they think his policies are good or bad for the country).  Most of the Republican party is either dominated by or sucking up (cough John McCain cough) to the disloyal opposition.  That is why the loyal opposition within the Republican party are either disappearing (Voinovich, Lugar, Graham, Hagel, etc) or selling out (McCain, Grassley, Collins, etc) 

I find it laugable whenever someone on the left analyzes the various factions on the right. They have no appreciation for substantative differences nor do they have any consideration to do justice to the various factions. It is all about placing them on a linear plane and differentiating only the two Republicans between how far they are from them, then what and who they actually are.

Bottomline, ideological bias is clouding the analysis. The only way to accurately describe, analyze and appreciate the differences amongst people on one side of the isle whether right or left is to de-personalize, to not base the analysis in relation to oneself and to avoid entirely the setting of other arbitrary goal posts somewhere on that now relatively useless linear political spectrum.

Gotta love that Libertas debating style.