« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

Dick Lugar’s Voting Record

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  April 30th, 2012 at 12:05 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

ImagesThe other day I suggested Dick Lugar fire his new media guy.

Let’s add another example to the list. His campaign sent out an email blast encouraging people to come to a site supporting Richard Mourdock to read a hit piece Lugar’s new media guy posted about Mourdock’s voting record.

The offense? Not voting for John McCain in the Indiana GOP Primary in 2008.

But what about Dick Lugar’s voting record. Consider the following:

Dick Lugar voted

  • To support a host of anti-gun legislation including a concealed weapons ban
  • To support the Bridge to Nowhere
  • To oppose school choice for victims of Hurricane Katrina
  • To oppose $13 billion in new mandatory spending cuts
  • To support raiding the social security trust fund to fund general budget appropriations
  • To oppose a one year earmark moratorium
  • To support adding $52 billion in new spending to Barack Obama’s stimulus bill
  • To support TARP
  • To support giving the IMF more money
  • To support the tax credit and tariff on ethanol
  • To support increased foreign aid spending
  • To support an expansion of highway spending that would bankrupt the Highway Trust Fund
  • To support increasing the loan limit to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

Richard Mourdock did not go vote for John McCain in a, by that time, uncontested Republican Primary.

Dick Lugar voted to bankrupt America.

Tags:

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • http://www.rightspeak.net/search/label/-Right%20Wingnut rightwingnut2

    Lugar’s vote to confirm Kagan to the Supreme Court

    Lugar’s vote to confirm Sotomayor to the Supreme Court

  • uncmike

    and shining light on Lugar’s anything-but-conservative voting records. Guys like him, McCain, McConnell all need to go home and let some real conservatives save our country before it’s too late. Unfortunately, these self-serving RINOs think they have a golden lock on their Senate jobs. His recent votes confirming the two Obama left-wingers to the Supreme Court tell us all we need to know about Lugar and his handlers.

  • casuist

    … and Romney.

    Alas.

    c.

  • mikeymike143

    lugar cares more about being loved by the new york times than he does representing the people of indiana.

    and richard mourdock gives indiana a shining star in the conservative orbit.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Nice try, though.

  • ardendulou

    May 5th rally in Indy for Mourdock.

    Lugar is doing anything BESIDES COMING BACK TO INDIANA, to get reelected.

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    is going to be ticked off at being beatout by Lugar for Obama’s brf. You would have thought Mika Brezinski and the usual guest line up of left wingers on “Morning Bore”: Al Sharpton, Steve Rattner, and Donnie Deutch would have been enough to clinch it.

  • nativetexan41

    Hope we can retire Lugar to his Home in DC area. We need someone to vote for the people not Obama.

  • mearsc

    So a guy who is ineligible to vote in this year’s primary is criticizing a guy for deciding not to vote 4 years ago when there was nothing at stake? That’s the strategy I would take… if I wanted to lose

  • morninginamerica

    Cantor and his group used the “young guns” program to promote Adam Kinzinger, a protogee of Rep. Aaron Schock from Peoria, in the 2010 Illinois primary and shut everyone else out of the NRCC– before the others even filled out the forms to run. They are changing the rules all the time.

    The group then ran Kinzinger agains a more conservative Manzullo rather than Bobbie Rush or Jesse Jackson, Jr,, after claiming their undying faith to the Republican areas they promptly fled. That means they abandoned the most Republican part of his old 11th district to the Democrats. So much for the advantages of incumbency and working for a living as a politician.

    While party leadership wants representatives who toe their line, we may not. Primaries are supposed to be how the voters select the candidates to run for office in Washington, not the other way around. This is why the budget and taxation become so hard to get under control. Our guys are supposed to be telling “them” how to vote or end up representing Washington rather than us at home.

  • tnguy

    …as long as we continue to vote for liberal republicans in the general, they won’t change.

    “Dick Lugar voted to bankrupt America.”

    Nothing else need be said.

  • dfaith

    I think having the position that the President has a right to his nominees, and you should only vote against confirmation if they are so out of the mainstream as to pose a threat to the Constitution is probably correct.

    I wouldn’t want Dems voting against a Supreme Court nominee merely because they were nominated by a GOP President so I’m not going to require Republican Senators to do it.

    This is one of those situations where elections have consequences, which is why it’s so important to make sure Romney gets to pick the next Supreme Court Justice.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    There’s no ‘right’ to a nominee. The Senate must give its consent.

  • youngsterz

    Until we have term limits to clean out this kind of dead wood, we need to do what we can to tip the scale on these sorts of close races. Unfortunately the citizens of Utah didn’t figure that out with Hatch (I live there so I’m allowed to criticize my neighbors) but we can all help get rid of Lugar, who is worse than Hatch anyway.

    Erick, be sure to post the donation link to Mourdock every time you do a post on this race. I just sent $$.

    http://richardmourdock.com/

  • dfaith

    received bipartisan support except in rare cases as demonstrated by the link below.

    http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/nominations/Nominations.htm

    If this wasn’t the case, we’d likely end up with deadlock every time the White House and Senate was controlled by different parties, which could cripple the Court’s ability to function.

  • dfaith

    I’m not going to miss Lugar when he’s gone (and it’s looking more and more like he will be). I just don’t particularly care for this line of attack.

  • http://www.rightspeak.net/search/label/-Right%20Wingnut rightwingnut2

    …than whether Mourdock voted for McCain in a meaningless primary.

  • dfaith

    N/T

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Evasion just proves your defense of Lugar is a poor one.

  • dfaith

    my answer was a non-answer at all.

    To be more specific, the Constitution doesn’t require (or forbid) the position I proposed. However, I believe that, considering the great importance of having a fully-functioning judiciary, responsible governance does.

    Historically, as demonstrate by the url I provided, the Senate has agreed with me.

  • http://www.rightspeak.net/search/label/-Right%20Wingnut rightwingnut2

    ….Supreme Court confirmation votes are appropriate. I suspect the majority of them disagree with you.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    That President’s have a “right” to have their nominees confirmed?

  • dfaith

    I should have said that I believe Senators ought to choose to give deference to the President when giving their advice and consent (for the reasons I’ve already outlined).

  • rabun1016

    And the contribution link is key.

  • acat

    not hyperpartisan windbags like Al Franken and Barak Obama….

    As John McCain showed in 2008, most “seasoned politicians” haven’t got the first clue what to do with a hyperpartisan windbag .. and end up looking foolish for trying to find common ground.

    Mourdock, I suspect, knows better than Lugar how to handle a Franken.

    Mew

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    “I wouldn?t want Dems voting against a Supreme Court nominee merely because they were nominated by a GOP President”

    Dumb and bad logic. Democrats did that anyway, and will continue to vote against conservative nominees solely because they will fight to keep govt limited, so your unilateral disarmament doesnt make the Senate safe for GOP nominees, not since the Democrats borked, well, Bork in 1987.

    Presidents are entitled to nominees, Senators are entitled to reject nominees who are unfit. If the GOP Senators are patsies and keep allowing leftists on the third branch, while Democrats stop folks like Estrada or the many other fine GWB nominees, we are left with a ‘ratchet effect’ that moves the judiciary to the left.
    This is precisely the kind of go-along RINO behavior that leads to the destruction of the policies we care about.

    “so I?m not going to require Republican Senators to do it.”

    This is dangerous and wrong. Voting for a candidate just because a President nominated them is plain stupid.
    GOP Senators should vote their conscience on whether a nominee is suitable for SCOTUS. No conservative could in good conscience say that Sotamayor or Kagan or Ginsburg would interpret the constitution consistent with our understanding of the Constitution and judicial restraint.
    Sen Lugar has voted for activist leftists to be put on SCOTUS. Those votes are directly opposed to constitutional governance and conservative values.

    No conservative can vote for Senators who support the likes of Ginsburg and Kagan.

  • Joel Griffith

    Just donated to Mourdock as well..In a conservative state like Indiana, no need to settle for a senator who cast votes in support of Kagan and Sotomayor..

  • davesinsanantonio

    nt

  • ihateliberals

    I want to support the Republican that Obama hate’s the most. That would be my guy. That would mean he is opposing Obama and winning at it.

  • ihateliberals

    Tht means that he only votes 73% of the time in a conservative manner for conservative issues. According to most popular school grading systems that would be a low C. Not very good for a Republican to have. There are many Democrats that beat him on the conservative voting score.

  • commonsenseobserver

    I don’t support Lugar, but the Senate GOP average is 76%, and most Democrats are well to the left of Lugar (in fact, all).

  • commonsenseobserver

    That only shows how weak the Conference is, and how extreme the Democrats are.

  • powertothepeople

    have to do with Ihate’ claim that Luger scores a 73 and there are some dems with better scores.

    Had you simply gone to their website, you would have seen he was correct. Pretty stupid of you to tell the guy he is a liar and not know jack crap about the whole thing.

  • commonsenseobserver

    “There are many Democrats that beat him on the conservative voting score.”
    That’s false. And it’s strange to imply that any Democrat could get near the GOP Conference average.

    You’ll note, though, that Lugar’s holding that Conference average down, as close as he is to it. Another reason for the CINOs to go. Even then, you might want to focus your efforts, post-primary, on those 68% guys in the House. Even further to the left than Lugar.

  • commonsenseobserver

    Voting just below the average is indeed a C. Didn’t mean to imply that anyone was lying, sorry.

  • donrsherwood

    Sen. Richard Lugar has become a corrupted resident and adherent of Washington, DC.

    He sold his residence in Indiana in 1976 – 36 years ago. Yet, he has used that address, FRAUDENTLY, for all those ensuing years as his voting residence.

    I can think of no better example of he essential need for Voter ID laws, as well as the pursuit and prosecution of those committing voter fraud.

    Voter fraud has been the province of Democrats – more proof that Lugar is a long time RINO!

  • powertothepeople

    he did not claim that there are many democrats voting close or above the Republican average. We would all know that to be patently incorrect.

    What he said was simply, Luger scores so low, there are dems with a better voting average. In this statement, he is correct.

    And I would agree that anyone with a less than stellar voting record needs to go and Luger is a great place to start.

  • http://www.kjv-truth-ministries.org preachercruz

    Does anyone remember the trouble Clarence Thomas had and what about Robert Bork? They practically crucified Bork with lies and disinformation, It got so bad he withdrew from consideration. Almost EVERYTHING they said about him was disproven but by then it was too late!

    This President MIGHT not even be eligible, is bankrupting this country morally AND financially and you think the Republicans should just GIVE him what he wants? THIS more than anything else (IMHO) is why people should never vote for Liberal or “Progressive” candidates. Elections have consequences and the Supreme Court could strip us of our rights on a judicial whim! www.kjv-truth-ministries.org

  • commonsenseobserver

    “there are dems with a better voting average.” But there are none! Except from outside the Congress… who don’t vote…

    Never mind though, I’m sure we all agree on the important point- Lugar needs to go.