Posted on 05/09/2012 11:55:44 AM PDT by Jeff Chandler
"I think it's a generational issue," syndicated columnist and FOX News contributor Charles Krauthammer said about the Lugar-Mourdock Senate primary in Indiana. "I think Lugar is a lion of the Senate. I think he's served very well, he's been very important in foreign affairs over these years but that doesn't appeal to voters. He's been in there for very long time. He's had a lot of moderate opinions. He's not a Tea Party favorite and I think his time will likely will have come. I'm not sure that there is anything he could have done differently in campaigning. He is who he is after all of these years. His generation of the sort of somewhat right-of-center Republicans is an eclipse," Krauthammer said.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
ping
That’s why he was blown out in the primary?
I’m obviously not on the same mental plane as Krauthammer. Maybe not on the same astral plane either.
He has been in office during the entire explosion of government, spending and unaccountability.
The message is simple. No more career politicians are wanted in our hallowed halls.
It not a job, it’s an adventure. You are suppose to return from you adventure and live under the rules you pass and they stay in office forever so as to not have to.
ALL OUT - ALL NOW.
GOP-e(xtinct)
Translation: Conservative voters want conservative candidates.
Yeah, Krauthammer and the other DC beltway elitists have never had to put up with illegal aliens pissing in his front yard every morning while waiting for "trabajo" to show up. So issues like the "Dream Act" that Lugar sponsored really don't "appeal" to him like it does the rest of us peons.
That’s what you think!!!
um... I think people here are reading this differently than me...
I read this as LUGAR’s slightly right of center generation is being ecliped by a much further right newer generation of Republicans.
Lugar WAS good in the Reagan, Bush I, Clinton years.
He was an essential part of the Cold War victory, and the “Reagan Revolution”, etc.
He was dependably right nearly the whole time.
Among other things, and this is personal, he was critical in the Philippine revolution of 1986 (being on the spot, with Sen. Kerry, who was by contrast a useless self-absorbed blob) in arranging for a bloodless resolution of the crisis. He was a leader and a statesman.
Our problems changed though, and he has grown too old.
I think his support of obama did him in.
Maybe on defense issues, but self-admittedly, Charles states that his compromised on many issues.
Win or lose, there are too many congress-critters much too willing to compromise on their fundamental principles for no other reason than to support the position of the party leadership, to avoid being called obstructionists. We need more, not fewer obstructionists in Congress. The party leadership needs to posit and stand up for the principles of the party.
36 years is too long.
Please go back to writing speeches for Walter Mondale and stop positioning yourself in groups of liberals in attempt to give the appearance that you are a conservative.
.
Voters enforcing a term limit on a guy who had been there too long. Krauthamer may be right.
I read this as LUGAR’s slightly right of center generation is being ecliped by a much further right newer generation of Republicans.
OK, I've got it. I misunderstood Krauthammer's remark.
It's so hard for me to hold in my mind the concept that, while the Democrats have purged their ranks of pretty much anyone who's ideological position is to the right of say... Gwyneth Paltrow, or Gil Scott Heron, Republicans are irresponsible if we don't stay right in the "center." Which "center" constantly drifts to the left. Some years slower, some years faster, but consistantly to the left.
Heaven forbid we elect anyone who can counterbalance that reality, because, as everyone knows, too many Ronald Reagans and the cattle cars will roll.
—I read this as LUGAR’s slightly right of center generation is being ecliped by a much further right newer generation of Republicans.—
I call them “Gen 45”.
I completely disagree. If a politician is a good conservative and never wavers, they can stay there for life. A good conservative is hard to find and I wouldn’t kick them out because of some kind of arbitrary time limit. As for the liberals, vote them out early and vote them out often.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.