Defeated Republican incumbent Marc Molinaro (NY-19) was the second most bipartisan in the current Congress according to the Lugar index lol

 He got a well-deserved boot in the ass for that.

Now he can hang the distinction on the wall, right next to his Associates Degree in Humanities and Social Sciences from Dutchess Community College.

 

Obama's Justice Sotomayor is the total and complete racist Americans should be worried about

New York Times transcript of 2001 Sotomayor speech, here, where she says physiological differences may and will make a difference in the administration of justice and make decisions better:

Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences, a possibility I abhor less or discount less than my colleague Judge Cedarbaum, our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging. Justice O'Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases. I am not so sure Justice O'Connor is the author of that line since Professor Resnik attributes that line to Supreme Court Justice Coyle. I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, as Professor Martha Minnow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life.

Senate Republicans Alexander, Bond, Collins, Grahamnesty, GreggTARP, Lugar, Martinez, Snowe and Voinovich voted to confirm her, 68-31.

Richard Lugar reminds us why he's no longer a Republican US Senator from Indiana

Where else but in the New York Times, here:

[W]e would seem close to an optimal state-friendly federal immigration policy.

When the president took his executive action on immigration, he was not flouting the will of Congress; rather, he was using the discretion Congress gave him to fulfill his constitutional duty to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”

Media Shills Claim Surging Support For ObamaCare Even As Obama Disapproval Surges To New Highs

Now why would Obama set a new record for disapproval if his signature law is so popular?

On the last day for open enrollment in ObamaCare yesterday, the news script on the radio at the top and bottom of each hour was the same: support for ObamaCare is surging, when the fact is that overall it isn't.

Those reports were based on the headline story from WaPo here: "Democrats’ support for Obamacare surges", conveniently leaving out "Democrats'".

As with most infractions against the truth in our society, we major in sins of omission and minor in sins of commission, unless you're the Obama regime, which got a double major. Not only is it more secretive and conniving than Tricky Dick ever dreamed of being, it sends the leader of the free world off to Brazil after sending in the troops to Libya, leaving hapless Dick Lugar trying to find someone to complain to at The White House about not consulting with the Congress first.

The WaPo/ABC poll showing surging support for ObamaCare among supporters (!) started on March 26th, the same day WaPo here headlined "Poll: Obama’s disapproval rating hits a new high", surmising it's due to foreign policy:

Negative views of President Obama have hit a new high, according to a poll. The AP-GfK poll shows 59 percent of Americans now disapprove of Obama -- a point higher than the previous high set in December. Obama's approval rating stands at 41 percent. That's the second-lowest figure the poll has ever found. Part of Obama's problems appear to be related to foreign policy: The poll shows Americans disapprove of his handling of the situation in Ukraine 57-40 and disapprove of how he handles relationships with other countries 58-40.

Foreign policy? Really? Americans never give foreign policy much thought, and even less than they have given to signing up for ObamaCare. Sign-ups supposedly surged yesterday in a rush to beat the deadline, crashing the system, even though people have had six months to sign up and the regime has had three years to build a website that works. Where have they all been living during the PR blitz, under a rock?

Of course, WaPo doesn't tell you about the other "part" of the reason for Obama's record level of disapproval.

But they don't have to. You already know what it is, and so do they, which is why they didn't mention it.

Gov. Mitch Daniels Denies Mourdock Is Tea Party Phenomenon

lefty makes a point

The former Lugar associate might be expected to say something like this, but the fact is, and Rush Limbaugh is right, Sen. Lugar of Indiana represents the Republican establishment, and Mourdock beat him with the help of the Tea Party.

This is also why Mitch Daniels went nowhere this cycle as a possible presidential candidate. Mitch is also the Republican establishment. He might as well be Senator John McCain.

Rush has the full story, and here's Daniel's denial:

DANIELS:  It would be a complete misunderstanding to label this a Tea Party phenomenon when in fact the winner had a very strong majority with rank-and-file Republicans who felt they knew him, have seen a lot of him, he's been elected twice statewide in just the last six years, so he's a Republican regular himself, and that was the decisive factor.

Mourdock Creams Lugar in Indiana, But is he a Conservative?

Murdock once supported the Fairness Doctrine, of all things, way back in 1992, according to this story. The source cited is National Review.

And he's supposedly soft on sanctions against employers who employ illegals. No source named.

We'll see. He'll have to defeat Democrat Joe Donnelly first though.

Anyway, that squish Lugar is history.

Liberal Senate Republicans Stand in the Way on Passage of Ryan Budget

As reported here.

They might as well switch parties:

Mitch McConnell

Susan Collins

Scott Brown

Olympia Snowe

Kay Bailey Hutchison

Dick Lugar

Chuck Grassley.

Senate Traitors Enshrine Doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction 71-26

Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse than George Bush's immoral doctrine of pre-emptive war, 16 Republicans helped, HELPED!, the Senate's Democrat majority turn back the clock to the bad old days of mutually assured destruction and ratified THE NEW START, which is just the old madness. 13 actually voted for the thing. 3 didn't bother to show up.

From The Washington Post:

The final vote came after Senate Democrats accepted two amendments designed to placate Republicans who had qualms about the treaty. The amendments, which passed on voice votes with bipartisan support, emphasized the administration's commitment to a limited missile-defense program and to continued funding to modernize the aging US nuclear weapons complex.

The amendments were to the resolution of ratification accompanying the treaty, a nonbinding statement that codifies the Senate's understanding of the pact but does not directly affect its language. Republican efforts to alter the treaty language were defeated, with supporters of the pact arguing that such changes would have forced new negotiations with Moscow and effectively killed the treaty.

Thirteen Republicans joined all of the Senate's Democrats in voting for ratification, helping to exceed the 67 votes required. Three senators - all Republicans - were not present.

The amendments are meaningless, pure mental gestures by the effete for the effete.

Charitable observers will nevertheless say the US Senate ignored Russian threats to embark upon a new arms race if we didn't ratify, when the truth is this country under Barack Obama doesn't have the stomach to defend itself and couldn't declare its independence from the inside of a paper bag. It doesn't even know what it stands for, and couldn't articulate it if it did.

The moral center of America has melted, as the passage of repeal of DADT makes plain.

What are we fighting for? The right of Afghan men to parade their adolescent lovers as they do, to the disgust of every frontline soldier in arms?

Are we really in such a state of decline that we fear the Russians' ability to outspend us? The answer in truth is No. But what we do have is a population fed up with the protracted wars of nation building in Iraq and Afghanistan and consequently now incapable of understanding the pressing need to rise above this squandering of resources and build up America's deteriorating strategic defenses. Barack Obama is a man made for just such a time as this.

The Russians will use the opportunity to build anyway, and cheat and lie about it as they always have done, which suits the Bolshevik in Chief Barack Obama just fine, a traitor to everything this country has stood for, who will get us all killed if something isn't done soon to stop him.

Clearly the Republicans are not the party to do it. The Stupid Party has struck again, snatching another defeat from the jaws of a victory won just weeks ago, and the Democrats are laughing all the way to New Year's Eve with feathers of healthcare, another year of stimulus spending, repeal of DADT, and this treaty in their caps. The corks will be a-poppin' on Nancy Pelosi's last flight as Speaker. 

Here are the names of the disreputable lot of Republican cowards:

Alexander-TN

Bennet-UT

Brown-MA

Cochran-MS

Collins-ME

Corker-TN

Gregg-NH

Isakson-GA

Johanns-NE

Lugar-IN

Murkowskie-AK (heh, heh, heh)

Snowe-ME

SPECTRE-D, PA (heh, heh, heh)

Voinovich-OH

The Republicans not bothering to vote on something so momentous:

Bond-MO

Brownback-KS

Bunning-KY.

Useless men and women, all.

A pox on them, and on their states.