Liberal New York Times: Orrin Hatch is Too Liberal for Utah

To those who say Orrin Hatch is "conservative enough," here's a little reminder. This is from Nate Silver (not a conservative) at the New York Times (not a conservative publication):

...the dashed line represents how conservative we would expect a Republican senator to be, based on the partisan composition of her state. The further below the dashed line that the senator appears, the more liberal he or she is, relative to the state. Those far below the line, from a Republican point of view, are arguably not pulling their weight.

Five Republicans stand out as being especially far below the line — that is, they are more liberal than you would typically expect a Republican from their state to be. The list includes George V. Voinovich of Ohio, who is retiring, and Richard G. Lugar of Indiana, along with Mr. Hatch. And, sure enough, we also see Ms. Murkowski and Mr. Bennett.

Details on the numbers are here.

Silver wrote what I quoted above back in September of 2010.

Subsequently, conservitive Mike Lee (R) displaced liberal Republican Bob Bennett and liberal George Voinovich (R) retired and made way for conservative Rob Portman (R). Liberal Republican Olympia Snowe is retiring this year. Liberal Lisa Murkowski lost the GOP primary in 2010 to a conservative (but with the help and encouragement of -- drum roll --- liberal Republican Orrin Hatch, she went on to win in the general election as a write-in candidate ).

Now Richard Lugar is in trouble (update, 5.8.12: he's out) and Orrin Hatch is feeling the heat.

Hatch will now face a June 26 primary election against a conservative -- state Sen. Dan Liljenquist.

I leave you with a quote:

"What do you call a Senator who's served in office for 18 years? You call him home."

— Orrin Hatch, 1976 (Orrin has been in the U.S. Senate now for 36 years.)

Hatch Blocked (For Now)

Doggone Offended? Credit: Gage Skidmore

X-posted from the Left Coast Rebel

Good news regarding Utah's 36-year progressive Republican Orrin Hatch over at Memeorandum, via today's Washington Post:

Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch will face off against conservative former state Sen. Dan Liljenquist in a June primary after the six-term incumbent failed to win 60 percent of the vote at the state Republican convention on Saturday. Hatch took 57 percent on the first ballot and then 59 percent on a second ballot, one on one fight against Liljenquist. Hatch needed to win 60 percent of the vote to avoid a June 26 primary.

Hatch forces had hoped to win the nomination outright on Saturday. He came up short on that goal. But, Hatch did avoid the fate of Sen. Bob Bennett (R), who two years ago lost his bid for reelection when he finished third at the state party convention amid deep discontent directed at him from conservatives.

Previously at the Left Coast Rebel:

• Orrin Hatch's anti-Constitutional progressive record.
• Orrin Hatch is "doggone offended" by Tea Partiers and libertarians within the GOP!
• Hatch loathes tea party conservatives.
  

If you're a liberal, statist or progressive Kool-Aid drinker, what's not to like about Orrin Hatch?

Could Dan Liljenquist be the next Rand Paul or Mike Lee?

Dan Liljenquist for the United State Senate?

Updated: Malkin has more, including a lot more info on Liljenquist.

Added: Donate to Dan Liljenquist HERE.

*The runoff election will be on June 26.

Instapundit: "TEA PARTY FORCES ORRIN HATCH INTO PRIMARY. That’s huge..."

Primarying Utah's Progressive Republican, 36-Year Senator Orrin Hatch

Cross-posted from the Left Coast Rebel

Gage Skidmore

"He's been there a long time, and with that length in service comes a lengthy record of expanding the scope and size of government."

-- Russ Walker, FreedomWorks to NPR April 12, 2012

Senator Hatch’s record includes the following (hat-tip Club for Growth):

• Voted YES on TARP (RCV #213, 2008)

• Voted YES to increase the debt limit at least five times (RCV #354, 2007; RCV #54, 2006; RCV #213, 2004; RCV #202, 2003; RCV #148, 2002)

• Voted YES to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (RCV #157, 2008)

• Voted YES on SCHIP (RCV #353, 2007) • Voted NO on defunding the Bridge to Nowhere (RCV #262, 2005), and supported billions of dollars in other wasteful earmark spending.

• Voted YES on the Medicare drug benefit (RCV #459, 2003)

• Voted YES on No Child Left Behind (RCV #371, 2001)

In 2009 Hatch also called Obama's budget "reckless" yet he joined a dozen or so of the GOP's most liberal senators in voting for the corresponding Obama budget appropriation bills.

Yah, this guy deserves to be out of a job...

Orrin Hatch embodies the worst things the Republican party represents: cronyism and backdoor deals, big government just slightly to the right of the Democrat agenda, and -- perhaps the worst -- a feigning mentality of elitism and power entitlement. The guy's been in Congress for 36 years!

Utah: You did it right last round with RINO Bob Bennet -- It's time to primary progressive Republican senator Orrin Hatch at your May, 2012 state convention.

Hatch's chief primary challenger at this point (4/14/2012) is a fella named Dan Liljenquist. FreedomWorks is supporting him but beyond that, I know nothing about him although I found this morning that the lamestream press has been spreading a Liljenquist can't win meme for a while now. More on Liljenquist later either per LCR or RightKlik.

The Democrats' War on Personal Responsibility

One of the most obnoxious features of the Democrats' health care agenda is the threat of jail time for those who choose not to purchase a government-approved health insurance policy. Under the Pelosi Plan, if you're self-insured, if you pay for medical care out of pocket, or if you choose to take your chances and rely on your good health — you're a criminal. Be prepared for a visit from the IRS. And if Queen Nancy gets her way, you might even end up behind bars for up to five years.

Sounds a lot like tyranny to me. Senator Orrin Hatch agrees:

Hatch said if the federal government starts ordering Americans to purchase specific products without being able to plausibly justify that mandate through the Commerce Clause of the Constitution which empowers Congress to regulate interstate commerce, it will mean “we’ve lost our freedoms, and that means the federal government can do anything it wants to do to us.”

Obama, self-proclaimed tough guy, isn't comfortable addressing this issue head on:

TAPPER: But as the Senate puts its bill — its final bill together and as a House and Senate prepare to vote on a — on a — after the conference committee, they should know, does the president think jail time is inappropriate...

OBAMA: Well, I'm — I'm not sure that's the biggest question that they're asking right now...

Obama prefers to frame the issue as a question of personal responsibility:

I think the general broad principle is simply that people who are paying for their health insurance aren't subsidizing folks who simply choose not to until they get sick and then suddenly they expect free health insurance. That's — that's basic concept of responsibility that I think most Americans abide by.

...I think I put out the principle that penalties are appropriate for people who try to free ride the system and force others to pay for their health insurance.

Interesting. Somehow Obama managed to set aside his concern for personal responsibility when he approved the "largest one-year increase in government handouts in American history." Those who free ride the welfare system are some of the biggest winners in Obama's taxpayer-funded lottery:

[The] "stimulus" bill abolishes the limits on the amount of federal money for the so-called Emergency Fund, which ships welfare cash to states.

"Out of any money in the Treasury of the United States not otherwise appropriated, there are appropriated such sums as are necessary for payment to the Emergency Fund," ...In other words, the only limit on welfare payments would be the Treasury itself.

A President committed to personal responsibility would be inclined to take the Federal Government out of the equation altogether, leaving individuals free to decide whether to purchase health insurance, seek help from charity, or pay for health care out of pocket.

Thomas Sowell addresses the issue with perfectly transparent clarity:

What did we do, back during the years when most Americans had no medical insurance? I did what most people did. I depended on a “single payer” — myself. When I didn’t have the money, I paid off my medical bills in installments.

The birth of my first child was not covered by medical insurance. I paid off the bill, month by month, until the time finally came when I could tell my wife that the baby was now ours, free and clear.

In a country where everything imaginable is bought and paid for on credit, why is it suddenly a national crisis if some people cannot pay cash up front for medical treatment?

Personal responsibility is clearly not the issue at the heart of the Democrats push for health care reform. As William Jacobson notes, the Democrats' perverse health care agenda is a "once-in-a-lifetime chance for the Democrats to achieve a permanent, economically-enslaved majority."

~~~

Pelosi: It is "Very Fair" to Jail People For Not Buying Health Insurance

h/t: hospicenurse54

More

Brilliant: The Dead Zone...The Implicit Marginal Tax Rate

Very good: Another liberal blasts ObamaCare

100% Taxation: Key To Permanent Democratic Majority

Fables for Adults. Once upon a time, grown-ups had no illusions about arbitrary government power.

Pelosi: Buy a $15,000 Policy or Go to Jail

If Feds Can Force Us to Buy Health Insurance ‘Then There’s Literally Nothing the Federal Government Can’t Force Us to Do.

Republican Shame

An open letter to the Republican senators who voted to confirm Geithner as Treasury Secretary:

Your vote to confirm Timothy Geithner as Treasury Secretary was very disappointing.  As others have said, "this was a perfect moment for Republicans to stand on principle."  But you failed to do so.

In light of Geithner's failure to pay his taxes, it is hard to imagine how he can summon the moral authority to perform his duties as Treasury Secretary.  Even the New York Times understands that "Americans expect the man who’s in charge of the I.R.S. to pay his own taxes."

Despite the fact that many have made the (specious) argument that "he's the right man for the job, no one else can do it, and he's the financial industry's man of the moment", it is hard for me to believe that among 300 million Americans, there is not a single one who is both honest and qualified for the job.

I hope you have a plan to redeem yourself after this unconscionable vote to confirm Timothy Geithner.

Sincerely,

RightKlik

*********************************************************************************

Shame on these cowardly Republican senators for voting to put a tax evader in charge of the I.R.S.

Corker (R-TN)

Cornyn (R-TX)

Crapo (R-ID)

Ensign (R-NV)

Graham (R-SC)

Gregg (R-NH)

Hatch (R-UT)

Shelby (R-AL)

Snowe (R-ME)

Voinovich (R-OH)

Obama's useful idiots.  What were they thinking?

*********************************************************************************

More

Enough Happy Talk

The White House Stimulus Meeting

"I thought he once said we are not red states or blue states. We are the United States of America. We are not Republican or Democrat. Look, he won as the man who reaches across. But here is an example in which he says ‘I won, you lost. It’s my way.’ He listens, but unless he gives something, it’s all a sham."

Obama’s Folly

One doesn’t make points at all about bipartisanship by explicitly attacking another partisan voice, no matter how much one disagrees with it.  By naming Rush and attempting to sideline him, Obama lifted Rush’s profile and practically anointed him his opposition.  It demonstrates that Obama still has no sense of his office, nor of “post-partisanship”, regardless of his endlessly empty rhetoric on the subject.

Opposing President Unity

Those who don’t get with the Obama program are going to be in for a rough ride, but if Republicans don’t stand up for conservative principles, they might as well pack their bags and go home.

Spendapalooza

It's taking a long time for this thing to sink in with Americans, but this Obama spending bill is not a stimulus bill. It's nothing more than good old-fashioned Democrat big-government spending on steroids.

The politics of ice cream

Every time Barack Obama opened his mouth he offered "ice cream" and fifty-two percent of the people reacted like nine year olds. They want ice cream.

The Incredible Porkiness of the Economic Stimulus Bill (Warning: very graphic)

Final thought: Obama's bipartisanship is a trojan horse.