With the Indiana primary election tomorrow, the most watched Senate primary race in the country between Indiana’s incumbent Senator Richard Lugar of Virginia and Indiana’s Treasurer Richard Mourdock, was the major topic of conversation on the Sunday morning talk shows this week. Not surprisingly, it led to some pretty humorous analysis from the pundits.
Take CBS’s long time liberal champion Bob Schieffer, who was so aghast that such an entrenched Washington establishment elite like Lugar could possibly be defeated by a more conservative candidate, he took the occasion to worry aloud over the path being taken by a party he wants nothing more than to see defeated:
BOB SCHIEFFER: Peggy, I want to ask you because you wrote something about this. Do you think that the Republican Party has moved too far right for its own good? I mean, when you see the situation that’s happened out in Indiana, where Richard Lugar, who’s probably passed more significant legislation than any single member of the Senate right now, I would say-- that I can think of-- he might actually get beat in the primary because they think he’s not conservative enough.
As Brent Baker pointed out over at Newsbusters, this line of questioning isn’t unfamiliar to Schieffer. In February, he asked New Jersey Governor Chris Christie if conservatives were “pushing your party too far to the right to make the nomination worth anything when you get to November.” As Baker appropriately surmises, since when does Bob Schieffer have a vested interest in seeing Republicans win the presidency? He works for CBS, after all – the folks who were responsible for making up reports about forged documents to try to defeat President Bush in 2004.
LIKE US ON FACEBOOK
I’m always of the belief that conservatives should be very wary of anyone in the mainstream media who is offering them advice on the direction of their party or movement. When you know you are dealing with folks who oppose you and want you defeated, it’s probably not all that likely that they are offering you advice that will help you or your cause win.
Take this Lugar/Mourdock race as a prime example. The fact that Schieffer is advising Republicans to go with Lugar could quite possibly (likely) be because (1) Lugar is more likely to lose to the Democrat or (2) both Mourdock and Lugar will most likely beat the Democrat and Lugar is further left than Mourdock. Ergo, the more liberal Schieffer is advising conservatives and Republicans to choose the more liberal candidate. Pretty simple analysis.
And one other point that is worth making (Baker points this out as well). When is the last time you heard anyone in the mainstream media ask if certain Democrats were pushing their party too far to the left? It never happens. Obama is the furthest left president we’ve ever had – pursuing government healthcare, economic socialism, sexual anarchy and taxpayer financed abortion. But I don’t recall Schieffer ever asking if Obama was pushing the Democrats too far to the left. Now why would that be?