PDA

View Full Version : Senator Junior DeMint-----Mike Lee




Fozz
12-23-2010, 09:55 PM
You guys are going to love this.

The New Republic has an excellent article about Mike Lee and why he'll be such an important asset to constitutional conservatives. The tone is a bit negative since it's a statist magazine, but now that I read it, I am even more glad that he got elected.


With all the hullabaloo surrounding Sharron Angle and Christine O’Donnell and Joe Miller during the midterms, it was easy to lose track of some equally conservative, but less flamboyant, candidates. And it seems safe to say that no Tea Partier had more success while garnering less national attention than Mike Lee. While running for Senate, the 39-year-old Utah Republican proposed dismantling the Department of Education and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. He wants to repeal the federal income tax and the provision in the Fourteenth Amendment that makes children born in the United States automatic citizens. Yet he cruised to victory with a near-30 point margin in a Senate race that was largely overlooked by the national media.

http://www.tnr.com/article/80296/utah-republican-mike-lee-tea-party?page=0,0

Mods, I'll post the whole article only if copyright isn't an issue, but it's at the link.

Monarchist
12-23-2010, 10:01 PM
And this was supposed to be a negative appraisal. Heh...

cswake
12-23-2010, 10:25 PM
Here's the referenced speech by Mike Lee in the article:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13Mlt7JAKkA

sailingaway
12-23-2010, 10:29 PM
Yeah, Ron endorsed him and C4L people were supporting him in the primary. He and Rand have apparently hit it off, as well.

He is more like De Mint than Rand on foreign policy, but I welcome him on civil liberties assuming he's up for a fight.

cswake
12-23-2010, 11:00 PM
I'm not so sure about the foreign policy stance. Not only did he have to tone up his war rhetoric during the primary, he praises marque and reprisal in the above speech - he *had* to have seen RP stating his bill during the 2008 debates:

H.R. 3076: September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h107-3076

sailingaway
12-23-2010, 11:11 PM
I'm not so sure about the foreign policy stance. Not only did he have to tone up his war rhetoric during the primary, he praises marque and reprisal in the above speech - he *had* to have seen RP stating his bill during the 2008 debates:

H.R. 3076: September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h107-3076

I don't really know the dispute about his foreign policy views, but I've seen people on here arguing about it. We'll know when he votes, though. I really liked his speech, though, and his comment about not voting for anything Madison wouldn't vote for...

And I'm glad Rand has him with him in DC.

TheTyke
12-23-2010, 11:13 PM
Looking forward to seeing if he's really as good as Junior Mints.

Fozz
12-24-2010, 10:38 AM
Here's the referenced speech by Mike Lee in the article:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13Mlt7JAKkA

That's a great speech, thanks for posting it.

Imperial
12-24-2010, 11:10 AM
I don't really know the dispute about his foreign policy views, but I've seen people on here arguing about it. We'll know when he votes, though. I really liked his speech, though, and his comment about not voting for anything Madison wouldn't vote for...

And I'm glad Rand has him with him in DC.

Before the convention Bob Bennett ran some ads calling Lee out for a "weak" policy in Afghanistan. Lee then did what Rand did on gitmo and national security and reframed his position to be tough on national defense., He started sounding like the other Republicans then, relatively (although this cycle we got lucky many of the Tea Partiers had more rational foreign policies [DioGuardi, Miller, Buck all come to mind]).

Brett85
12-24-2010, 11:16 AM
(although this cycle we got lucky many of the Tea Partiers had more rational foreign policies [DioGuardi, Miller, Buck all come to mind]).

Yes, and it's extremely unfortunate that all of those guys lost. Miller and Buck were both great on the issues, but unfortunately they both ran terrible campaigns.

sailingaway
12-24-2010, 11:27 AM
Yes, and it's extremely unfortunate that all of those guys lost. Miller and Buck were both great on the issues, but unfortunately they both ran terrible campaigns.

Miller got hit with some sort of ethics thing late in the campaign, and he lost support. Until then, he was winning.

Churchill2004
12-24-2010, 12:21 PM
I've been wondering about Lee myself. Paul's endorsement speaks well of him, but that's not necessarily conclusive for me. To the degree he does align with us, his views seem more grounded more in pure conservative constitutionalism than the libertarian-constitutionalism hybrid of RP.

Still, I'm looking forward to Mike Lee and Rand Paul replacing Jim DeMint and Tom Coburn as the Senate's most fiscally conservative voices. I know Rand is not, and Lee seems not to be, a vitriolic social conservative like DeMint and Coburn.

Brett85
12-24-2010, 08:58 PM
I've been wondering about Lee myself. Paul's endorsement speaks well of him, but that's not necessarily conclusive for me. To the degree he does align with us, his views seem more grounded more in pure conservative constitutionalism than the libertarian-constitutionalism hybrid of RP.

Still, I'm looking forward to Mike Lee and Rand Paul replacing Jim DeMint and Tom Coburn as the Senate's most fiscally conservative voices. I know Rand is not, and Lee seems not to be, a vitriolic social conservative like DeMint and Coburn.

I know that Mike Lee has said that he's opposed to most federal drug laws, so his strict Constitutional views make him libertarian leaning on that issue. I think we may see a lot of votes in the Senate that are 98-2 with Rand and Mike Lee voting "no."

randolphfuller
12-24-2010, 09:06 PM
It is wise to ever be mindful of Ron's admonition that "Until you have got the foreign policy right, you cannot get anything right",

randolphfuller
12-24-2010, 09:08 PM
He had been disciplined repeatedly by the Alaskan Bar Association, for ethics violations.