Replies

If I had to rank the incumbent GOP Senators up for re-election in 2010 from worst to best, I'd actually put Bennett in the middle somewhere. Nowhere near as good as a Coburn but well ahead of a Murkowski. Bennett's ACU rating was a pathetic 64% in 2008, but he was back up to 84% in 2009 which is considered reliable conservative (anything above 80% being "good" according to the ACU) But ACU ratings alone don't tell the whole story -- I'd also have to go by their lifetime ratings from other conservative organizations and how they've stacked on major issues, as well as how often they've delivered for us (and by delivered I mean actually fought to get something done, not just made a good speech on TV about it) I'd venture a guess that the current crop of Senators up for re-election would rank as follows:

WORST TO BEST -

1. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska
2. Chuck Grassley of Iowa
3. Richard Shelby of Alabama
4. John McCain of Arizona
5. John Thune of South Dakota
6. Bob Bennett of Utah
7. Johnny Isakson of Georgia
8. Richard Burr of North Carolina
9. Mike Crapo of Idaho
10. Jim DeMint of South Carolina
11. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma
12. David Vitter of Louisiana

My own internal ranking shows DeMint is overrated by freepers as the greatest Senator ever, and "future presidential candidate" John Thune is WAY overrated. I'd also rank several of the would-be Senators running in 2010 -- Kirk, Castle, Campbell, etc., WAY more liberal than the WORST sitting Republican Senator on this list (Murkowski). One Republican seat becoming 5% more conservative will not overcome a bunch of brand new Linc Chafees in the Senate to outvote him in the GOP caucus. Again I question freeper priorities, though admittedly it's easier to dump RINOs in some states more than others. But the most liberal Republicans should be the first ones to go.

I also think it's hypocritical of freepers to rejoice over Bennett being eliminated by a party convention, but scream bloody murder when the same type of process resulted in Dede Scozzafava being the GOP nominee. I believe Bennett should have been defeated, but that decision should have been up to Utah GOP primary voters. It seems in Utah the party decides who the voters are "allowed" to pick from.

Again, if we had term limit laws we wouldn't have to waste all this time getting rid of entrenched incumbents like McCain and Bennett, they'd simply be barred from running again. Then we could spend more money going after the truly awful socialist "Republicans" running for the U.S. Senate, and eliminate Democrat sleeper cells before they take root.

Also, regarding the freeper arguement that we should only go after RINOs in GOP-controlled states (which I disagree with anyway)... according to that list, the ONLY GOP seat up for re-election in an “Obama state” is Grassley of Iowa. That means it should be just as big a priority to take out Murkowski, Shelby, and Thune, all of whom have conservative ratings on par with Bennett (or worse than him).

After 2010, Thune plans on raising his national profile. David Brooks wants a Mitch Daniels/ Thune ticket. Thune’s okay.

The Utah Convention process is a glorified straw poll. In a regular primary with a broader electorate, Bennett might have survived or a least kept it close. He would have not finished a pathetic third.

Thune shouldn’t be up that high in your list. He’s more Conservative than Coburn who isn’t more Conservative than DeMint. Coburn attacked FOX News and praised Nazi Pelosi and you have him near the “best”?