HoosierPundit on Young, Sodrel, Hankins, and "GOP leaders we can have confidence in"

From HoosierPundit, citing these (and other) excerpts from an article in the Indiana Daily Student:

“We cannot trade irresponsible Democrat leaders for Republican leaders we don’t have complete confidence in,” said Todd Young...It was a jab at former Rep. Mike Sodrel...

Young called the Republican-controlled Congress in which Sodrel served the most fiscally irresponsible, second only to the current one. But Young didn’t offer specifics about how he would have done better, just the usual talk about outrageous earmarks and bloated budgets.

Then, HP starts to critique Young and defend Sodrel.

So, let's hear it. Let's set aside the empty rhetoric about "outrageous earmarks and bloated budgets" and let's hear Todd Young's specifics.

I don't know about Young's speeches, but it's true that his website only provides modest detail. Then again, Sodrel's website provides none that I can find. That's probably best, since Mike sold himself as a fiscal conservative before he got to DC and then voted like a fiscal moderate. (See: the data from fiscal watchdog groups like NTU and Club for Growth. But I'm especially fascinated by the equivalence of Obama and Sodrel in 2006 by Citizens Against Government Waste!) I'd hate to see him start making more promises that just aren't credible-- without owning (and apologizing for) his voting record.

For those who value website specifics, they'll end up choosing the best candidate in the GOP field, Travis Hankins-- who has, by far, the most detailed description of his positions on his website.

HP ignores Hankins and attacks Young. A good strategy for a Sodrel supporter, I suppose...

Continuing on, HP also takes Young to task for critiquing the GOP Congress in which Sodrel served:

Young called the Republican-controlled Congress in which Sodrel served the most fiscally irresponsible, second only to the current one. Republican Congresses deserve a lot of criticism, particularly in light of the expansions of government they unwisely voted for in 2003 and 2004.

I'd also say that the Republican Congress that held office from 2005 to 2006...represented an attempt to begin a return back to the fiscal prudence seen by the Republican majority in the 1990s....

Some people are satisfied with the economics and spending of President Bush and the GOP Congress from 2005-2006 (and even 2001-2006). And many of those people will be quite content to vote for Sodrel. Unfortunately, those people cannot reasonably be called fiscal conservatives.

For those who want to choose a fiscal conservative in the 9th District GOP primary, you can have some/much faith in Todd Young-- and you can have as much confidence as one can imagine with Travis Hankins.

The Republicans in 2005 and 2006 were also trying, with their efforts at taking up Social Security reform in early 2005, to address looming entitlement problems....

Actually, this is one area where President Bush deserves credit-- one of the few areas in economic policy. Instead, it was the GOP Congress who sacked his efforts at reform. The GOP controlled the Presidency and the Congress and made no progress on entitlement reform-- or other issues like drilling for domestic oil or ending federal funding for Planned Parenthood.

Again, you may be content with that sort of thing. But you really shouldn't try to convince people that such things are "conservative" or impressive.

One last comment from HP:

So to attribute fiscal irresponsibility to be some Republican malady as Young does is to concede important facts, and a big area of the political battlefield, to assumptions and spin put forward by the Democrats...

I'd phrase it like this: To fail to attribute fiscal irresponsibility to the 2001-2006 Republicans "is to concede important facts, and a big area of the political battlefield, to assumptions and spin put forward by" those who want to return (or maintain?) the GOP ideological status quo of politically-expedient, big government. We cannot afford to go there...