« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Why DE Republicans Should Vote For Mike Castle.

By and large, I heartily despise GOP “moderates.” Most especially “moderate” Republicans that allow themselves to be used as a foil against other Republicans so the media can cast the party as being full of “extremists” with them being the only ones who are “reasonable” in the caucus. My posting history for the past five years on RS is proof of that.

So what about the primary election going on tomorrow in Delaware? Simply, this; I’m imagining some morning in late November or early December 2010, where the night before, the US Senate, with newly sworn-in Senator Chris Coons (D-DE) – together with outgoing Senators Lincoln, Specter, Bennet, Reid, Dorgan, etc voting in favor – just passed Card Check, sending it to the President’s desk for his signature.

Be honest with yourselves; would the defeat of Mike Castle taste quite so sweet then?

Which is why I – personally – am supporting Mike Castle in the DE US Senate Primary tomorrow, and I urge everyone to hold their noses and do the same. The Democrats are indeed planning a vengeful lame duck session. The winner of the DE Senate race would be seated immediately and make no mistake – we need an R in that seat.

Furthermore, the candidate matters – this is no Rubio vs Crist, Buck vs Norton, Angle vs Lowden, Miller vs Murkowski or even Hughes vs Kirk, Quite apart from their conservatism, Rubio, Buck, Angle, Miller and Hughes were intrinsically personally viable candidates – O’Donnell is, frankly, not.

Keep these three things in mind.

  1. The winner of the Senate race in Delaware will be seated immediately, like the winner of the race in Illinois, Florida and West Virginia. Castle is a confirmed filibuster vote to kill an active lame-duck session for Reid, Pelosi and their acolytes to pass stuff like Card Check, Crap & Tax, raise taxes, etc. that will take until after January 2013, a new President, and filibuster proof majorities to undo.
  2. To pull off the sort of upset we’re hoping to see, I repeat; the quality of the candidate matters. There’s a reason why Erick – who would back the underdog against all odds (and sometimes, I’ve thought, reason) – has washed his hands off O’Donnell. People do not see “Conservatism” vs “Liberalism” on the ballot, they see people’s names and vote accordingly – the DE electorate likes the name and the people of DE like the name “Mike Castle”. Christine O’Donnell is far from the quality of candidate we need – she’s no Rubio, Brown, or even Kirk.

    What we need to do is win. Not only win, but win in such a way as to give them a long moment of pause so they’ll be too terrified to try and pass any more of their agenda for generations. Taking the vacated Senate seats of their President, Vice-President and Senate Majority Leader is something they cannot ignore – and I doubt it would be much comfort to them that “moderates” took their seats given the Rs behind their names.

  3. The race to replace Mike Castle in the House has the Democrat leading either of the two likely Republicans by approximately 16 points. This is the exact same electorate that will be faced with a choice between Coons and O’Donnell in the Senate race – the same electorate that is already showing that they prefer Coons to O’Donnell by 11 points and prefer Castle to Coons by a similar 11 points.

Let’s be realistic here; states do not abruptly swing from deep Blue to deep Red or vice versa in one go. The best way to ensure that DE would vote for a four-square conservative is to build up our party infrastructure and build a bench of excellent potential candidates with stuff like the Precinct Project. The GOP rank-and-file needs to start working to get combative conservatives into the party leadership and into public office in Delaware. This starts with getting rid of Michael Steele at the RNC and getting someone like Ken Blackwell in there.

These are the stakes;

  • With Castle we get someone who votes with us at least 50% of the time and gives our people the power to halt stuff in its tracks. Most important, we get someone who would vote to block a lame duck session. Better to have a rusty strut that sometimes fails for the mean time than a shiny new one that wouldn’t fit so it doesn’t get there in the first place.
  • With Coons we get someone who votes with us less than 5% of the time. We get a vote to keep Obamacare. We get a guy who would be seated the day after November 2 who would be a vote for a lame duck session that would pass Card Check, raise taxes, pass Crap & Tax, and destroy what is left of the American dream.

Make no mistake – this really isn’t the time and place to “send a message” to the GOP establishment. The person giving the victory speech in DE on November 2 has to have that scarlet ‘R’ behind his name.

COMMENTS

  • AceInTX

    His voting record makes me skeptical first of all….and second…I’m not convinced Odonnell can’t defeat Coons….we keep getting the same arguement that we beed to vote for RINO candidate A because Conservative Candidate B can’t win in blue state Y….but in case after case from PA to KY and down the line…when the primary is over…the conservative jumps out to the lead in the polls and never looks back.

    Castle has a 52 ACU rating and has a more liberal voting record than some Democrats….Were I voting in DE, I’d be voting of Odonnell.

    • texasgalt

      to be the 60th vote, it might be different.

      As it is, take a chance on O’Donnell.

      • Mary Beth

        I’m not getting why people are so antsy about the need for Castle and the supposed majority or padding to a majority he might bring were he to win the primary and in November.

        Without 60 votes, we’re not getting much of anything out of the Senate. And whatever does get out will not be veto-proof.

        Voting for Castle for a nominal majority seems like short sighted thinking IMHO. Sure, we “win” the majority (theoretically) but we’re not going to get any real benefit out of it and a new thorn-in-the-side liberal squishie for who knows how long.

        • http://kevin-wardsworld.blogspot.com/ kevinaw2

          What we get with a majority is Jeff Sessions blocking liberal judges

          • AceInTX

            Castle is an RMSP toady and a vote for the Dems…vote for him if you must…just don’t patronize us by telling us how important his vote will be in a lame duck session because he’ll back the Dems like he always does.

    • SirGladiator

      You guys tried this argument in Florida, in Kentucky, in Alaska, etc. and you failed, just like you’re failing in Delaware. We just don’t believe that voting for a liberal against a Conservative is the best way to advance the Conservative movement. Thats because we’re sane :) . Its strange that this is on the front page, since Erick has stated that not only does he support O’Donnell fully, but that he would rather the Democrat win instead of Castle, if Castle won the Primary. But you could’ve put it on the Front Page and left it there for the last week, in all-caps, with all of the most famous RINOs in America as co-signers, with a promise of 100 dollars to each person who votes for the liberal against the Conservative in this race, and your result would have been the same. Christine O’Donnell is going to win this race, and then she’s going to win in November, because this is our year. This is the year of the Consevative movement, this is the year of the Tea Party movement, this is not the year of the RINO. Liberal Republicans like Crist, Specter, Murkowski, and Castle are all going in the same direction, to the Private Sector. I hope that after O’Donnell wins the Primary tomorrow you’ll write another Front Page commentary telling the RINOs to vote for Christine.

      • Martin Knight

        This really has nothing to do with DE only wanting “moderate” Republicans – I have no patience for that sort of argument. If anything, 2006 and 2008 have proven moderate Republicans to be nowhere near the electoral juggernauts the establishment insisted they were.

        The problem is Christine O’Donnell.

        If she were anything approaching competent – which, given her history with the ISI (an institution I have a lot more faith in than her), disturbing revelations of dubious finances, and multitude of recent missteps, is an affirmative no – then I’d be just as gung-ho about her as anyone here.

        My point is that the quality of candidate is important.

        This is a seat a Marco Rubio, Nikki Haley or Pat Toomey can win. Christine O’Donnell is not in their class.

        • cordpt

          It’s not about O’Donnell being “too conservative” or Delaware “too liberal”.

          O’Donnell would be an equally unacceptable candidate in Utah, Montana and everywhere else in the country.

        • SirGladiator

          Most Delaware voters at this point have probably seen Christine O’Donnell in a TV or radio interview by now (I think I read she was on Hannity’s TV show one night, sad to say I missed hat one), and they’ve seen what I have seen. Not someone who is ‘incompetent’ or ‘unacceptable’, but a strong, impressive, Mainstream Conservative Republican. If you’ve seen her and you don’t feel the same, I guess we’ll just chalk it up to ‘agree to disagree’, but I think most people get the same feeling I do when they see or listen to her, that she’s very much an impressive candidate and someone we’d want to have representing us in the US Senate. That’s why unlike Castle’s 43-47 favorable-unfavorable rating, O’Donnell’s favorables are 45-41 despite the incredible barrage of negative personal attacks, the likes of which I personally haven’t seen since Palin 2008. People across Delaware just watch her and listen to her, and don’t believe that she’s ‘incompetent’ or ‘dumb’ or ‘crazy’ or whatever else the Castle folks can think up to call her.

          Its true that she lost a couple races in the past, but one of those was in 2008 to Joe Biden. Does anybody seriously think that Biden was beatable by anybody in 2008? That was the strongest Democrat in the state in the strongest Democrat year in a long time, anybody would’ve lost that one, and badly. I have every confidence that against a weaker Democrat in a much better Republican year, O’Donnell will do in November exactly what she’s been doing all year and what she’s going to do tomorrow, campaign strong and win an impressive victory for Conservatives across Delaware and America.

          • cordpt

            She also lost to Jan Ting and Mike Protack. And she lost to Carper as well. Running as a write-in candidate, showing a cringe-inducing lack of discipline and loyalty. In fact, she has never won a single race in her entire life. More than that, she has never come close. So, you have to understand some guys will see a candidate with such an incredibly poor record as an unimpressive one.

            Personally, I don’t care for electability. That’s O’Donnell’s minor problems. I’d be willing to sacrifice this election in order to build some name-recognition for some conservative politicians.

          • http://pragmaticpachyderm.blogspot.com texasproud

            The point being missed here is that Coons can be sworn in on Nov. 3rd. This same logic of cutting off your nose to spite your face is the reason we faced a filibuster proof Senate two years ago in the first place. I am going to say something some people are not going to like, but is reality.

            1) Things would be much better with McCain as President than Obama. There would be no government-run healthcare, transfer of ownership of auto industry to UAW, or a $800 billion transaction to union cronies known as the stimulus. There also would no be an Elena Kagen or Sonia Sotomayer on the Supreme Court.

            2) Squishy moderate Republicans in blue states are MUCH better than firebrand liberal Democrats. Sure I have hurled plenty of expletives at the votes of Susan Collins or Olympia Snowe, but considering the alternative of what a Democrat would do in that position, I am glad we have the lesser of two evils. People who say ‘there is no difference’ don’t seem to realize by having R’s in blue states allows for us to have an extra R, a more conservative one, on different committees where we wouldn’t if the other side had those seats. I know this is anathema to people because it doesn’t fit the narrative of principled conservatives at any cost, but being practical is more important. If I have 3 dollars on me at a McDonalds, I can’t get the Quarter Pounder combo meal. I might want the fries and drink, but it isn’t possible. The key is to get the most conservative candidate THAT CAN WIN. In places like Alabama, Utah, Oklahoma, etc that makes perfect sense because we can do better than Robert Bennett or Lisa Murkowski in those states. In places like Delaware or Massachusetts, you really have to take what you can get and be realistic about it. Jim Demint or Tom Coburn would not win a statewide race in those states. That’s reality whether you like it or not.

            3) Christine O’Donnell is not a viable candidate. There is a reason she has NEVER won a race in Delaware. She doesn’t represent the voting constituency and, for all of her newfound talking points about fiscal conservatism, has yet to be that in her personal life. She was a social conservative activist who at the last second changed her tune to pretend to be a tea party activist when that is not who she naturally is. Delaware is a small state that puts an emphasis on local connections and being a match to the people there. It is the same mentality that makes the Iowa Caucus what it is-personal connection with the voters is more important than 3rd party groups bombarding the state with ads. People in Delaware have been voting straight ticket D but have been willing to keep Castle because they personally like him even if he is to the RIGHT of where they are.

          • cordpt

            I understand your points and I fully agree with the importance of the special election.

            I’m just saying that the reasons why O’Donnell is a bad pick goes well beyond the electability issues. I think having persons like her as advocates hurts the conservative cause more than helps and I fear she’ll become a liability to every Tea Party candidate in November.

          • ciscoguy

            While not a DE voter, until today, I was going back and forth about O’D. Now, I’m pulling for Castle. I had forgotten this was a special election, and a double digit spread in favor of the Democrat in the single house seat DE has tells me a vote for O?D is a legislative suicide mission. Delaware is not Florida and O?Donnell is not Rubio. This is not the state for RINO hunting, especially when you consider this seat will be filled before the rest of the cavalry arrives in January.

          • http://pragmaticpachyderm.blogspot.com texasproud

            I don’t want death threats. I believe in challenging and holding accountable our party establishment, but I also believe we should hold accountable the alternative options as well. Just because the establishment gets behind a candidate doesn’t mean that candidate is the wrong choice. Rob Portman, Dino Rossi, or Ron Johnson are great candidates. The key is to for our party to make rational decisions instead of emotional ones. I don’t believe in the big tent/small tent issue because it really is irrelevant. I believe in being a ‘big picture’ party. Castle would not be my favorite Senator, and in Texas we can do a lot better (hello Michael Williams) but considering the voting electorate and quality of candidates in Delaware, to me its common sense. Emotionally, voting for O’Donnell will make you feel good in the short term, but when O’Donnell gets destroyed in November for not reflecting her state, and Coons sides with Reid to pass a lame duck pet project, you will feel angry when you have no one but yourself to blame

          • http://pragmaticpachyderm.blogspot.com texasproud

            and expanded on it just to further the debate.

            http://practicalgopvoter.blogspot.com/2010/09/gop-voters-have-to-share-blame-too.html

          • AceInTX

            I asked the question above and no one has answered it…I can only assume the answer is no unless he has I haven’t heard it…I’d be surprised if he did…most squishes end up cow towing to the Union vote…and I’d be surprised if Castle didn’t as well…

          • Scope

            I’ve posted the links a few times, I’m not doing it again. In 2008, he supported the SEIU EIGHTY THREE % of the time. He also supported AFL-CIO something like 73% of the time in 2008.

            Just read that Castle VOTED FOR Impeachment of George Bush. Mark Levin will have that up on his wesbsite shortly.

            HE VOTED TO IMPEACH GEORGE BUSH.

          • AceInTX

            they way the do Conservatives….

            What a piece of work

          • http://practicalgopvoter.blogspot.com/ texasproud

            Castle is not a perfect candidate, but neither is O’Donnell and if you can;t see the difference between Castle and Coons, then I would suggest you take a step back because yes there is a significant difference. Castle has stated repeatedly he will not support a lame duck session and Coons will gladly do whatever Reid or Schumer ask him to do. People need to take into account that Delaware is not Utah or Alaska. There is a reason no conservative Republican has been competitive since the ’80s-it is not what that state wants. We can wring our hands complaining about them not being smart but that is the reality.

          • AceInTX

            Conservatives were sold on Scott Brown as the 41st vote against Obama Care and what we ended up with was Obama care anyway combined with another carbon copy of Snowe and Collins….and here we go again with Castle in DE, Ayotte in NH…and let’s not forget we’ve put Kirk in nomination in IL

            Assuming we nominate all of them…and they all get elected…now we have a voting block of liberals in the Senate who will play all kinds of havoc on an already moderate caucus made up of 6 Liberal Republicans, (Snowe, Collins, Brown, Castle, Ayotte, and Kirk) to add to Graham, Lugar, McNasty and the rest of the leftist cabal that gave us 2006 and 2008 when the voters decided there wasn’t a dime’s worth of difference between the Dems and the Republicans…

            You and I know there is a difference…but most voters don’t pay attention like we do.

          • AceInTX

            Check….

          • AceInTX

            and doesn’t that speak louder than anything else that can be said for what a steaming pile of Dung Castle is as a candidate?

          • http://practicalgopvoter.blogspot.com/ texasproud

            in a small state where they are inundated with ads. If Christine O’Donnell was as good of a candidate as you are making her out to be, she would do better than 35% in her serial election losses. There is a reason she has never been competitive in a GENERAL ELECTION. For once see the big picture. Primaries are not irrelevant, but the general election is the one that matters. When Coons is the 60th vote for any of Reid’s lameduck session, you can know that you are just as responsible for that vote as Coons is.

        • powertothepeople

          Abraham Lincoln was considered to be a piss poor candidate who would drag the party down. Yet he turned out to be a tremendous blessing to the black community and to this country. He is now remembered in almost every circle to be one of the greatest presidents to date.

          While O”Donnell has dug her own grave, in practice, voting for the “viable, polished, electable” candidate is what has given us such gems as McCain and what caused our party to lose big in 2006. We voted in the ‘pretty’ candidates in favor of the good candidates and we had a party filled with well spoken, well financed, electable democrat lites who angered the voters so badly we ended up with Obama, Pelosi, and Reid running the show.

          • powertothepeople

            and remember how to spell “remember” again.

          • walter_hanson

            I’m just wondering why was Lincoln considered to be such a poor candidate.

            In 1858 not only did he defeat Douglas in the popular vote for Senate (back then Douglas won because the IL legistlature elected the Senator) he gave great passion to the anti-slaverly issue.

            Lincoln was a great speaker who knew how to make a point. As one person put it at Gettysburg he said more in just a couple of minutes than all of the other speakers said.

            The fact is that must be like the Democrats in 1980 who thought Reagan was their dream opponent.

            O’Donnell is no Reagan by the way!

            Walter Hanson
            Minneapolis, MN

          • powertothepeople

            Gettysburg speech which came after his win, Lincoln was considered by many on both sides of the Aisle to be backwoods, less than educated, and a joke for the nomination. He could not get the required delegates the first night to be the nominee and his win was based more on the fact there were so many German who dislike Freeman and his stance on immigration. The reasons Lincoln did not get the nomination the first night was based on many things from his stance on slavery to his perceived ability to win.

            In fact when he was elected to the Presidency, he got less than 40% of the vote and most who did not vote for him did not like him. Now some of this could be attributed to the issue at hand during that time, but there were other factors. By the time he was killed, even southern people had gained enough respect for him that they would not hide the killers and did not protest the hangings.

            But back to the issue at hand, never compared O”Donnell to Regan or Rubio. Simply stated that stating we should vote for a liberal based on his electability or the perceived or correct opinion that the conservative is not electable puts us in dangerous waters. Chuck lost tons of votes based on nothing more than the false perception he could not beat Boxer, and Rubio had to scrap back for many of the same reasons.

            O’Donnell has sunk her own ship if it happens, my point was that to deny votes for her based solely on the authors opinion that she is not electable or viable is not the way to go. Not too mention that with the latest polls, seems the author may end up wrong as she is now even or ahead of Castle and the same with Coons. While he calls it “competent” it boils down to a perceived notion that she can not win and nothing more.

          • Achance

            the Republicans needed to add Illinois’ electoral votes to their ’56 tally in order to win the Presidency. Clearly, Seward et al. thought that Lincoln was to be the front man and he and his Eastern friends would be the ones calling the shots. They did a good job with their propaganda about his rural roots and rail splitting and such but mostly Lincoln came to prominence in Illinois politics by splitting hairs for his railroad clients And from contemporary accounts, Lincoln’s speeches were far better read than heard as he had a high-pitched nasal voice and regional accents were very, very strong and distinctive in those days. You can read CW soldier letters and usually tell where the soldier is from pretty closely. American English wasn’t standardized in those days before Websters became the standard and there were very distinctly regional accents, and vocabulary.

        • http://itsaboutfreedom.proboards.com Conservative Phantom

          to Rush Limbaugh or Mark Levin. They have both given her an unqualified endorsement as recently as Friday. Levin has been banging the drum for her for several weeks now.

        • AceInTX

          Castle is one of the chief antagonists in the RMSP. The only people I can think of that I loath more would be Charlie Bass who founded that group of vermin…and maybe Christi Todd Whitman.

          I don’t get what we gain with Castle and Kirk and a couple others we’re stuck with up there undercutting our every move…Yeah they give is procedural votes to help us make McConnell Majority leader….but the damage they do to the brand undercutting the party on hot button issues makes any benefit we get from having them there a wash at best IMHO

          • eburke

            I’m gonna have to copy and paste this into my diary:

            Ace just said he’d willingly vote for McCain. I don’t care if it was for dog catcher, I’m writing this down :-)

          • AceInTX

          • AceInTX

          • eburke
        • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

          Not seeing reasons other than “electability”. OK, list 3 reasons with specificity why she is unelectable, not including polls.

          • furious

            …I’ll bite.

            1. She can’t pay her bills.
            2. She’s a terrible interview, even with a sympathetic host.
            3. Delaware voters are accustiomed to her losing, repeatedly and badly.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
          • JSobieski

            (1) She filed a lawsuit pro se in which she specifically attributed conservatism for why the ISI thinktank had instituted sexist policies

            (2) By her own words, she admitted that she had not even finished “processing” the invoices from her 2008 campaign before starting up on her 2010 campaign—fiscally responsible?

            (3) A collection of mistatements on things that are easy enough to varify. When did she have a college degree? Was the tax lien an error or did she just not have the money at the time? Does she really believe that Rasmussen and radio talk show hosts are conspiring against her?

            (4) A lack of record of achievement. Not saying she needed to be a founder of Microsoft, but PR is pretty thin gruel.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            to get up to speed on this! I would still vote for O’Donnell given the relative unimportance, TO ME, of the issues you cite, especially for a legislator whose job it is to make easy yea/nay votes, as compared to the stark differences on policy issues between her and Castle and the Dem.. But I understand the argument Krauthammer made today on The Panel, re Castle’s sure win in Nov given his DE history as Governor, etc and given the likelihood that if we win the Senate, that Castle gives us the best chance.

            But i see a wave election in which O’Donnell’s skeletons get drowned.

      • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

        Apologize to Martin now. Next post. No more than four words.

        Moe Lane

        PS: Life is not fair.

      • chipbennett

        Florida, Kentucky, and Alaska are decidedly more conservative than Delaware. Conservative candidates have a very real chance of winning statewide election in such states.

        At the end of the day, a primary vote for O’Donnell is a general vote for Coons. That, bottom line, is the deciding factor for me. Conservatism is not advanced by electing liberal democrats, which is precisely the end-result of an O’Donnell primary victory.

        If O’Donnell wins tomorrow, I pray that all of you prove me wrong regarding her electability. Otherwise, I will be holding responsible everyone at RedState who supported her candidacy, when the Dems wreak havoc in the lame duck session.

        But should she – and you – prove me wrong, I will gladly take my lumps.

      • http://kevin-wardsworld.blogspot.com/ kevinaw2

        I will enthusiastically vote for Marco Rubio. I would also vote for Rand Paul,Ken Buck,Sharon Angle & Joe Miller if I were a resident of those states. How is Christine O’Donnell good for conservatism if she cannot coherently articulate our principles. He demeanor would subject our principles to ridicule as a prospective spokes person for those principles. I’m tired of Mike Castle like Republicans, but I’m always annoyed by “checklist conservatives”. Electability is key and even if the checks line up, if you are an embarrassing example of conservatism, then we all suffer.

    • Oz

      Castle has already gone on record as being oppossed to anything being done in the lame duck session:

      Here’s the role call

      And here’s an article that says why it is so important for Republicans to get behind Castle and Kirk in regards to the lame duck session:

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/16/AR2010081602818.html

      • AceInTX
    • Jay

      Just saw Christine on Fox News, not real impressive. I live in Indiana with my own RINO problems….Lugar, who must go in 2012. Hmmm…Conservative who MIGHT win or a liberal RINO who can win?? Please make the right decision Deleware. The fate of the nation hangs in the balance, but no pressure though.

      • walter_hanson

        There is a major difference between IN and DE

        In IN which is a conservative state you expect a conservative Republican. Bayh won by running as a conservative yet he gave us liberal health care.

        The other thing to keep in mind is if you can steal a senate seat for six years that should be in the hands of the other party that is a bonus. We have health care because the democrats got their hands on an AK senate seat which should be Republican.

        Thus in DE it’s Castle which might vote for the Democrats once in a while, but I rather have a half vote (especially one that gets seated immediately) than the Democrat who will automatically vote with the Democrats until what 2050?

        Walter Hanson
        Minneapolis, MN

  • Wubbies World

    … I don’t buy into it. This is the same crap I was sold when it came to McCain. I am supporting O’Donnell.

    Martin I love your stuff, but here I disagree.

    Have a nice day.

    • Oz

      Assuming you are talking about the primary, McCain would have been another moderate repulican running the whole country like Bush.

      In this case, you are talking about making an entire group of legislation off limits to the Dems last chance grab.

      As I noted above, Castle has already gone on record as oppossing any major legislation as part of the lame duck session and he and Kirk will matter and matter big time then.

      • Wubbies World

        OZ, I understand what you are saying and I do not disagree with you. However, Mr Castle is the type of RINO that when it comes to legislation that Dems will fight hard against, I expect him to stab the Republicans in the back far more often than not.

        I would rather have a Dem in the seat than that kind of Republican.

        I am glad O’Donnell won. Now let the Republican Establishment – vs- Tea Party war begin in earnest. I relish the outcome. Establishment Republicans more resemble Pre-1960 Democrats than Republican Party. The Democrats are more Marxist – Socialist now. Lets have the debate in the open and see who the public votes for now.

  • philsoc

    The year before he was rated at less than 30 by the ACU – and I guarantee you that for the next five years THAT would be the Castle we would get, until he jumps back up near 50 for his re-election bid…

    And after 100 years of ‘bowing to reality’ I think it’s time to stand for conservatism and against ‘pragmatic’ RINOs

    • Martin Knight
    • Martin Knight
      • powertothepeople

        this argument. While the O’Donnell case is a separate issue as she has taken the gun, shot herself in the foot, then kept on shooting, the idea that we should vote based on “quality” or “electability” flies in the face of moral voting.

        Chuck in CA was really never viable from the start, but he was the one to vote for. In polished speaking, he was not as good. In being able to be marketed to the CA public, he was not the best quality. In size of bank account he was in dead last. And because of this and some other issues the Republican machine and many voters started the whole “he is not the one to beat Boxer (quality)” crap and their pre-doom paid dividends for Chuck’s opponents. Yet on conservative issues and the things that matter to us and this country, Chuck was the only choice. We will now support Carly 100%, but we failed our cause.

        Polished, Quality, electability are nothing more than words used by RINOs to dissuade voters from doing the right thing and it will only cause voters to become disgusted again with democrat-lite republicans who go back to business as usual once this election is over.

        Rubio is a prime example of having less “quality or electability” who is now the one to beat. I will give you that it would have been nice to have a “Rubio” running instead of O”Donnell, but regardless of that, no way one who claims conservative values could vote for Castle in the primary regardless of his better, well lets call them, qualities.

        • JSobieski

          Rubio was never an interior candidate to Crist. Never. He had lower name recognition at one point, but he was always a strong candidate. He is a compelling speaker and has a record of achievement. He is more than simply a bunch of conservative positions.

          The word quality is not just a RINO word. A candidate is more than a bunch of policy positions. Especially to those in the mushy middle–the attributes of the candidate matter. The list of odd facts/allegations against O’Donnell and they way she had addressed those limitations in public forums make it clear that her candidacy is not ready for prime time. Frankly, I question why she doesn’t first try running for a lesser office and build some kind of record before running upstream for Senate in a blue state.

          Christine is no Rubio and no Devore. She is a bridge too far.

      • philsoc

        Sorry – I would rather have a flawed conservative than a perfect RINO.

        (And while we’re labeling – he’s nowhere near Moderate, he is as Liberal as almost any Democrat in Congress…)

        • cordpt

          is that in politics the messenger matters. And deeply flawed conservatives affect the way conservatism and less flawed conservatives are seen – negatively.

          I’d rather have Dick Lugar instead of Bob Ney.

          I voted for Scott Brown over Frank E. Robinson last year for that same reason. And Robinson, for all his faults, is a fluent and eloquent man and, for all we know, a high-character individual in the way he conducts his life.

        • JSobieski

          Castle is not as liberal as a House Democrat. Not even close.

          He would however be the most liberal Republican in the Senate.

          Lets just stick with facts instead of making stuff up, shall we.

          • deano64

            Like that means anything. This is an election year. It’s amazing how “conservative” RINOS become in an election year. And who wouldn’t look like a conservative Republican with the radicals we have in power? Take a look at his whole record. We are talking about a 6 year term here.

          • Aaron Gardner

            This is a special election.

            I agree with your point, I just wanted to point that out.

          • deano64

            special elections this time around.

  • edintexas

    If Castle is a sure vote against Cap and Tax, or is sure to adhere to party discipline (i.e. he’ll do what the leadership wants on major votes), then tell me why he voted FOR Cap and Tax in the House.

    • Martin Knight
      • http://itsaboutfreedom.proboards.com Conservative Phantom

        Seriously. You take him at his word? Really?

        • JSobieski

          Castle was open and truthful about his past deviations, such as cap & trade, etc. The guy hasn’t been in the habit of casting surprising votes.

          • http://itsaboutfreedom.proboards.com Conservative Phantom

            Castle is a weasel. A lot of people are pointing to his ACU rating of 52 in 2009 but in 2008 he chalked up a whopping 28 score.

            His voting record is an insult to RINO’s. If you think for a second that he can be depended on to keep his word on any conservative policy or position then you are being gullible.

            This guy will dependably vote with Democrats almost 75% of the time. And he will do so while laughing at conservatives who were cheerleaders for him.

  • rdelbov

    vote for Castle.

    Here’s even one more reason

    Roth 30 years
    Biden 36 years
    Carper 10 years going strong and looking good in 2012.

    The very liberal Coons will not only be around in Nov 2010 but will likely be around in December 2040??

    Delaware re-elects their officials until they become ancient like Bill Roth in 2000.

    We have a chance to steal a senate seat in a very blue state for a few years.

    ODonnell has zero chance of taking this seat in November

    • SoFiMil

      I’d back her in the primary if I learn otherwise.

    • ithos

      to not switch parties? Or not to filibuster GOP backed legislation?
      I just think this guy will be another Specter or Jeffries.

      • http://itsaboutfreedom.proboards.com Conservative Phantom

        Exactly.

      • SoFiMil

        http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/christine-odonnell-wont-rule-out-third-party-run

  • cordpt

    regardless of the electability issue.

    That’s why I’d be voting for Castle in DE tomorrow. Because at least he doesn’t present himself as a conservative.

    O’Donnell will be a huge liability for conservatism and for conservative candidates all over the country during her time under the spotlight. It’s not that she can’t be elected, it’s that she’s such a terrible advocate for conservatism – to the point of being one of those very rare persons who can actually make conservative positions look bad.

    • proudgop

      Us Northeast Republicans understand what it takes to win statewide in our region. Castle has shown he can win

      The more important race should of been focusing on congress race in the state. Its highly likely Castle will only be 1 or 2 term Senator at the most and Carper may retire soon work on ground level and build a candidate thats more or liking.

      • Martin Knight

        We need to build a bench in many places so we’re not faced with these types of choices again – DE is one of them.

        • redcometchar2010

          Benches need to be built in the northeast. There aren’t Scott Brown’s all over the place ready to be elected. They need to be cultivated. New York is another example, if we had a top tier candidate Gillibrand would be vulnerable, but we don’t so she’s safe. I support Castle because O’Donnell is totally unfit for office and would be an a disaster as a candidate. Now I don’t live in Delaware, so I don’t exactly have a vote in the matter, but I would urge all DE conservatives and hold their noses to vote for Castle.

          • proudgop

            I highly concur

            Northeast Republicans get that sometimes you have to give little to get something.

            Castle is the Republican party in the state if you kill him off the state all republicans will be hurt so much in the state

    • http://kevin-wardsworld.blogspot.com/ kevinaw2

      You have it spot on!

  • conservvoter

    It’s time to shake things up, GOP especially. The status quo just ain’t cutting it.

    • redcometchar2010

      in Utah, Florida, Kentucky, Colorado, Pennsylvania, and Alaska. Now can we get off the “message sending” horse and get into “winning a majority” one.

      • conservvoter

        for “message sending” or “winning a majority.” It’s all about voting for the candidate who resonates the best with my political beliefs and principles. Now, if the GOP wins majority, good on ‘em.

        I’m cautiously optimistic that they’ll do better this time around. But I’m not going to vote for Castle merely because the establishment is doing its best to smear O’Donnell. Like Prof. Jacobson points out, it’s Nuts and Sluts In Delaware http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2010/09/nuts-and-sluts-in-delaware.html

        • redcometchar2010

          Hey, in a perfect world we would have perfect candidates that agree with us 100% of the time and who were totally free from scandal. However, we don’t. I don’t like Mike Castle, if he’s elected he will frustrate and annoy me. However, O’Donnell is not the hill to die on. She isn’t a Buck, a Rubio, or a Miller and Delaware isn’t Colorado, Florida, or Alaska. Sometimes you have to make the hard choices and go with your head and not with your heart. Imagine if card check and/or some other monstrosities pass in a lame duck session and further damage is done to our country and thirty years from now and your kids ask you what happened. You can point out to them that we could have stopped this, but the alternatives just weren’t good enough for your taste. Can you live with that? I know I couldn’t.

          • conservvoter

            With what I’ve read/heard, and going on gut feeling, I’m confident in voting for my preference over what you perceive to be the “greater good.”

            I don’t like Castle. I don’t see that he’s much better than a Dem. For me, O’Donnell is worthy of a try.

            Good thing the primary is tomorrow. The smearing and the fearmongering is getting wearisome. I’ve always hated it when someone’s tried to tell me what to do. And that’s what this race feels like: the Ruling Class telling the Rubes how best to vote, or else.

            I can live with voting my conscience and letting the chips fall where they may.

          • walter_hanson

            Conservator:

            O’Donnell got killed in 2008 when she ran for the Senate. She’s already shown for a statewide race for this seat she can’t win. Yet you want her to run again? That’s like the Democrats in 1976 saying that George McGovern should be the Democrat party nominee since he did such a great job in 1972.

            You put O’Donnell on the ballot we lose Delware and there goes possible control of the Senate for another 2 years.

            Keep in mind we got the health care bill in part because Harry Reid had the power as majority leader to park it on a bill and control the process of trying to amend. No majority for Harry Reid he can’t write that bill or any other bill for two years.

            Walter Hanson
            Minneapolis, MN

          • conservvoter

            . . . Mr. Hanson. What I’m saying is, in today’s climate, yes, give O’Donnell a chance. If she beats Castle, then everybody come together — kissie-kissie, group hug — and move on to beat Coons. It can be done. I don’t believe that it can’t.

            I’ll vote for Castle IF he wins the primary but not before.

          • cordpt

            http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/

            -In Delaware Chris Coons polls 26 points better against Christine O’Donnell than Mike Castle. Castle’s net favorability is 25 points higher than O’Donnell’s. That electability gap is even wider than what we saw a month ago when Castle did 20 points better against Coons than O’Donnell.

            Coons polls 26 points better against O’Donnell.

            26 points.

  • http://www.theminorityreportblog.com/blog/loren_heal Socrates

    All of this hand wringing and effort spent trying to elect someone you don’t want would be best spent building up the one you do.

    We will never elect conservatives until at some point we nominate them.

    • Martin Knight
        We will never elect conservatives until at some point we nominate them.

      And I say, we will never elect conservatives if we nominate conservative yet non-credible incompetents.

      If this was a Nikki Haley that we are talking about, I’d be more than happy to terminate Castle’s career and take a risk. O’Donnell, not so much.

      • http://www.theminorityreportblog.com/blog/loren_heal Socrates

        You wish to spend a marginal amount of effort defeating someone whose ideas you like and nominating someone you don’t so that you’ll have a minimal amount of work electing them. At that point you have an open-ended commitment to persuading them, time and time again, to vote with you. That open-ended commitment may at times scuttle your effort to defeat bad legislation or enact good legislation. You are, essentially, kicking the can down the road.

        I wish to spend a greater amount of work nominating someone I do like, opposition research and all, followed by an even greater amount of work to try to elect them. If the other side wins, they win, and I will have an open-ended chance to notice that they do not vote with me. But if my side wins, I have a solid ally in the Senate.

        The key thing to note, though, is that there is precious little difference between 41 and 59 in the Senate. By the other races this year we will pick up some seats. In all likelihood we will be between 43 and 50, exclusive. So we will have a filibuster for most things regardless of who wins in Delaware.

        So suppose what we’re talking about here is the Senate majority. What does that get us? Not having Chuck Schumer (D-NY) or Little Dick Durbin (D-IL) Senate Majority Leader, and instead getting Mitch McConnell as Leader, along with the best committee assignments and chairs.

        But what good is that — to us? To them it’s a big fat hairy deal. But to us?

        Conservatives just want to block legislation. A solid filibuster, combined with owning the House, does that. We only need 51 to cement the power of the NRSC.

        Thanks, but no thanks — I’ll take my chances up front.

        • Mary Beth
  • Oz

    Note this from “The Campaign Spot”:

    Over at the Weekly Standard, fellow apostate John McCormick writes about O?Donnell?s $6.5 million lawsuit against the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, a conservative non-profit based in Delaware in 2005. He notes ?sought $6.95 million in damages. In a court complaint, she extensively detailed the ?mental anguish? she suffered after allegedly being demoted and fired because of her gender. And, although she didn?t have a bachelor?s degree until this year, O?Donnell implied she was taking master?s degree classes at Princeton University in 2003.?

    ***********
    Conservatives sueing conservatives because of alleged gender discrimination?

  • texicanstar

    all these so called conservative pundits trying to be the smartest guys in the room. See if you can comprehend this: NO MORE RINOS!!!!

    • redcometchar2010

      all these posters trying to be the most childish guys in the room. See if you can comprehend this: GROW UP!!!!

    • chipbennett

      Delaware isn’t Texas.

      O’Donnell cannot win statewide office in Delaware, even if she could in Texas, or Kentucky, or Alaska, or Florida.

      The “let the liberal Democrat win the seat, rather than a RINO” is what got us in the position even to worry about ObamaCare, Cap-and-Tax, Card Check, et al.

      A primary win for O’Donnell equals a general win for Coons. And the likes of you and everyone else blindly supporting O’Donnell just because she is the most conservative candidate will be 100% culpable when it happens.

      I’m not saying this as an establishment Republican, a RINO, or any other similarly ad hominem adjective y’all keep bandying about. I say this as someone who is, in order, a Christian, American, Conservative Republican.

      I wouldn’t vote for Castle here in Missouri. But if a vote for him in Delaware keeps Coons from taking the seat, then more power to him!

      • Martin Knight

        The candidate matters – and she’s simply a bad candidate.

        This has nothing to do with her being a conservative.

        • chipbennett

          That’s a separate issue, and one that is perhaps equally valid – but it’s an issue that I’m not really getting into, because I’ve not done my own homework in that regard (mainly because I’m not a DE resident, and I quite frankly have more important things to do with my time).

          But, whether everything that’s said about her is true, or even if its only a matter of perception equaling reality, the quality of her candidacy is very much valid, even if she were ideologically electable statewide in DE.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    3. O’Donnell’s RiNO write-in run

    2. O’Donnell’s ridiculous lawsuit in which she claims conservatism subjugates women

    and the most important factor

    1. Coons is much younger than Castle. With Castle in we get a much quicker shot at replacing him than we do with Coons.

    • JSobieski

      in which conservatism was cited as supporting evidence for gender discrimination.

      However, I couldn’t find the actual language in the complaint (I admittedly just skimmed through it last night).

      If O’Donnell actually filed legal papers expressly linking conservative philosophy to gender discrimination, would conservatives still support her?

      O’Donnell may be the punching bag democrats are looking for.

      • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

        She said ISI’s conservative views demanded that women be subservient to men. And I’m told she wrote the complaint personally, so there’s no lawyer to blame.

  • Massachusetts_Transplant

    Great points above. Comparing a Christine O’Donnell to a Rubio, Buck or Miller, is a HUGE disservice to the latter 3. For conservatism to win, you need competent, articulate conservatives, not incompetent gadfly candidates like O’Donnell. Agree – if she was a Nikki Haley or a Pat Toomey it would make sense to support her versus Castle, but she is not, will lose the race and make the climb back to respectability that much farther out of reach for the Delaware GOP.

    As the healthcare debate showed, Party matters. Plus – how could we throw away the chance to control the Senate? I would rather Orrin Hatch controlling the judiciary committee for the next two years – and thus eliminate the chance that Obama gets to appoint more Berkeley radicals to the appeals courts. Just as Bush had to relent and appoint a Clinton appointee that had been blocked, maybe the price for more Obama appointees is that Miguel Estrada gets another shot? Far-fetched, but much better than Pat Leahy fast-tracking Obama’s nominees to confirmation over the next few years because people wanted to punish Castle and nominate Christine O’Donnell.

  • streiff

    1. The DE election is really a null set in the lame duck session. The seat is currently held by a Dem and unless a Republican wins there is no change in the makeup of the Senate caucus. If Castle wins there will be a change in party make up but not in philosophy. I am unconvinced that Castle is even as reliable as Snowe/Collins.

    2. Getting rid of Castle has a lot of inherent goodness associated with it regardless of who wins.

    3. I don’t think O’Donnell is a stellar candidate but she’s not Castle.

    4. Do we really want to see the NRSC spending money to put, and keep, Castle in the Senate?

    • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

      I think once this primary’s done he retakes a 15-25 point lead on Coons.

      • streiff

        I think the civil war in DE is far enough developed that Coons wins regardless of which one of the nominal Republicans wins the primary.

        • cordpt

          At least he won’t make conservatives look bad by claiming to be one of them,

          • streiff

            That’s one thing Castle has never claimed to be. I just don’t think winning this seat, considering what the winner will bring with them in terms of baggage, is a good deal for us. I’m certain focusing on this nothingburger of a race when there are real candidates out there who could use the attention is a lot less than helpful.

          • aesthete
          • eburke

            by giving Dems the fig leaf of ‘bipartisanship’.

            And, since we’re trying to make “Republican” synonomous with “Conservative” again, he does a huge disservice to our cause.

        • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

          Sometimes it happens right away (see WA sen, MO sen). Sometimes it takes a while (see TX gov). But even nasty races can heal up.

          • SIConservative

            Didier still hasn’t endorsed Rossi. What’s worse, he came out with a statement that he’d only endorse Rossi if he agreed to his three criteria, which Murray could use against him if said endorsement actually comes. The numbers do suggest that most of the Party has come back together, but if this race is decided by less than .3% or so, we know who to blame.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            Clint Didier may be a RiNO loser, but his voters have united behind Rossi.

            Nobody cares what that moron thinks, least of all his primary backers. The voters have unified and did so quickly. That’s why Rossi took instant leads after the primary.

          • SIConservative

            I think you underestimate just how tight this race could be. Yes, the overwhelming majority of his supporters are now behind Rossi. This race, though, could come down to the few who aren’t. Don’t forget how close Rossi’s first statewide race was. This could be that tight.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            I said that Didier’s primary support has lined up behind Rossi. All the polling is clear on this. Rossi is uniting pro-lifers, TEA partiers, Republicans, conservatives, any cross-tab you can think of that might be a 100%er.

            I’ve been following this race in the polls since before Rossi entered. The unity bounce Rossi got was staggering and confirmed in further polling.

            Clint Didier is a non-entity.

    • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

      …more than the NRSC will if the seat goes back into play Wednesday.

      • Spiker

        The NRSC will abandon Delaware. No need to prop up a candidate who can’t fundraise and is polling well behind a strong candidate in a blue state. We’d have much better pick-up opportunities elsewhere that would be more deserving of NRSC involvement.

        • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

          If I’ve heard it right, they’re in it enough to be on hand if something happened that suddenly boosted Coons, but this seat has been generally conceded to to the GOP because of Castle’s general election lead.

          • Spiker

            Here are the two outcomes:

            Castle wins, NRSC and DSCC largely avoid Delaware to invest in more competitive races.

            O’Donnell wins, DSCC invests in Delaware to guarantee a hold and NRSC (should) avoid Delaware to invest in real pick-up opportunities.

            Either way, the NRSC isn’t getting involved much in Delaware, but the DSCC will if O’Donnell wins.

  • Marcus_Traianus

    if the party would get off their collective asses and start promoting viable, real conservative choices in the primaries instead of party stalwarts and safe choices we wouldn’t be in this position my friend.

    I would agree that O’Donnell may not be the “ideal candidate”, but who is? Is Castle, the conniving, shifty, everyman, “well I really lean conservative- every once and a while when an election comes and it helps my polling” or O’Donnell, the unpolished, unproven, questionable but fairly guaranteed vote for liberty the right choice. Well, jack-be-nimble- flip a coin.

    I guarantee you a year or so from now when Castle teams up with Snowe, Collins, Graham and supposedly born-again McCain to, oh, I dunno- put another Sotamayor on the court, raise taxes, vote for earmarks or advance illegal immigration, folks that got Castle elected will be wringing-hands and telling tales about how they didn’t see it coming.

    I am not against so-called “moderates” provided they get in line behind an agenda the American people want and complies with OUR parties platform. Right now, that is not the slate this quasi-left wing RINO cabal has pushed us into the basement with.

    • cordpt

      why are you supporting O’Donnell? She’s the one who actually ran against a party candidate in an election.

      • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

        Neither one of these two is above helping the other party when it suits them.

        • Marcus_Traianus

          but who would more consistently support an agenda of the American people an be less inclined to keep destroying our liberty? I am duly concerned with the converse.

      • Marcus_Traianus

        Time was when that was a process aimed at finding people with the best ideas to act on the principals which a party said where pillars of its platform.

        But then again, I am an old-timer.

        • cordpt

          She ran against the GOP candidate in the GENERAL ELECTION.

          This is the main problem: most O’Donnell supporters just ignore the most basic things about her.

          • Marcus_Traianus

            Please, spare me the history. I reject the entire premise for this line of argumentation as it relates to the current election. In fact, I would love to see the facts on how the party platform she ran against has done exceedingly better since that time. But that’s discussion for another day as I believe most of us are pretty familiar with how we became bottom-dwellers.

            And just a reminder, most candidates that adopted the “Tea-Party” platform either switched from their prior platform or outright adopted it as there own due to its contemporary nature.

          • cordpt

            A lot. I’m not that ready to believe on sudden and extremely convenient redemptions and epiphanies from politicians. I suppose you were an enthusiastic supporter of, say, John McCain in the Arizona primary, if nothing more than this electoral cycle matters.

            One of the reasons for our recent debacle was exactly electing too many politicians who would pay lip service to conservative principles but lacked character and integrity. That kind of person doesn’t do any good to the conservative movement.

            The undeniable bottom-line is this: O’Donnell and Castle have both proved in the past they can’t be relied upon as good soldiers for the party. Both of them.

          • eburke

            On this we are in complete agreement.

            And Castle’s is abysmal.

            Anti-1st Ammendment (DISCLOSE Act)
            Anti-2nd Amendment (F rating from the NRA)
            Anti-Life (*F* rating from the NRTL
            Anti-Energy Independence (ANWR/Off-shore drilling)
            Pro-Crippling tax increases (Crap & Tax)
            Weak Fiscal Record (Lowest congressional scores from CFG)
            Weak on Constructionist Judges (won’t say if he’d have voted for Alito)

            Whatever warts Christine has, or *might* have, in the future is obliberated by Castle’s demonstrated record.

            So, yeah, I think record matters, too.

        • Spiker

          O’Donnell finished 3rd in a three-way primary in 2006 and ran as a write-in candidate.

          That was her first of three times running for the Senate on a hardline social conservative platform. She only adopted the Tea Party platform after she realized it was a way to gain traction in a state that’s already soundly rejected her.

  • ctpsb

    In regards to the argument that having another Republican to stand against the lame duck sesison…
    If other Republicans win in the states that would seat in the lame duck session ( lets’s say three) wouldn’t a count of 56 Demorat (two independents count as Dems) to 44 Republican be enough of a filibuster enabling ratio? I.e. Would four Republicans in the lame duck vote for cloture, would Castle making it 5 Republicans make a big difference. It would seem to me that you would need to filibuster for a month to ride out the lame duck session. Or am I missing something? Are the rules different for lame-duck sessions.

    • walter_hanson

      CTPSB:

      Three Senators are suppose to be seated immediately. WV where the Dem governor is running and has a shot to win. IL where Kirk has blown his lead and has been in a tie with a candidate who has no business winning, but Chicago could deliver the election for the Democrat. DE where if Castle or O’Donnell don’t win remain Democrat.

      Why is that important? Than just one vote breaking for the Democrats will let bills win. Gramham on immigration or cap and trade for example.

      The more Senators we get closer to 50 instead of election day improves our odds of stopping horrible laws in that lame duck session.

      Walter Hanson
      Minneapolis, MN

  • trt1

    First, you make some huge assumptions. Castle won’t vote with the Democrats. What is your evidence? O’Donnell can’t win the general. What is your evidence. Can you tell me what the winning lottery numbers are too?

    You couldn’t be more wrong… Martin Knight, whoever the hell you are. Holding our nose and voting is what got us in this damn position. When are you idiots going to stop doing this nonsense?

    Lastly, you are a coward. “We need an R”…good grief. There are quite a few with R’s after their name that we have to fight off on a regular basis. Get your balls out of your wife’s purse and fight. What a damn coward you are.

    • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

      Much obliged.

      Blam.

      Do I have people’s attention, now? This primary is starting to seriously annoy me with what it’s doing to otherwise rational commenters. If I have to start doing wholesale object lessons, I will.

      • Bill S

        he doesn’t fall into the “otherwise rational commenters” category. So you were justified…

  • laxconservative

    There are great opportunities to make inroads in states with more balanced electorates. Further, O’Donnell has a lot of self-inflicted wounds that can’t be pinned on moderates or the NRSC.

    Also, I’m not convinced that a party switch would ever make sense for Castle. He is giving up a congressional seat, that with his seniority, would entitle him to a pretty high-powered committee chairmanship when the House flips after the election. If there’s a conspiracy that he’s out to sabotage the right, he would have a heck of a lot more influence in placing checks on hard-line conservatism in the House than he would as a junior senator in the minority party or in a very weak majority in the Senate.

    • streiff

      if Castle is elected to the Senate he has zero seniority. He would be senior to anyone elected in November who is sworn in in January but he would not get a committee chair.

  • drivlikejehu

    Delaware is an odd state politically. Their economy is basically premised on business-friendly laws that led many companies to headquarter there, at least on paper. Anyway, it’s an overwhelmingly Democratic state and changing that would take time.

    O’Donnell is just not up to the level of the other conservative candidates who have won Senate primaries. She can’t win the general election- not because she’s conservative, but because she is a weak candidate. So the choice is very simple: probably win with Castle, or definitely lose with O’Donnell.

    It’s still a tough choice. I couldn’t vote for Castle personally. Is a majority that relies on him one worth having? A good argument can be made that it isn’t. Democrats will be able to filibuster regardless, and Castle would never support a ‘nuclear option.’ A majority would result in GOP committee chairmen, a modest benefit at best.

    I think ultimately it’s just not that important.

  • paulnashtn

    Mike Castle WOULD support cap & trade and would support raising taxes, he is the MOST liberal republican in congress. He will cite some advantage to the citizens of Delaware and vote with the democrats

    • LibertarianHawk

      But Chris Coons would vote with the Democrats even more. And that’s kinda the point.

      I’ll refrain from calling Mike Castle “good” — but we shouldn’t let the perfect become the enemy of the better. And I do think that a Sen. Castle would be *better* than Sen. Coons.

      Those are our realistic choices.

  • LibertarianHawk

    I heartily agree with you, Martin. While I can totally understand the dilemma — and support the effort to weed out RINOs in favor of genuine conservatives — there’s always a place for pragmatism.

    By all means, keep the pressure on Castle and people like him. But it seems extremely unlikely that Christine O’Donnell could win in a Delaware general election. This isn’t Alaska — where Joe Miller will likely emerge victorious (assuming Murkowski doesn’t play spoiler).

    Defeating Castle, however satisfying that might be in the short term, would quickly reveal itself to be a Pyrrhic victory for the Tea Party movement.

  • izoneguy

    where the boxers are getting ready for a semi-final match and a brawl breaks out in the audience and the boxers forget about the match…..

  • Brian Darling

    Castle will be a disaster in the Senate for conservatives.

    • deano64

      in the Senate as do the other RINOS. It’s about more than just how he will vote. If a voter can’t really tell the difference between the Dems and Repubs what good are we doing? I believe we must battle in the Northeast instead of taking the “conservative intellectual” stance that “hey it’s the Northeast so just hold your nose and vote for Dem lite.”

      • cordpt

        The Senators and Reps that mislead voters are the ones who claim to be conservatives and then act like liberals – say, socially conservative big spenders – not the moderates like Castle.

        • deano64

          n/t

          • cordpt

            Nobody can ever accuse conservatives of saying one thing and doing another thing completely different after elected because of Castle. Are you 100% sure that the same will happen with O’Donnell?

            CiNOs have hurt the conservative movement in this last decade more than all the liberals, moderates and centrists put together.

            *Castle is a centrist relatively to the ideological composition of the Congress. I think that’s a fairly objective qualification.

          • deano64

            sand and say we are no longer going to support Liberals? It’s doesn’t matter whether there is an R or a D after their name. A Liberal is a Liberal. Are you saying you believe O’Donnell is a Liberal? I understand O’Donnell is not perfect. Who is? When exactly will we have the perfect candidate to run for all our seats? Conservative in the primary Republican in the general! Some folks here seem to think Liberal in the Primary is fine and not quite as Liberal in the general is fine well because it’s the Northeast so what should you expect? My only response that is Bollox!

        • aesthete

          Conservatives, by and large, loudly reject obvious moderates like Jumpin’ Jeff, McCain, and others. Frist, Bush, and others who whisper sweet nothings into the ears of conservatives (in the case of Bush and “Compassionate Conservatism”, even the rhetoric was misplaced) and turn around to do unconservative things are a much bigger problem for conservatives than moderates from blue states.

        • eburke

          the old fairy tale of the ‘socially conservative/fiscally moderate’ voter.

          Nice try. That little canard has been debunked so many times it’s laughable. I can give you the names of dozens upon dozens of ‘socially conservative/fiscally conservative CongressCritters. The names of at least 5 ‘socially moderate/fiscally conservative’ Reps are…..

          • aesthete
          • JSobieski

            The prototypical Michigan candidate
            Pro-gun
            Pro-life
            Against gay marriage
            Against affirmative action
            Pro-tariff
            Pro-Union
            Pro wealth distribution

            Candidates don’t always exist along these fault lines, but voters certainly do. Ethanol subsidies have rendered Iowa unfit to be the first caucus state. Do fiscal conservatives there even exist anymore?

          • eburke

            Social and Fiscal issues and Tom Latham, the other Republican congressman from Iowa is an A on Soical Issues and a B to B-, on average, on tax and budget issues (mainly because of his votes on agricultural subsides).

            Latham’s not where I’d personally like him to be but he’s a hell of a lot more conservative on fiscal issues than Mike Castle or any of the other purported “socially liberal/fically conservative” members of the GOP caucus.

            I will repeat that in aggregate, the odds of finding a social conservative who’s also a fiscal conservative are a helluva lot higher than find a social liberal who’s also fiscally conservative.

          • aesthete
  • IJB

    (I think good arguments can be made either way on this one. I’m just not invested enough to get off the pot one way or the other…)

    NOTE: I would, however, make the argument that we don’t necessarily need DE to win back the Senate. And if we win IL and WV (and FL(?) – are we sure this one gets seated immediately?!…), the lame duck issue goes away as well.

    So, bottom line: I doubt DE actually matters all that much, in the grand scheme of things.

    • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

      …and assuming that we keep our own seats (which is… reasonable, at this point): we need to take AR, IN, & ND (shouldn’t be hard); IL, PA, & CO (doable); and four of CA, CT, NV, WA, WI, & WV. It’s that last batch that’s going to be the bear.

    • Martin Knight
    • cordpt

      Maybe this seat can be a 60th vote to break a democratic filibuster in 2013.

      • Aaron Gardner
  • SIConservative

    If O’Donnell pulls this out, I could see a post-primary bounce making this a race. Coons would be the favorite, but I don’t think it’d be quite as easy for him as some seem to think. I don’t know that O’Donnell could pull it off, but the 11-point gap that the polls indicate probably isn’t reflective of where this race would be after an O’Donnell primary victory.

    • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

      Moderates who were going to vote for Castle might instead go for Coons.

      • Aaron Gardner

        ;)

        • JSobieski

          nt

          • Aaron Gardner
          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            Once supporters of write-in O’Donnell started calling anyone else a RiNO, that pretty much opened the flood gates for everyone to call everyone else a RiNO in this race.

          • JSobieski

            it has been used to describe candidates.

            If you want to separate actual voters from the GOP, then I think you are asking for trouble.

            Calling a Republican voter a RINO can only either insult them or encourage them to look elsewhere for a party affiliation.

            So no, I don’t agree that calling voters RINO is a good idea. Its a free country so do what you want, but any political movement that insults voters willing to self identify with the movement is asking from trouble.

            Can you provide a single link to an example of where RINO was used to describe voters rather than candidates, political operatives, etc.?

          • Aaron Gardner

            And I am not saying that to put Neil on the spot. I agree with him.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            Way back when, I had a diary calling *myself* a RiNO because I was willing to vote third party when I detested the nominee enough.

            I once voted against Mary Bono before she was Mary Bono Mack and everyone disliked her, for example.

            But eventually I got tired of never accomplishing anything so I then posted a diary saying I’m a RiNO no more.

            Being a fair-weather Republican, abandoning nominees you don’t like, is no different from what Arlen Specter and Charlie Crist did. A RiNO is a RiNO is a RiNO.

          • JSobieski

            but i don’t think it makes sense to call the population of Delaware a bunch of RINOs, which is the context of the statement.

            Is it accurate? Probably. Is it productive? Probably not.

            Its one thing to call people who blog/comment RINOs, but just ordinary voters? Independents outnumber Republicans in Delaware.

          • Aaron Gardner

            They’re not republicans to begin with.

        • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

          But it seems unlikely Castle’ll follow in O’Donnell’s footsteps and run a write-in indy campaign.

          • SIConservative

            I bet that if she wins he doesn’t endorse her either.

        • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

          There’s a three-to-two registration advantage for Democrats versus Republicans: eyeballing it it looks like the partisan breakdown is 47% Dem, 30% Republican. 23% Other. Bottom line: a lot of Castle voters aren’t even ‘RiNOs.’

          So how is O’Donnell planning to win their votes?

          • chipbennett

            As usual, you are the voice of reason.

            (Can you now please try to talk some sense into the other front-page editors, like Erick and Aaron, on this matter?)

          • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

            The problem here is that not everybody has the same goal.

          • chipbennett

            …but I don’t see how cutting off one’s nose to spite one’s face is much of a laudable goal – although it apparently rather accurately summarizes Erick’s goal in the DE-Sen election.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            They disagree, but as Moe points out, they have similar but not congruent objectives.

          • chipbennett

            And I certainly wouldn’t imply that either is incapable of reason, even if I believe their current position is lacking in reason.

            And I understand that one of the critical points is one’s assumption regarding O’Donnell’s general statewide electability. Perhaps both Erick and Aaron see something in the demographics of the state that tells them that she has a plausible chance of winning statewide. I’m just operating from exactly the opposite assumption.

            (Also, until confirmatory polling exists, I’m taking PPP’s latest as an outlier.)

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            They’re overwhelmingly backing Castle and disliking O’Donnell per PPP.

        • chipbennett

          All the more reason, then, to give up on the fantasy that O’Donnell can win statewide election in Delaware. The ideological demographics of the state just don’t support someone as conservative as she is.

          The long-term strategy is to change the ideological demographics of the state. The short-term strategy is the Buckley Rule: vote for the most conservative candidate who is electable.

      • SIConservative

        Those same people might also decide that their desire to reign in/punish the President is more important than their party affiliation or ideology. Every open Democrat seat is competitive, including West Virginia, where Democrats have dominated, albeit with a few exceptions, everything except Presidential elections. If Connecticut, Illinois, and Wisconsin are competitive, the environment is so unfavorable to Democrats that it’s hard to see any open Senate race not being competitive. Castle is certainly the stronger GE candidate, but I think the calls for preemptive surrender in the event of an O’Donnell victory are premature.

      • chipbennett

        How else to explain Castle +11 vs. Coons, while Coons +11 vs. O’Donnell?

  • Aaron Gardner

    There are a bunch of comments noting that O’Donnell isn’t a Rubio, I have even seen comments that say she doesn’t match up to Reagan well.

    With this in mind, is it now the contention of this group that it takes a Rubio to win in the North East?

    • JSobieski

      In other words, a full blown conservative could win in DE but the candidate will have to have better candidate skills than average. The bluer the state, the more the candidate has to bring to the table besides merely conservative positions. For example, I don’t think Angle or Paul could in DE.

      Watch/listen to a neutral interview with Brown and then watch/listen to a neutral interview with O’Donnell.

      Brown was great at turning tough questions into positives for him. He picked his battles intelligently, and made sure to come accross as reasonable to the independent voter. O’Donnell comes across incredibly defensive unless the person is actively cheerleading for her like Levin. Her ability to persuade is definitely questionable.

      If Rush/Hannity/Levin could carry someone over the finish line, Romney would be President right now. The candidate needs to do that job, and O’Donnell’s strategy as far as I can see from her public comments is to hope for low turnout in the primary, and worry about the general election later.

      I wish O’Donnell would have tried running for some local offices first. Nothing wrong with running for city council or state rep before going all in for the US Senate.

      • Aaron Gardner

        BTW, have you gone back and read the thread from last night?

        I noticed you didn’t answer my reply to you where I linked to the comments that inspired what you considered attacks on cord and ffc99 from me.

        • JSobieski

          I don’t want to pick fights with you on matters outside the issues at hand.

          • Aaron Gardner

            I wish you would have thought of that last night instead of making false claims about me.

            Oh well.

          • JSobieski

            I said that you were engaged in some name calling, and you were. I didn’t want to reopen the issue today because I don’t think it benefits anyone to do so.

            Oh well.

          • Aaron Gardner

            It would seem more that you read my reply and disregard the evidence contrary to your position and refrained from reply instead of acknowledging that you were playing a double standard.

            But I am probably just being emotional and have again lost control of my faculties.

          • JSobieski

            you were more at fault than the other side.

            Am I biased? Sure. But so are you. Neither of us was an outside observer to the argument.

            Thanks again for your military service.

          • Aaron Gardner

            I like to know where the ground is under my feet. Now I know.

          • JSobieski

            I confess that my qualifications to discuss the supernatural are limited and will stand down.

            The only double standard is that I acknowledge my own weaknesses and mistakes.

            Thank you again for your military service.

          • Aaron Gardner

            We all have biases. I am not immune to that. Heck, I even apologize when I am wrong.

            I suppose I could take the path you have chosen and instead disregard your opinion and write it off to emotion and then follow it up with a patronizing thanks for your service.

            Next time just spit on me and be done with it.

          • JSobieski

            it represents an attempt by to try and be positive. To insinuate that I am spitting on you as people did to Vietnam veterans is not an accurate comment/interpretation, although you obviously have the constitutional right to make it.

            I do think your comments on this topic are not up to your usual standards. You asked me for my opinion and I gave it. I do think that from time to time, we all can get so caught up in the debate that we lose our usual cool.

            With respect to the military service comment, if my saying that fact is to you the equivalent of spitting on you, then I would suggest that you re-examine your interpretation of what is happening.

            When I disagree with someone on a topic that I usually agree with, I try to reiterate a point of common ground. Its a way of saying, yes there is common ground here.

            So once again, I thank you for your service to this beloved country. I sincerely wish you all of the best.

          • Aaron Gardner

            In the future, if you are going to call me out as incapable of acknowledging my mistakes and weaknesses, save the thanks.

            Whether you intended it to be so or not, it was passive aggressive, patronizing crap.

          • JSobieski

            I meant it each and every time. Military service is a serious commitment that I hold in the highest regard. My thanking you for your service was not passive aggressive, sarcastic, or anything else.

            But for the US military, I would be a slave. Each and every Nobel Peace Prize since 1942 should have gone to the US military.

            You made comments about me, I made comments about you. We don’t agree with what the other person said. I don’t doubt your good faith in any of it, although I do disagree with your assessment.

            I have acknowledged where my language was sloppy, and apologized. I have not engaged in name calling, and simply called things like I saw them. In arguing the issues, I took the time to provide a supporting rationale and cite facts that I thought were relevant.

            Any perceived insult on your part by anything I said was not my intention. If my comments about a perceived deviation from past writings by you was insulting to you, I shall make sure to avoid doing so in the future.

          • aesthete

            so if you don’t mind the off-topic question, what branch of service are/were you in?

          • Aaron Gardner
          • jonreagan

            Accusing people of lying, making false claims, etc.

            Could this be some kind of peculiar mental disorder which forces you to make such accusations? It’s really quite unusual.

            In any event, take care of yourself.

          • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

            …when you’re prepared to start acting like a functioning adult again.

      • pilgrim
    • Martin Knight

      Rubio is high quality. Haley is high quality. Brown is high quality.

      O’Donnell is not.

      • Aaron Gardner

        I was having fun with that comment.

        It’s funny to me that out of one side of their mouth many are saying that a conservative just can’t win in the North East while out the other side they say O’Donnell isn’t conservative enough to win in the North East.

        You don’t think there is just a tad of cognitive dissonance going on there?

        • JSobieski

          Some have said that she hasn’t been tested, i.e. that her conservative beliefs are like my conservative beliefs, I vote them in elections, but not outside that context.

          Who is saying that O’Donnell is conservative enough? Is anyone out there arguing Castle is more conservative than O’Donnell?

        • Martin Knight

          It’s that she’s a bad candidate.

          I’ll just cut and paste from JSobieski from upthread; A candidate is more than a bunch of policy positions. Especially to those in the mushy middle?the attributes of the candidate matter. The list of odd facts/allegations against O?Donnell and they way she had addressed those limitations in public forums make it clear that her candidacy is not ready for prime time.

          • Aaron Gardner

            Apparently that isn’t allowed.

            I suppose I should just laugh.

    • aesthete

      At least for self-professed conservative candidates. Recall that even strong two out of three legged conservatives who were skilled retail campaigners, competent, etc, like Rudy Guiliani, lost some elections and were not necessarily widely supported by the electorate. The NE is just a tough nut for conservative candidates to crack, and we need top-notch recruitment if we want conservatives to win in those areas. (I’m not even sure a hardcore culture warrior could win, regardless of his/her candidate skills.)

  • izoneguy

    The DE Senate GOP primary: Castle, Soros & a health advisory

    http://michellemalkin.com/2010/09/13/the-de-senate-gop-primary-castle-soros-a-health-advisory/

    Castle?s campaign questions O?Donnell?s trustworthiness. GOP primary voters need to question Castle?s. He was just one of two Republicans to vote for the $26 billion Edujobs/BigGovJobs bailout a few weeks ago. He supported the TARP bailout that benefited many of his political donors. And he is the co-founder of the George Soros-tied Republican Main Street Partnership ?
    http://www.republicanmainstreet.org/ -
    which, as I reported in 2005, successfully pressured the House GOP majority to cave in to enviros on the ANWR drilling ban. The Republican Main Street Partnership PAC supports ACORN-friendly, Big Labor-backing, tax-and-spend, abortion radicals in GOP clothing like Dede Scozzafava.

    This isn?t ?Main Street.? This is the road to progressive hell. We already have one too many shady Soros Republicans in the Senate ? and John McCain doesn?t need any more company.

    ——————————————————————————————–

    Money from Republican Main Street Partnership might put Brian Rooney out of touch with conservatives

    http://www.mlive.com/opinion/jackson/index.ssf/2010/06/money_from_republican_main_str.html

  • chipbennett

    (Cross-posting this comment from one other comment thread.)

    Christine O’Donnell, in her own words (from her lawsuit against ISI for gender discrimination and unlawful termination):

    However, the reason that ISI demoted Miss O’Donnell and ordered her to report to a man, Doug Schneider, was because ISI did not want to allow a woman to remain unsupervised by a man and report directly to ISI’s President.

    ISI demoted Miss O’Donnell because of a three-month sabbatical by Vice President Jeff Nelson, starting in early February 2004, during which Christine O’Donnell would have been a woman standing on her own without being supervised by a man.

    This was a baby-sitting measure so that while the male supervisor was absent on sabbatical, Miss O’Donnell as a woman would have a male “minder” to look after the woman.

    As of the time that Miss O’Donnell was fired on February 26, 2004, ISI had never had a woman executive or manager who was not under the “covering” of a man.

    Because of ISI’s conservative beliefs, subscribing to a particular interpretation of gender roles, during Miss O’donnell’s employment there, ISI expressed its organizational beliefs that women must serve under a man’s supervision or “covering” and should not have authority without being under the headship and authority of a man.

    So, the staunch conservative O’Donnell blames conservative beliefs for gender discrimination.

    Yep; she sounds like a real winner.

    • JSobieski

      http://www.weeklystandard.com/sites/all/files/docs/O%27Donnell%20Complaint%20ISI.PDF

      I read through the actual complaint, and did not find the phrase “Because of ISI’s conservative beliefs” in the complaint.

      If its in there and I just missed it, I think it does change the game in my view. A linkage of conservativism to sexism would not be acceptable to conservatives.

      However, I didn’t see this language in her complaint.

      • indylawyer

        I checked after seeing it quoted in the Weekly Standard piece. That allegation knocked me off the fence on this race. The highlighted quote is from paragraph 109 of the complaint, which can be found here: http://www.weeklystandard.com/sites/all/files/docs/O%27Donnell%20Complaint%20ISI.PDF More in the paragraphs right after it, and at paragraphs 154, 155

        Also check out paragraph 159 that “nearly all” male employees and executives at ISI “openly refused to take Miss O’Donnell’s directions as a woman, resisted her leadership as a woman, and made openly hostile comments at meetings directed against her as a woman.”

        • deano64

          for language which I’m pretty sure would have been created by attorneys representing her at the time. So a couple paragraphs in a 55 page court document filed by her attorneys 6 years ago disqualifys her? Weak. I guess Castle is the perfect candidate.

          • ffc99

            with filing the complaint cited above. She filed it pro se.

      • chipbennett

        Pages 15-16 of 55. Clauses 105 – 109. The specific phrase you reference is found in Clause 109.

        The link is above.

        These are in her own words. Allegedly (I have not attempted to confirm this point), O’Donnell filed this lawsuit pro se. She was representing herself, and therefore wrote the complaint herself.

        I realize you don’t know me from Adam, which is the only reason that I choose not to take as a personal affront the accusation that I was attempting to smear O’Donnell.

        • indylawyer

          Just scroll to the end of the complaint, she signed it herself pro se. The allegation also stayed in the amended complaint after she’d hired an attorney.

          • deano64

            I didn’t realize she acted pro se. So a couple paragraphs in a 55 page court document filed by O’Donnell in her own words 6 years ago disqualify her as a candidate? In my opinion it’s still quite a weak argument. No one has convinced me why we shouldn’t support her. I guess Castle is a pure as the wind driven snow.

          • JSobieski

            that the pro se complaint specifically links conservatism with the ills of sexual discrimination.

            How often would someone have to write that before it became a problem in your eyes?

            Once a year?
            Once a month?
            Once a week?

            As a purely theoretical matter, if someone votes the way you want, do you care what they say?

            I don’t think it disqualfies her, but it is another “odd little fact” in her record. I am in fact surprised that she wrote it in there, but I understand that litigation can be emotionally painful and people say all sorts of things in that context.

            I wonder if Castle has ever accused conservatism of being related to sexism?

          • deano64

            and I will stick with O’Donnell.

            http://hotair.com/archives/2010/09/10/jim-demint-endorses-christine-odonnell-over-mike-castle/

          • chipbennett

            As long as she says all the right things, what she really believes means absolutely nothing to you?

            Isn’t that sort of thinking the very thing that got us in the RINO mess to begin with?

          • pilgrim

            I’d rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University.

            William F. Buckley, Jr.

            The idea that the political experience of having been elected before just trumps everything else leaves us with a very pathetic pool of people to choose from.

          • chipbennett

            I’m totally not following how that point – valid though it is – in any way relates to my comment regarding O’Donnell’s apparent hypocrisy with respect to conservatism?

          • aesthete

            and that while he would have preferred aforementioned 400 to the Harvard set (so would I), but that he didn’t see those as the only two choices. Buckley was very much anti-populist, and preferred intelligent and competent candidates.

          • chipbennett

            How can O’Donnell on one hand claim to be a staunch conservative, and to adhere to conservative principles, while on the other hand blame those same conservative principles as being responsible for the gender discrimination that she alleged was perpetrated against her?

            In short, she claims to be a conservative, but smears conservative principles.

            I’m struggling to comprehend why it matters whether she wrote those words yesterday, or in 2004. They’re her words.

          • indylawyer

            I think the fact that she filed the lawsuit shows poor judgment – particularly since she did so pro se, which suggests she had trouble finding an attorney willing to take it despite the large sums of money requested and the eligibility for attorneys’ fees under Title VII.

            Worse, she is using the fact that ISI is a conservative organization as a basis for establishing that it discriminates against women. She’s alleging that putting a woman in charge of something would violate ISI’s conservative philosophy and alienate its donors. That’s a scandalous charge that plays right into the Left’s “conservatives are racist, sexist, etc.” playbook.

            I’m sure I’d vote for her over Coons, and would probably do so over Castle if the Dems didn’t have a candidate. But I think this casts grave doubts on her electibility, and also suggests we may have some embarassments from her in the future if she somehow gets elected.

          • chipbennett

            …is that you have to spell out these points.

            Personally, I thought that, reading through the complaint, she had the makings of a valid case. (I also thought it was horribly written, and, even in my layman reading, appeared to be fraught with unsubstantiated speculation, rather than sticking to mere facts.) So, the lawsuit itself may have been with merit. (Of course, she also dropped it; which means that neither a lawyer of her own, or the legal system, thought likewise.)

            But you nail it right here:

            Worse, she is using the fact that ISI is a conservative organization as a basis for establishing that it discriminates against women. She?s alleging that putting a woman in charge of something would violate ISI?s conservative philosophy and alienate its donors. That?s a scandalous charge that plays right into the Left?s ?conservatives are racist, sexist, etc.? playbook.

            True: Coons will get great mileage out of her smearing of conservatism. It speaks – again – to her electability within the constituency that will be casting votes. But worse is that she smeared conservatism to begin with.

            Those who are pushing O’Donnell at all costs need to ask themselves: was O’Donnell simply using conservatism to attempt to win a windfall sexual discrimination lawsuit? And if she was willing to do so then, is she also now simply using conservatism – by latching onto the TEA party movement – to get elected?

            For all of the denigrating that O’Donnell supporters have done regarding Mike Castle by insinuating that he is a potential Arlen Specter, perhaps the real potential Arlen Specter in this race is O’Donnell herself.

          • aesthete

            That such a corporate policy on the part of ISI would be immediately apparent, if it were present. If that was the case, methinks that it is unfair to pin the blame on ISI for a longstanding, probably very clear policy that it had before O’Donnell joined, in the same way that it would be difficult to blame the Klan for discriminating against a black employee who joined of his own volition knowing what the Klan stood for, even if said treatment is unjust and foolish in and of itself.

          • chipbennett

            Thanks… I’ve only gotten through page 24.

        • JSobieski

          When an article removes the paragraph numbers so that its harder to confirm the accuracy of the quote, I do get suspicious.

          Please note that I did say “may” be a smear. I read through the complaint last night and missed the specific reference.

          Thanks for providing the specific paragraphs.

          • chipbennett

            I do the same thing. That’s why I downloaded and read the PDF before commenting. Very easy to overlook when skimming, though.

          • JSobieski

            are so ideologically distinct, that the primary has focused on issues of record and personality. In a weird way, this mirrored CO, although there the race focused on record and personality because the candidates were ideologically similar.

            If you graph out some of these primary races onto a matrix of ideological/policy vs. record/personality you get some interesting results.

  • jeffersonjohn

    This is exactly the attitude that has left the Republican party in such low regard. If you don’t really believe in anything, just don’t paint yourself as a constitutional conservative. Why not join the Democrap party and argue that maybe they should elect moderates like Bart Stupid.

    • JSobieski

      Barak Obama.

      People had every right to punt on McCain—-but the end result of that understandable reaction was the worst of the worst.

      Remember people saying that if McCain was the nominee we might as well elect Obama? Well, thats exactly what happened.

      Stimulus. Obamacare. Financial Regulation.

      Not being enthusiastic about O’Donnell doesn’t mean you don’t believe in anything.

      Ask yourself why so many people who supported the other upstart candidates (Rubio, Miller, Angle, Buck, Paul) aren’t also supporting O’Donnell.

      Its not about an absence of conservative values.

      • deano64

        who DID support the other upstart candidates like Rubio, Angle, Buck, Miller and Paul ARE supporting O?Donnell. See Palin and Demint etc.

        • smagar

          Delaware is not that kind of place…at least not in between now and November 2nd.

          If you want to build for the future, fine. Start grooming an appealing conservative to run in 2014—when this seat comes open again. (Reminder—the winner of this seat only holds it for 4 years).

  • lovethetruth

    Women have had to contend with discrimination in the church for centuries. Unfortunately, whether she is content or contends depends not just on her own bents, but also on how lovingly she has been covered by those men who have been responsible for covering her. It is much easier for a loved woman to be content than it is for an unloved woman to be content.

    A woman will either be content being covered by a man who is loving her as Christ loved the church (whether by a father, a pastor, an employer or a husband) or she will contend for what God has ordained for her and sin has denied to her. I think it is interesting that the bible describes a contentious woman as a steady drip, drip, drip.

    The women’s lib movement was born out of women refusing to pretend that it was okay for them to be mistreated in the name of God. I wonder how society would change if we would all just love one another as Christ loved the church. God calls us to peace. The constitution provides freedom for men and women alike. God calls us to contend for the faith.

    We are a nation of people born out of rebellion against an unjust ruler. We have a heritage of rebellion against unjust rulers. It is humanly impossible to bring a nation to repentance. Rebellion is ultimately rebellion against the God who allows the unjust to rule. It makes me want to fall on my knees and pray, come quickly Lord Jesus. Let there be peace in Jerusalem. In Jesus Name. Amen

    • smagar
      • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
  • traversecityconservative

    1. Closed primary

    2. There are more “tea party” people out in the real world than Rino supporters. And we’re boots on the ground now – taking over our local GOP, becoming precinct delegates, going to state conventions, supporting national elections…You have no idea what’s going on out here and how involved we are in taking over the GOP – which is fine because it makes our job that much easier. Rino and Rino supporters have become as much of an enemy as the Democrat party. We will no longer put up with it.

    • deano64

      in Deleware and all our heated post on the topic won’t matter much any more will they?

    • smagar

      You seem to be forgetting—the key is to win the Senate seat in November.

      Show us something convincing that helps us believe that O’Donnell can beat Coons. Otherwise, you’re just marching off a cliff. With banners flying and trumpets blaring, to be sure….

      • traversecityconservative

        Show me something convincing that either one of them can’t beat Coons.

        • smagar

          Are you in denial?

  • cbc80

    ….the lefty purge continues

    • futurerep

      A vote for Christine O’Donnell is a vote for Chris Coons in November, as she would get crushed in the general election. Way to want another Democrat in the Senate.

      • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

        There are good faith O’Donnell supporters. Argue with them in good faith.

        • futurerep

          How could O’Donnell possibly win? If she is the nominee, you may as well just put Delaware in the Safe D column. Look at the poll numbers; look at their favorability ratings. You can’t go RINO hunting in a state like Delaware.

          • smagar

            How could O?Donnell possibly win? If she is the nominee, you may as well just put Delaware in the Safe D column.

            You’re right. The Dems will cut O’Donnell to pieces.

            So far, I have yet to see anything convincing that leads us to believe that O’Donnell can overcome all her negatives—some of them her own making, some of them thrust upon any R who has to run statewide in Delaware—and win the general election.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            Get all of that out of your system now, because if she wins tomorrow we’re not going to let people come in threads and spread doom and gloom.

          • Doc Holliday
          • futurerep

            “Get all of that out of your system now, because if she wins tomorrow we?re not going to let people come in threads and spread doom and gloom.” The last time I checked, RedState was for free speech. I am a true conservative, but I support Mike Castle due to electability, and I have the right to express my opinions. I like the 58 seat pickup prediction, by the way.

          • JSobieski

            Its not censorship for someone to say, off my property, I don’t want to here it.

          • Doc Holliday

            this is a closely monitored site and we are here at the director’s discretion. There was a time when they didn’t even want my pearl’s of wisdom, can you believe that? If you want to be a martyr keep it up.

            btw, what it is about Castle you love so much? Was it his vote to allow transporting minors across state lines for abortions? Or could it be his votes against the Second Amendment? Or maybe the votes for the stimulus. And yes, the vote supporting the Kucinich bill that was an attempt to impeach President Bush?

            From those votes and see anti fiscal conservative, anti-social conservative, and anti-libertarian conservative. Maybe we need a new faction, we can call it “Castle for Delaware”.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            If O’Donnell wins and I catch you talking her down at RS, I won’t hesitate to disable your account.

            You are warned.

          • futurerep

            I was not planning to and am not planning on bashing O’Donnell if she somehow wins. I am just stating my opinion before the primary.

          • smagar

            You can visit, but you don’t do what the owners tell you not to do.

            In this case, substitute “Redstate” for “house”, and “Contributors” for “owner,” and you’ll get the idea.

            Methinks that Neil is trying to lessen the possibility of future blogfights on this topic.

          • Bill S

            And he’s not the only one on the lookout.

    • smagar

      There?s nothinghere that you haven?t heard before, but since ?true conservatives? are in RINO-stomp mode towards Paul Mirengoff and John McCormack and Jim Geraghty and a bunch of other people who were conservatives in good standing as of, say, four days ago, let?s make sure the stealth liberal known as Charles Krauthammer takes his licks too.

  • cbc80

    …of the unwavering convictions of this conservative “Tea Party” movement!

    The most inspiring thing i’ve seen in politics in my lifetime.

    • smagar

      Brave cavalry, with banners flying…riding straight into the Russian guns…

      • cbc80

        …are you?

      • Achance

        “Not tho’ the soldier knew
        Someone had blunder’d:”

  • Doc Holliday

    too many people checking their beliefs at the door. If Castle is a sure win in the general, and O’donnell is not, fine, I would not be upset to much by a Castle win. On the other hand, O’donnell has been trashed by her own side so much, we may never know how well she would have done if conservatives were not playing “not to lose”.

    Castle has an NRA rating of F, that tells me all I need to know about the man. Hell, don’t give me the blue state bs, DE is actually pretty good on 2A rights, so Castle is left of his state on that paramount issue.

    If Castle is our only chance to stop the lame duck session damage then fine. But I would have to put a lot of things aside to believe that. I would have to believe you that O’donnell could not possibly win, and I would have to believe that Castle would stand up to the Dems. Hmm, still not convinced.

  • Mary Beth

    Is that a person you really are going all in on? That you trust will vote your way even 50% of the time? A Kucinich wannabe?

    Look. Both candidates are flawed. But as eccentric and amateurish as O’Donnell can come off with the mistakes she’s made, none of her mistakes or eccentricities are of the liberty-killing, leftist-appeasing variety.

    110th Congress / Bills / H RES 1258
    Title: Impeaching George W. Bush, President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors.

    http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/bills/h_res_1258/
    http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/house/2/votes/401/

    • Bill S

      There were specific circumstances behind that vote. It was NOT a vote to impeach. It was a vote to refer to the Judiciary committee. Several conservative Republicans voted for it. The intent on their part was to make the Democrats look bad.

      Note the text in your link: On Motion to Refer The Kucinich Privilege Resolution.

      http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2008/06/12/democrats_scuttle_proposal_to_impeach_bush/

      If people are gonna beat on the guy, it ought to at least be accurate. This isn’t.

      • JSobieski

        and that we all just happened to miss it somehow, then who are we to argue?

        I mean, the idea that Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and Red State would never even mention the fact that Bush was impeached would be a conspiracy of eath shattering proportions. Not to mention, the obvious questions about what the Senate did with the Aricles of Impeachment.

        Clearly yet another sign that we need DE to be over. Its breaking basic social cohesion here at RS and in conservative circules generally.

        • smagar

          (What a great line from St. Elmo’s Fire.)

          I’m confident we’ll get over this.

          • Doc Holliday

            never explain your joke. Then again, I have so many that get the cricket sound lol.

      • Mary Beth

        Doesn’t change my opinion over the rest of his voting record though.

    • smagar

      The madness continues, as activists who support Christine O’Donnell in the Delaware Senate primary have stepped up their attacks on Mike Castle by alleging that he voted to impeach President Bush. That will come as a surprise to those who wonder how they missed such a vote,

      Mike Castle never voted to impeach President Bush; no such vote ever occurred on the floor of the House. He did vote to commit goofball Congressman Dennis Kucinich’s impeachment resolution to the Judiciary Committee, where it died, as intended, a slow death. And Castle’s office said that it opposed impeachment because “they believed there weren’t any crimes committed by the Bush administration.”

      Is Mike Castle as conservative as I am? No, I am sure he is not. On the other hand, he, like me, is a Republican, and he, unlike me, has an excellent chance to be elected to the Senate from Delaware. If some conservatives, like Mark Levin, prefer a different candidate, fine. There is a case to be made on both sides. But attacking the motivations of their fellow Republicans and fellow conservatives is stupid; and it is worse than stupid to misrepresent positions that have been taken by Mike Castle, or any other candidate. Such falsehoods are typical of the Left. We conservatives are better than that; or should be, anyway.

      Link to Powerline article from today

      • JSobieski

        Seriously, how could anyone believe that they missed the impeachment of a President. There is some kind of mass insanity going on out there.

        • Doc Holliday

          issue. But I have to say, who cares about Powerline? They mattered in 2004, but they are not a go to site anymore. I may go there once a month, and I don’t think I am alone.

        • http://www.libertytreehugger.com reverelth

          Every Democrat voted to commit. Only 24 Republicans, including Castle, did so. The other 166 Republicans voted “no.”

          A “no” vote would set the stage for a vote on impeachment, which would have failed, but also would have required members go on the record. 166 Republicans were prepared to go on the record as opposing impeachment. Not Castle.

          So which way did those vote who wanted to kill the impeachment?

      • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

        link to a left wing site called WarIsACrime.org where impeachment was being discussed and promoted. A Commenter (#6), from Delaware called all the DE reps…

        Last week I spoke to Senator Biden’s office and asked if he would support impeachment. He said he is willing to support it if it can make it to the Senate. He said that the recent testimony by Scott McClellan and Bush beating the drums to war for Iran should be enough for any Congressman and Senator to get behind it. He also suggested that I call Senator Carper and Congressman Castle because he didn’t believe they would support it. First I called Senator Carper and was told that they would not support Impeachment at this time. I also called Congressman Castle’s office and was completely shocked. I was told that the Congressman would not support Impeachment because they believed there weren’t any crimes committed by the Bush administration.

        Any more questions?

        • JSobieski

          /sarcasm off.

          Is there a medicine available to cure mass insanity?

          • Mary Beth
          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            You’ve been forgotten about because of some really stupid posts by a – now – former poster. Leave it at that.

          • Mary Beth
          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            people will remember your “old names”.

          • Mary Beth

            I was corrected and I’ve already said I was wrong. Would you like me to throw myself on my sword?

            I started off here with a different username…Power_Pro (which is associated with my business) and decided to change it to my first name. That was like a year ago and there’s still no nefarious reason behind it. I just preferred seeing my first name. Why are you mentioning that now?

            What’s the deal with you anyway? You’re bringing up ancient history from a time when I was a little too overzealous in my posting methods to…what exactly? I felt bad about it then and I still do.

            I don’t need you to insert yourself into a conversation for the sole purpose of insulting me.

          • JSobieski

            you are probably misinterpretting something.

            We all do it, but in the case of an impeachment, there should be something in your head that says “I don’t remember that ever happening” and it says here in the link that the measure passed.

            The DE primary debate has resulted in lots of misleading/inaccurate statements by folks who never had that voice go off in their head.

          • Mary Beth

            I had remembered there was a political move by the left to impeach that didn’t go anywhere and some lib R’s voted for but I suffered from a temporary brain cloud of sorts and got my facts wrong. Brain clouds are cruel like that. :D

            But to clarify, I didn’t at any time think there vote was even remotely successful. I’m pretty sure even with a brain cloud that I would have remembered that one. ;)

          • JSobieski

            that Castle voted in favor of impeach clearly stated that the vote passed.

            Are you saying you didn’t even reading the link that you yourself posted here? Did you just find the assertion “Castle voted to impeach Bush” and just repost the link here without reading it?

            I’m betting that is exactly what happened.

            What I don’t understand is how anything an O’Donnell supporter does is an accident, but if someone is a Castle supporter, its clearly a RINO-motivated smear.

          • Mary Beth

            I saw that it passed just that it wasn’t what I thought it was. I wasn’t thinking clearly and didn’t process what I was reading as well as I should have and for that, I again apologize.

            And I can’t speak to the second part of your post. I’ve seen folks from both groups behaving badly and others with strong, legitimate and honorable reasons for why they support their guy or gal.

            To be clear, I’m not a rabid O’Donnell supporter. Fact is…she would not be my first choice given the baggage she has. They’re both seriously flawed IMHO and I think anyone going too far in their support for either are probably headed for a big disappointment.

            So I can see why people of good character can support either of them and why group A isn’t a bunch of losers for supporting their candidate and group B isn’t a bunch of sellouts for supporting their candidate.

            My big interest today will be in seeing what kind of voter intensity their is. I’m curious to see how various groups may or may not have influenced the turnout and if there will be anything we can gauge if even blue Delaware is forecasting a red wave in November.

  • cactusjack

    1. Doesn’t she get any points in DE for guts for keeping fighting and making it this close an election, knowing full well all the dirty laundry going to be thrown at her by…everybody?
    2. Sometimes lighting strikes twice – the Joseph Cau effect – and when the smoke clears after all is said and done, plus a few unexpected twists, there will be Senator O’Donnell, swearing in. Will the national and DE Repub party support her or will they, in their best country club manner, back away from her and look down at her as some kind of freak(?).
    3. Not a registered DE voter, but the sympathy factor is starting to go up for her and some mighty big media artillery is registering in for her now – Hannity, and Rush as of today.
    This is Delaware’s choice: Godspeed Delaware.

    • Doc Holliday

      not more than a handful of people from Delaware. Castle is a gun grabber, I would never vote for him if I lived there full stop.

    • http://www.libertytreehugger.com reverelth

      and they lurve Mike Castle, so don’t be so hard on yourself.

  • cbc80

    And this symantic crock of spin is different than actually voting to impeach him???

    This is the first i’ve heard of this. But if true… it’s obvious the lefties in our party (or maybe not) will accept anything to impede the conservative movement that’s taking our Party and country back…

    • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

      at Powerline.

      And before you start on the Powerline guys check the upthread links. Levin is making a complete, lying ass of himself over this.

      • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

        But to try to bury Pete King in the process?

        • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

          …that Mark Levin would be trying to do that.

          • JSobieski

            Castle did it because he hates Bush.

          • http://www.libertytreehugger.com reverelth

            he asked listeners to read the link and make up their minds. Period

            His distaste for Castle is on the table, for all the world to see.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            Levin flat out lied about the Powerline guys. Not once but twice.

            I don’t care what his opinion of Castle is, but he doesn’t have to resort to lying about folks who are his betters. And the Powerline guys are way better than Levin, he’s just got a bigger stage to show off how to be totally stupid on a non-issue.

          • Doc Holliday

            you obviously have a connection to these guys, so I will leave it alone, it is personal with you I see. But Powerline is not even a top conservative site anymore. We plebeians may not know better, but we have voted with our feet (clicks).

          • JSobieski

            Levin totally made up stuff about the Powerline guys. I must admit that this entire matter has changed my opinon of Levin.

            Conseratives are supposed to care about the facts. Levin has been acting the MSM—purposely not caring enough to accurately convey what people are saying.

            Some of the conservatives in our movement are becoming increasingly intellectually lazy.

          • Doc Holliday

            how many times have I wanted to explain something to Rush and Hannity that they did not get just right. I did not hear Levin on this. I will bow out of this part of the argument for now and let you guys figure it out.

            I like Levin, but I follow no one blindly.

          • JSobieski

            Blindly following anyone is a recipe for disaster–even if that person is your spouse.

            People who are willing to say, Mark says X so I agree are delegating their free will and judgement to someone else.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            facts. And an aversion to lies about people who are very careful with their writing. I certainly don’t agree with everything the PL guys write, but when they write their pieces are well documented, facts are labeled as such and opinion is labeled as such.

            Levin has simply gone off the deep end on Castle and flat out lied about the PL columns. Twice. I’m not defending them, they certainly don’t need the likes of me to carry their water. And somehow I doubt you can quibble with the bonafides of Jim Geraghty or Patterico both of whom have called Levin out on this one.

          • Doc Holliday

            I don’t like calling out bro’s, I am just free wheeling tonight. I too care about the facts, not celebrity. I read some of the PL rebuttal but I will have to delve into it more. I will do so out of fairness to your argument.

            having said that, I have said a lot about why I would NEVER vote for Castle tonight, I stand by all of that. I have worked on the Hill before and I know about political calculations. I want a majority as much as anyone, but this Castle guy has nothing to recommend him, I mean NOTHING. And I am sickened by the defeatist attitude, the idea that we should give up everything for someone with an R behind is name.

            Some of the people who trashed McCain are supporting this guy. If you look at the record, this guy is not even a RINO, he loathes Republicans. I don’t want Tea Party types to ruin it for Republicans either, I get that big time. But this guy deserves to go down, I hope he does.

          • JSobieski

            without mischaracterizing what other people say.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            in the scholarly accuracy on the issues they address on a day to day basis, most of which is probably due to the fact that PL has a team that collaborates on the blog and the fact that they don’t have a daily 3-hr radio show dynamic, but with respect to legal acumen, Levin is at least their equal on all aspects of the law and certainly their superior in terms of actual litigation experience and success on the major issues of the day. Moreover, his Men in Black and other books are impressive scholarly works.

          • JSobieski

            impugn his credibility with me on future matters.

            Mark Levin says X will no longer be enough for me, at least on intramural issues.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            But it doesn’t change the fact that Levin is flat out lying about the PL position. Twice.

      • Doc Holliday

        Levin is a movement conservative. Look at the vote on the Kucinich bill, few Republicans voted yay, Castle was on of them. I still can’t for the life of me understand why ANY proud conservative would vote for a viper like Castle. He has sawed off all three planks of our so called stool. The guy is not worthy, he is a leftist statist, I will be damned if I ever vote for the likes of him.

        btw, I have NEVER voted for a Dem (other than a town Sheriff who was pro-2a against a RINO. I would compare my conservative bonafides against ANYONE here. I have voted in every primary and general since I was of age and ALWAYS for the Republican.

        I am saying Castle is not worthy of all this support. We are playing scared, it is that simple. I will let this go, but I won’t forget who played scared.

        • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

          …they’re right and Mark Levin is rather drastically wrong.

          Doc. Seriously. You had an account here back then.

          • Doc Holliday

            but I know there is a vote that has been recorded. Castle voted yes on the Kucinich bill, when 90 percent of Republicans voted no. It would be nice if anyone has primary resources showing Castle’s view on the vote.

            I admit ignorance on a lot of the Castle v O’donnell and Powerline v Levin infighting, but my views of Castle stand.

            I am just amazed, I mean truly amazed by how many are out here supporting Castle like he is a rock star. I am amazed by how many movement conservatives are acting from weakness, like we have never overcome a poll deficit.

            Castle voted to allow transportation of minors across state lines for the purpose of abortions. He votes ALWAYS against gun owners and manufacturers. He voted for the stimulus, he voted to bail out GM, he voted to weaken bankruptcy laws, he voted to support affirmative action biases. He voted against American energy and voted for pie in the sky tree hugging laws. He even voted to support a federal national service I guess like the CCC and TVA.

            Levin might be overstating one specific vote, though no one has explained the vote yet. But Castle seems to me to be everything we are against. I just don’t see how people can be so into someone who cares nothing about them.

        • JSobieski

          “All 166 votes in favor of opening up a House impeachment debate came from Republicans, apparently eager to bring up the vote immediately and paint Democrats as political creatures in a time of serious issues.”

          http://articles.cnn.com/2008-06-11/politics/kucinich.impeach.vote_1_impeach-kucinich-resolution?_s=PM:POLITICS

          The votes in question were PROCEDURAL. Castle and King voted with the D’s to sweap the bill away (Pelosi wanted nothing to do with it). The other R’s were trying to force some political embarassment.

          I know people don’t like lawyers, but come on, at least read more critically.

          • donnylatenight

            There is an entire wing of the Democrat Party that believes Bush lied to go to war with Iraq so his friends could make money from Iraqi oil.

            They’re called moderate Democrats.

            The rest of the Democrats believe Bush caused 9/11.

            This vote was a joke when it happened…. We know that.. Levin knows that..

            But the fact that Castle voted to give the Dems cover during an election year says a lot about him

        • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

          of the past three decades. He and his foundation have won significant constitutional law cases in court and he served Reagan ‘s Justice Dept.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            Levin is a complete ass. And a lying ass at that.

          • JSobieski

            in a manner that was indisguishable from MSNBC.

            Contrast that with Rush, who is very conscientious about building up the players on our side and is very conscientious about facts.

            Rush didn’t get this issue right either, but he never drilled down to a level of detail where he could be wrong. Levin drilled down to the detail and got the details flat wrong, while mischaracterizing what others said.

            Very disappointing.

          • http://www.libertytreehugger.com reverelth

            Rush doesn’t do primaries.

            Mark Levin has always said he’ll take his lumps if he ultimately does not back winners, but will fight on principle.

            Just curious, who is “our side” in your eyes, anyway?

          • JSobieski

            The Powerline v. Levin dispute makes it clear that only side shared an interest in accuracy.

            Castle is easy enough to attack from a conservative position. Levin didn’t need to mischaracterize the opposition to O’Donnell. Levin was playing loose with the facts in the same way that MSNBC does.

            I rarely find myself on the other side of Mark Levin, this is the first time that I am aware of.

            Fighting on principle shouldn’t include lying about what other bloggers are saying.

          • http://www.libertytreehugger.com reverelth

            Did you listen to the show and hear how he presented the material?

            I did.

            Now lay some “accuracy” on me and tell me how he handled it.

            Who is “our side?” The DE GOP?

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            position not once but twice. Learn to read. Learn to use the stuff inside your skull for something other than a doorstop.

            Levin is absolutely wrong. So are you on this point. Get over it. If you can’t process stuff this easy and this clear you’re in for a really hard life. Facts are facts. Levin got basically all of ‘em wrong. Twice. He’s entitled to his opinion and so are you. Neither of you are entitled to your own definition of “fact”.

            Our side is the one that plays with facts and opinion and recognizes what they are and uses them appropriately. There’s plenty of reason not to like Castle, but nothing that Levin – or frankly you in this diary – has said encompasses any of those reasons. You guys are operating on sheer hatred of Castle without bothering to deal with facts and realty. You are simply shameful on this stuff and totally irrational.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            a) being overworked, and
            b) his justified disdain with the ruling class repewbicans, as he calls them

            btw, what exactly is the controversy over with PL. I found nothing in the diary proper and this thread is so long…

            Levin has been one the premier conservative legal minds and activists of the past 20+ years and so instrumental and instructive to my conversion, and given that I have read most all his columns and books and listened to him so often that I forgave him this transgression before knowing what it is!

            smile

          • JSobieski

            in the way that libs work off their own “template” and that if you get in the way of that template (i.e. anything you say that is not in favor of the most conservative candidate makes you a useless RINO who wants to suck up to the ruling calss), you will be steamrolled.

            If he is overworked, he should back off. He is hurting his own side. The Powerline guys were smeared in a variety of different ways on this.

            Shame on Mark Levin.

            But one example http://www.powerlineblog.com/

          • http://www.libertytreehugger.com reverelth

            Why can’t you process that?

            He rightly believes moderate Republicans have spelled disaster for the very party for whom you allegiance is unwavering. He ditched the Specter campaign as a young man, before everyone else thought ditching Specter was cool. He worked for Ed Meese in the Reagan administration after campaigning for Reagan and enduring the same crap from establishment Republicans as we’re seeing now.

            Who is “his own side?” Is that like the Democratic meme of “voting against your own interests?”

          • JSobieski

            I have a different definition than you do. If you think its ok to lie so long as you lie in favor of the right, we have little to say to each other.

            I have several of his books, and enjoy his radio show—but no, lying/smearing is not something I find to be acceptable.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            There’s plenty to criticize Castle for that doesn’t require lying.

            I don’t care about Castle one way or the other. I care when a high profile guy like Levin tells outright lies, gets caught and restates the same lies. Everything he’s said about this is easily provible with just a little help from Mr. Google.

          • captkirc

            I’ve agreed with the Gamecock 100 percent of the time, but alas 2 outta 3 ain’t bad.

            I’ve found Levin’s comments to be irresponsible and destructive to most Republican’s goals throughout this campaign season.

            1. Levin has openly called for the defeat of the Republican Senate nominee from the state of Illinois, Mark Kirk. Link:

            http://delawarerepublican.wordpress.com/2010/07/22/mark-levin-mike-castle-part-of-liberal-plot/

            2. Levin has played fast and loose with the truth in his criticism of both Mike Castle and fellows conservatives who happen to disagree with his zealous support of Christine O’Donnell. Links:

            http://powerlineblog.com/archives/2010/09/027212.php
            http://powerlineblog.com/archives/2010/09/027216.php

            The two articles convincingly show quite a few examples of Levin making false claims about the writers conservative credentials and Mike Castle’s actual record.

          • JSobieski

            Are you unaware that Levin is an unapologetic conservative? Why are so many RINOs coming out of the woodwork?

            /sarcasm off

          • http://www.libertytreehugger.com reverelth

            The ones who want to shove the Tea Party out of the way, or the ones who see the Tea Party as being the only thing standing between the Republican party and oblivion?

          • captkirc

            The only way for the Tea Party and the Republican Party to achieve their shared goal of stopping the Obama administration’s unprecedented expansion of government is find some common ground and work together.

            Levin’s impugning of fellow conservative’s character plays right into the hands of the very people who are cheering on said expansion of government.

            I’ll add that I find Levin’s false characterization of Mike Castle’s procedural vote on the eve of the Primary to be particularly nefarious since there are few people on the planet who know more about the ins and out of actual Presidential Impeachment than him.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            Could someone reply to this comment and provide links showing what PL said vs what Levin claimed? The info is not in the diary and the threads are so long and cryptic with so many links that aren’t well labeled, that I still don’t know what the supposed lies are.

            I need the facts to make a judgment, but yes, Levin’s great work of the past and present can’t be erased by a single zealous transgression anymore than would those named becker, ‘ski et al!

          • minncon

            I’ve been listening for many, many years now, and most of what he says you can take to the bank. He’s no showman… just is a brilliant legal mind and a great communicator (whose sense of humor is the same as mine).

            As a salute, I’ve made up some Levin shirts, etc for my own amusement and plan to send him one. I’ve sent such things before and they’ve been warmly received. Here’s an example:

            Marksist

            P.S. In case you should want to purchase any “American Marksist” shirts or goodies, please know that they’re priced at my cost for Redstate members. I’ve not market them up a dime – just having fun!

            P.P.S. I know where “the bunker” is, but they’ll never get it out of me!!!

        • furious

          …for court PREPARED. Levin can’t pound the facts, there’s no law to speak of, so now he’s just pounding the table. Those chattering lawyers nobody reads are making the “Movement Conservative” look foolish.

          House Republicans voted likewise to refer an earlier Kookinich impeachment resolution against VP Cheney to Judiciary where it, too, withered.

          • Doc Holliday

            but before I joined this site I was a lurker. At the time of the elections I spent more time at Powerline than hear. I left Powerline because it was losing its relevancy to me. I have a decent feel for this stuff, I don’t think I was alone.

            again, if they are right about a particular argument, that is fine, the truth will prevail. But this seems like a straw man to me, almost a Castle plan. He would be lucky if people forgot his multitude of statist votes and focused on this tempest in a teapot.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
    • JSobieski

      Second, think, how come I didn’t hear about Bush being impeached
      Third, ask, when did the Senate have a trial
      Fourth, think, how come I didn’t hear about any of this.

      Fifth, realize that you have been played.

  • cbc80

    …and then claims plausable deniability for having not voted for impeachment…simply because it didn’t make it to a vote?

    This is simply outrageous!!

    • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

      Do a little research and use just a teeny bit of logic before you sit down and ram both feet in your mouth like you’re doing right now.

      There’s plenty of stuff to criticize Mike Castle about. You don’t have to make stuff up – and this made up.

      • JSobieski

        This is not the proudest moment for the right.

        I have to say, that for all the talk of a “liberal template” it would appear that there is also a “conservative template”.

        The irony is that Castle was one of the few Republicans not trying to bring the impeachment vote to the floor of the House.

        • chipbennett

          I enjoy my lunch break, primarily because I get to spend a brief bit of my day listening to Rush.

          I turned him off after 10 minutes today, after I heard him pick up the meme, right where Levin left off.

          First, he was called out on the true nature of a Motion to Recommit (actually, to Refer). Then, he tried to claim that while the pure-as-the-wind-driven-snow conservative Rs who also voted for the motion had benevolent intent in doing so, Mike Castle clearly had malevolent intent in doing so, because he had previously “threatened” Bush regarding the Iraq War.

          Nevermind that Mike Castle, in his own words, said that he didn’t support impeachment because he believed no crime had been committed.

          I don’t like yelling at my radio, unless football is on. So, I just turned it off.

  • cbc80

    …voted to do this? The repubs owned Congress at the time. If no repubs vote for it…t dies a slow death even if there was no vote to go to the judiciary.

    This is an utter crock! Hard to believe so called republicans accept such a lame explanation.

    • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

      You’re an idiot.

    • http://www.libertytreehugger.com reverelth

      and those who want to do right by this country and oppose Mike Castle.

    • JSobieski

      If thinking isn’t an option, try Google.

      If Google isn’t an option, stop writing.

      • http://www.libertytreehugger.com reverelth

        And you can’t Google the answer.

        “I’ll take Republican Party Unity for 100, Alex.”

        How do the Bennetts and the Murkowskis and the Castles (assuming he loses) walk back every despicable thing they have said about their Tea Party opponents? They can’t, can they?

        Unity seems like a one way street for establishment untouchables, no?

        • JSobieski

          You think bitter fights are something new? How old are you?

          People can walk back quite a bit. Happens all the time on both sides of the political spectrum.

          For example, Sunbeam and Clinton just re-opened a nasty 20 year scab and put a bandaid back on it within 48 hours.

          Intra-party sabotage is very rare.

          • http://www.libertytreehugger.com reverelth

            Which is what the DE GOP is throwing Christine O’Donnell’s opponent, if she wins.

            How does Tom Ross go from filing FEC complaints against a primary candidate from his own party, or calling her “reckless,” “hypocritical,” and “dishonest,” to “party unity?”

            Don’t you see how voters reject this kind of dirty, corrupt system?

      • cbc80

        …is that you’re having a tremendously bad couple of weeks.

        First Murkowski… and now Castle.

        LOL!!!!

        • JSobieski

          I supported Miller by the way. I also supported Rubio, Paul, Angle, Buck, and others. I even nominally and tepidly support O’Donnell (I won’t donate money, I kind of hope she doesn’t win, but I could never pull the lever for Castle)

          LOL Bush impeached, oh my gosh—I must I slept through it somehow.

          But what the heck, I know more than everyone else here anyway..

          LOL

          LOL

          LOL

          (thats sarcasm by the way)

    • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

      We abruptly *stopped* owning Congress in 2007. I distinctly remember that happening. For that matter, mockery of Kuchinich and his endless impeachment proceedings were a feature of the site back then.

      Moe Lane

      PS: Reply to This is your friend. Master it.

      • cbc80

        And the Dems controlled Congress. And because the left was afraid

        “But there is a danger. If we cannot convince John Conyers to schedule time for HRes 1258 then it could die.”

        that it’s now somehow OK that Castle voted for this?? Conyers is the biggest incompitent in Congress. I doubt he even knows how to read. He as much as told his constituents that.

        So Castle had what? A premonition? That somehow Conyers wouldn’t get to it? Right. And what if he does?

        • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

          Blam.

          Sorry, but I got tired of this guy valuing his narrative over objective reality.

        • JSobieski

          The Republicans voting N wanted to actually bring the issue to the floor of the House.

          Republicans voting Y didn’t want to bring the issue to the floor of the House.

          • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

            In 2008, when this thing came up, we were not in a situation where the Democrats wanted impeachment and the Republicans did not. *Neither* side wanted impeachment, albeit for completely different reasons: the Republicans because there was nothing impeachable in the first place, and the Democrats because impeachment would have been electoral suicide. By June of 2008 the surge had been widely admitted to have worked, thus making Kuchinich’s impeachment proceedings a potential embarrassment for the Democrats.

            So the Democrats voted to send the bill to Judiciary, where it would die; and the Republicans tried to force it onto the floor, where it would have to be addressed. A bunch of Republicans disagreed with that strategy, so the bill passed, went to Judiciary, and died. Which set of Republicans was tactically correct is up to the observer, but nobody except Kuchinich and a few of his fellow-lunatics were actually pushing a legitimate impeachment agenda.

            And that is the story of the Great Non-Existent Impeachment of 2008.

            http://articles.cnn.com/2008-06-11/politics/kucinich.impeach.vote_1_impeach-kucinich-resolution?_s=PM:POLITICS

          • Doc Holliday

            I never said I thought Castle wanted Bush impeached, in fact I never thought he did, that would have been way too much.

          • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

            …were the New Media people who pushed it in the first place. Particularly since they passed up a legitimate criticism – that Castle may not have the killer instinct to go hardball in the next Congress* – for an easily-debunked attack that just makes their cause look ever-so-slightly worse.

            Moe Lane

            *I respond strongly to the attitude that you have to make the Democrats own their crazy. They campaigned on impeachment; make ‘em face that.

  • furious

    ..heretics while it was Republicans who welcomed, or at least sought, converts.

    All this “He’s a RINO!! BURN’im!!” pitchforks-and-torches reeks of Permanent Minority loser-dom score-settling. As Achance said upthread, the plan was supposed to be weed out *Democrats*.

    • http://www.libertytreehugger.com reverelth

      Repubilcans had the numbers, but not the principles, how did that work out?

      The “permanent minority loserdom” mindset presupposes Republicans can’t have both.

      • JSobieski

        Obamacare
        Stimulus
        Financial Reform
        GM and Chrysler Bailouts

        You want more of this?

        • http://www.libertytreehugger.com reverelth

          The feckless Republican leadership in Congress from leading up to 2006 certainly set the table for the Democrat majorities who were thus able to ram those through.

          Not to mention the testicular shrinkage among the vestiges of the same leadership when talk of repealing any or all of it came to be.

          You left out cap and trade. That DID pass the House, with Mike Castle’s vote. You want to suspend disbelief that he would not vote on it, or a less-of-the-same version that could be rammed through reconciliation, in a lame duck session December?

          I want to rip the head of this thing off and start taking it apart. 2012 or 2014 is too late. If Mike Castle is not down for the struggle, he should get out of the way.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            you should check out cbc80′s account. Yours will look just like it.

          • http://www.libertytreehugger.com reverelth

            but I can tell you walking back my opposition to Castle will give Democrats far less rope to hang him with than the DE GOP trying to do the same for O’Donnell.

          • JSobieski

            You don’t think the Dems will conduct opposition research?

            The opposition to Castle is that he is to much like a democrat, so that is of course easier to walk back than the stuff on O’Donnell which isn’t ideological so much as her record.

            P.S. The record thing is a reminder that this is a Republican site, and that if you don’t support the winner, you will be booted.

          • http://www.libertytreehugger.com reverelth

            Since the DE GOP helped them to it.

            And since the DE GOP can’t possibly support O’Donnell, if she wins, they deserve to be booted.

          • Doc Holliday

            the establishment, the same establishment excoriated by this site so many times has poked as many holes in her as the lefties. We will never know how well she might have done with better friends.

          • http://www.libertytreehugger.com reverelth

            before or after the primary.

            “There, I said it.”

            If that means I have to speak no evil on that race, so as to be technically in compliance with this site, so be it. I’m a registered Republican in a state that could not be more blue. My “choices” for Republicans are as bad as Castle. But at least my state party did not stab their own candidates in the back in the priimaries. I have nothing to prove to anyone. If demanding more of GOP is wrong, I don’t want to be right.

          • JSobieski

            How naive are you? You don’t think campaigns will search the public records?

            You don’t think anyone in the democratic party will know about the FEC charges?

            You don’t think anyone in the democratic party will know how to search for lawsuits, which are public records?

            You don’t think anyone will look for liens?

            You are a total fool. What do you think democrats do? Are you unfamiliar with the term opposition reasearch?

            This is a Senate race for gosh sakes. Both parties will spend millions of dollars on computer programs designed to identify where their local voters are and what issues matter to them, and YOU DON”T KNOW WHETHER SOMEONE WILL GO TO A LOCAL COURT HOUSE AND LOOK UP SOME RECORDS.

            You don’t know much, do you?

          • http://www.libertytreehugger.com reverelth

            I need a ruling as to whether this poster’s replies cross the line of being “respectful.”

            The questions about how old I am or how much I don’t know are creepy, if not downright against the TOS here.

            Second, it’s not the place of one’s own party to serve up dirt on its own candidates, whether the same stuff is in the local phone book or not.

          • JSobieski

            so it must be ok.

          • Doc Holliday

            Jsob is a respected RS’er. Even when we disagree we treat each other with respect, those who have earned it.

          • http://www.libertytreehugger.com reverelth

            and needs to be constantly earned. Asking me “How old are you,” and “You don’t know much, do you?” don’t earn respect from me.

          • JSobieski

            Good night.

          • JSobieski

            If you need me to explain it further, what I was suggesting is that you must be young because your comment was quite naive. Opposition research is performed on candidates running for state house seats. In federal Senate seat, yes Virginia, there will be opposition research.

            In terms of being respectful i confess to being guilty of sarcasm.

            There is a difference between message and messenger. I admit to being frustrated by people delegating to their minds to others and are so willing to say well if X is for it, it must be right.

            I regret losing my patience, because it serves no useful end to do so.

            However, in terms of banning, I should point out that refusing to endorse the winner of an R primary will get you banned far faster than making a snarky comment.

            To the extent that I actually hurt your feelings, I do sincerely apologize. My goal was not to insult you, but to get you to think. Critical thinking used to be the bastion of the conservative movement. Now, it appears we delegate that task to a few leaders miles away.

            I shall now consume an adult beverage and retire for the night.

          • Doc Holliday

            by support it will mean I might say ” I sure hope he beats the Dem”. I don’t live in Delaware so I can’t vote for him. I will never send him a dime. Ok, I went too far, you will never read me saying “I sure hope he wins”.

            btw, when I read the word Castle. i think of the “Castle Doctrine”. This is a law passed by many states that says people can defend their homes with lethal force is an intruder invades. Castle would never support the castle doctrine. He would rather have you die than defend yourself as a free man.

          • Mary Beth

            There’s a lot of healthy (and not so healthy) discourse with this race for some reason, but at the end of the day, whoever is the R left standing should get our total support.

            I don’t imagine I will be making any great effort personally to help liberal Rs per se, but I won’t talk them down. That debate is for the here and now. For the primaries. Once we have a candidate, talking them down only helps the opposition.

          • JSobieski

            you were fed a bag of goods on the impeachment link. I presume you pulled that off the website of an O’Donnell supporter. Just consider that fact, not for the purpose of determining your vote (I know that won’t change) but in how future intramural disputes are approached.

            Yes, O’Donnell is more conservative but that doesn’t make all of the arguments for O’Donnell factually correct. This impeachment vote is a great example of junk drudged up to mislead people, and it wasn’t the DE GOP or the Castle campaign that did it, now was it?

          • Mary Beth

            Usually I don’t post something until I see it confirmed but in this case I was just completely wrong about what that vote meant. So mea culpa on that one.

            As for the rest… I agree that O’Donnell has issues. I agree that there are people who don’t help that are purportedly on her side. But for me, those negatives do not measure up to the problems I foresee with a Senator Castle.

            But I respect why people think he’s the better choice… I just don’t happen to agree. I think it’s short sighted.

            Nevertheless, we have two very seriously flawed candidates and we’re stuck with one of ‘em tomorrow. Hopefully those supporting each of these folks will be able to come together and proverbially hold hands and sing kumbaya so we can get as many Rs in office in November. :)

          • Doc Holliday

            that is asking a lot of us who are true conservatives, but that is the price of loyalty. You can see clearly who will not let this go. I will say this for the last time, and i mean the last time, I am truly saddened and amazed by the vitriol towards the only conservative in the race on the site of conservatives.

            Castle has NOTHING to recommend him, not one damn thing! I will support the R because we need the Senate. If you Google Mike Castle on the issues, you will be sickened.

          • JSobieski

            Look, Doc, you and Beth are reasonable O’Donnell supporters. I don’t disagree with you–Castle offers little but an R and not being a liberal Democrat.

            However, we can see that many O’Donnell supporters just can’t come to grips with certain facts. Beth sees a link somewhere for how Castle supported impeachment and just concludes it must be right, when in fact it isn’t.

            There are things in the O’Donnell record that are troubling, but the two of you just assume that those on the other side are just making it up. The “template” that O’Donnell voters see everything in is “true conservative” vs. “RINO” so erroneous conclusions like say “Caste supported impeaching Bush” get accepted because it fits the template.

            I would ask you to consider the fact that you are wrong about the impeachment thing, and that in fact, you might be wrong about some other things that you are absolutely sure about. For example, Christine did link in her lawsuit the philosphy of conservatism with sexism. I can look past that in evaluating her candidacy, but you two can’t even admit she wrote it. Because it just doesn’t fit the template.

            I am not saying this to persuade you on tomorrow’s vote—but just for future reference.

            I am no RINO. But I can’t get through to people because they hear that I am only tepidly in favor of O’Donnell, and thus ignore anything I have to say as a smear.

            Well, I wasn’t the person doing the smearing now was I. However, the person saying that Castle voted for impeachment was conducting a smear. A smear that Beth spread to this site.

            Like I said, you are both very nice, so I gave it one last try to make you think about the issue from this perspective.

  • JSobieski

    Moe already posted the links about the Powerline dispute.

    I know its easier not to read and just parrot other people. I get that. But if you are interested in actually reading about what I am talking about, you just need to click on the links.

    If that will give you a headache, then just pass and delegate your brain to someone else—-it is easier after all.

  • izoneguy

    Republicans Are Blowing Their Best Chance to Beat Liberalism

    http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_091310/content/01125107.guest.html

    But I’m just going to tell you a Senate full of Mike Castles is not gonna get us anywhere. It’s gonna get a bunch of Republicans their chairmanships on the committee but it’s not going to do anything to reverse Obamaism. Not one thing. If that’s our majority with a bunch of Mike Castles there, we’re in trouble.” I was the only one at the table who thought this. Yeah. And this was a table of Republican conservatives. I was the only one, at least the only one who was willing to say it. I think some people did chime in later to one degree or another. (interruption) Some were Northeast Republicans, yeah. Some were Northeast Republicans. Don’t misunderstand. I’m not trying to put feathers in my cap. That’s not the point here. It’s just that in a lot of places Republican victory is all that matters, no matter who the Republican is. And now the Republicans and some official Republicans are actually in a panic over the fact that this Christine O’Donnell woman is leading Castle by three points.

    • JSobieski

      Last I checked, Mike Castle MAY be the R candidate running for Senate from DE. As of now, I have not heard than any or Senators/candidate are resigning to also be replaced by Mike Castle.

      For example, is Senator DeMint resigning to make room for a Mike Castle clone? If sitting Republicans Senators are resigning to be replaced by Mike Castle, we should speak with those Senators. Someone quick get to Senator Coburn before he resigns . . .

      NOBODY is in favor of a “Senate full of Mike Castles”. That lobby does not exist.

      Put another way, I agree with you and Rush—don’t vote for a Senate full of Mike Castles.

      This template by which anyone not agreeing that O’Donnell is great candidate someone wants a Senate ful of Mike Castles, is clearly a RINO or a GOP establishment hack is disappointing all around.

      Anyway, I will be glad when it is over one way or another.