« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Don’t Repeat the Mistakes of the Past

By: Ben Domenech (Diary)  |  September 14th, 2010 at 11:13 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

As an observer, primaries like the sort just concluded in Delaware are incredibly amusing. It’s an opportunity to see bloggers, reporters and flacks who’ve never won anything anywhere declare emphatically that someone will definitely or can’t possibly win in a state they’ve never run a campaign in, and in some of the more absurd cases, have never even been to. The best part is, a lot of these folks end up getting on television and talking about it, intoning with certainty like the blind men and the elephant. And they get paid to do it! (I love America.)

Amateurs like to read tea leaves and polling data to devise predictions. In a conventional political year, this might give you some degree of accuracy — but in a year like this, as we’ve seen, it’s about as much of a sure thing as having a grizzly bear pick your fantasy football team. So when Karl Rove said she couldn’t win, even as my politically moderate relatives told me they liked Christine O’Donnell, I put a heavier weight on their opinion. After all, the people saying this — unlike Rove, Kristol, and scads of other observers who’ve blatantly carried water for Castle over the past few weeks — actually live and vote in Delaware. It seemed like a stretch to me, but I trusted the bear, and I got Arian Foster in the 12th round. Shows me what I know.

Some of these consultants and flacks conceded any pretense to ideological conservatism long ago. Yet some political observers who are smart and respectable — RS’s own Dan McLaughlin is one of these — have ended up at the view that a guy like Mike Castle needed to win. Dan’s post is as fine a thing as you can read on the matter. I also think it’s wrong.

Here’s my view: Conservatives should not tolerate the likes of Mike Castle because of the simple fact that a 51 member Senate with Mike Castle is a Senate where Mike Castle is the most important vote in the room. As Specter and others before him, that Senator will set the terms of policy debates, determining in advance what can succeed and fail. Those who advance the argument that a majority with Castle is better than being in the minority tend to place priorities on Senate committee chairmanships and staff ratios and lobbyist cash… a list which pales in comparison to the power they would wield as the broker for both sides. Again and again I saw this play out during my time as a Senate staffer, and anyone who tells you contrary is incredibly naive about the way legislative decisions are made.

As a friend of mine in the business of campaigns and elections has said, electing moderates simply to secure a majority for Republicans is a self-defeating proposition. We’ve seen this play out time and again. Career politicians abhor principle, and adore power and fecklessness. Their presence in Washington provides constant aid and comfort to the Left. They dilute the brand, confuse voters and sell out conservatives just at the moment they are needed most.

It’s not about being right rather than winning, it’s about the definition of winning in the long term, which cannot be done with elected politicians who don’t believe in conservatism.

In the end, it’s really that simple.

Follow Ben Domenech on Twitter.

Tags: , , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • natlanthem

    Well said.

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

      555555

    • audax

      …the Liberty/Freedom candidate who will go to Washington and vote for more Liberty, will vote to take the heavy boot of government off our necks? Which candidate will vote for more Tyranny? More of the heavy boot on our necks? Higher taxes? more regulations (light bulbs, toilet flushes, etc.) For any candidate to get my vote they have to be the Liberty Candidate. And THANK YOU everyone, who has become a precinct delegate, got on your rules or candidate selection or executive committee and helped to select the Liberty candidate! Oh you haven’t become a precinct delegate yet? Then you should! You will have even more right to complain when we don’t have that choice to vote on in future.

  • http://charlemagne-the-hammer.blogspot.com/ DerKrieger

    Although I think it would be great to get the majority with a Senator O’Donnell I’m ok with remaining a more conservative minority. As long as we’re the minority Obama can’t use the GOP Senate as a foil to get reelected. He’ll do that anyway with a GOP minority but as long as Harry Reid is the face of the Democrat Senate it increases our chance sin 2012 when a lot more Democrat seats are up and so is the presidency.

    And Rove’s petulance IMO defines him for the establishmentarian I always suspected him to be. He no more wants power in the hands of We the People than do the Leftists. He and his fellow travelers want power and perks just as much as the statists across the aisle. I think his comments will only serve to even further rile up the conservative base against RINOs. I know I’m mad about it.

    • obladioblada

      and they refuse to follow their constituents. Why are they surprised that the voters want them to get the heck out of the way?

    • trutexan

      Mike Castle yesterday. It was then I said to myself, “I bet this lady can pull it off.”

    • greyhawk

      The only people that we should be electing to local, state and federal office are those who have as their mission the Dismantling of The Bureaucracy.

      Local and state governments are but a mirrored reflection of the federal government on a smaller scale.

      Before the wholesale takeover of Washington by Big Government Politicians in the modern era, which was started by Lyndon B. Johnson, the United States Government was fairly conservative as were the local and state governments in most states.

      When LBJ created the so-called Great Society Programs (Institutionalized and Nationalized Welfare Programs) this started the downfall of this nation as it created a system of Entitlement that has totally destroyed poor families, destroyed family values, destroyed work ethic in several generations of what would have been hard working and productive citizens, destroyed individual self worth in the recipients of welfare, destroyed self respect in individuals on welfare and in turn, these same folks who have no self respect, also do not respect others and they do not respect resources of any kind, and they have no gratitude.

      And, at the same time, the Federal Government has Squandered over ten trillion dollars in running this Federal Welfare System that has caused great harm to the country and more importantly to the lives that it has destroyed. And, of course, the Federal Bureaucracy mandated that State And Local Government’s put into place these Federally Mandated Welfare Programs that have proliferated over time, and the numbers of Victims To Serve Keeps Growing as the Bureaucracy Keeps Growing and Creating More Victims To Serve as a Means of Expanding the Bureaucratic Social Welfare Empire.

      You can apply the above analogy of the so-called Great Society Welfare Programs to all the Other Federal Agencies, Bureaus, Commissions and Departments and the results are the same.

      Once a Federal Agency, Bureau, Commission, or Department is established, the Federal Bureaucratic Machine Cranks Up and soon Becomes An Empire Builder and in order for the Specific Agency To Grow in Size and Power, it has to Find and Or Create New Problems to ostensibly solve, or it has to find or created New Victims To Serve as a means of expanding It’s Own Size, Power, Expenditures and numbers of workers and buildings it can accumulate.

      Once established, these Federal Bureaucratic Empires, they become Totally and Completely Fascistic and Despotic, and like all Despotic Empires, they will Never Willingly Give Up Their Empires, and in fact, they Will Purposely Sabotage Every Effort of anybody who attempts to do so, and they will use all the power and force at their disposal to destroy their opponents. All Empires Seek Growth with any means necessary.

      And, as all these Federal Agencies Grow in Size and Power, the states and local governments are given mandates by the feds by blackmail that says, “You get on board with us, and establish your own little kingdoms, or we withhold Federal Dollars and Funding to you.” And, the states fall in line, never questioning the Federal Regimes Authority to Blackmail them into submission and compliance.

      This sort of Governance was First Tried in the Modern Era with LBJ. LBJ got away with his Fascistic Takeover of the USA and He Put The Boot of the Federal Government on the Throat of State’s Rights and Nobody save for George C. Wallace said a thing, and in fact, the other states and the Mainstream Media Networks came down on George C. Wallace and Branded Him and Alabamians as a bunch of backwoods racists. The MSM and Government Branding of George C. Wallace and Alabamians as Racists was A Big Lie and Was Nothing But Propaganda, and the MSM and the Government Knew They Were Lying, but they sold the Lie Via Television, Movies, Sit Coms, and Propaganda Reporting posed as News.

      LBJ also started the Federalization of Public Education and in a mere 44 years, this Federal Intervention has Taken The Public School System in the USA from being in the top 3 best in the world in 1966 to Number 28 in the world today.

      There is a direct correlation with Incompetence, destruction and wasteful spending with the amount of federal intervention.

      Federal intervention into local and state matters has destroyed the American Family and the Members of those American Families, and it also Destroyed the Credibility of the Public Education System as it purposely Dumbed Down and Brainwashed the Country and It’s Citizens. This Dumbed Down Brainwashed Citizenry is the reason that the Obama’s, Pelosi’s, Frank’s, and other Incompetents keep getting elected.

      And, until we Begin the Abolishment of Many of the Federal Bureaucratic Machines such as the U.S. Department of Education as a start, we will never turn this Despotic Federal Bureaucracy and Government around. Sharron Angle, U.S. Senate Candidate from Arizona who is challenging Harry Reid, suggested the Dismantling of the U.S. Department of Education, and the MSM, including Fox News attacked her as if she had suggested burning down the White House. When, in fact, Abolishing the U.S. Department of Education is the perfect place to start in Dismantling the Federal Despotic Bureaucracy because this single Department now has an annual budget of over 200 billion dollars and is in the process of mandating that your children be taken from their homes at earlier and earlier ages and mandated to attend government run Pre-Schools (Daycares with Brainwashing). The Socialist Marxists now in power do not want to leave even one child behind who has not been Totally and Completely Raised By The Government Handlers who Can Thoroughly Brainwash and Dumb Them Down To Be Little Mindless Robots and Subjects or Slaves to the State.

      Wake up America. Obama and this gang in the U.S. Congress are trying to Finish Putting The Final Nail in the Coffin of this Republic. A job that was started with Lyndon B. Johnson after he and his fellow conspirators pulled off a coup de etat in 1963 after the assassination of JFK.

      November 1963 marked the End Of The Innoncence in America, and an end to Prosperity and the Advancment of the Middle Class. November 22, 1963 was the beginning of the End of the American Dream. And what we are facing in America today is the Nightmare that the Dream Turned Into.

      And, on Novemeber 2, 2010, we can begin Righting this Ship that LBJ and the other subversives Hijacked in Novermber 1963. If we do not turn this Ship Around 180 degrees and return to the Constitution and the Principles upon which this nation was founded and if we do not do it quickly, this ship of fools now in charge will take us to a point of no return.

      That is if we have not already arrived at that point?

      You decide? Are you going to continue to allow this nation to be run by a Ship of Fools, Subversives, Criminals, and Perverts? Or are you going to Demand Responsible Government Run By Responsible Citizens? As long as the Bureaucracy Is In Place, the Corrupt Politicians and The Paid Lobbyists will Continue to Purchase Legislation and Legislators. And you cannot depend on the TV Networks or Cable News Channels Talking Heads who are bought and paid for to give you good, useable information in making decisions. In fact, they, more often than not, will purposely mis-lead and lie to you, because they are owned and operated by the same folks who own the Lobbyists who Represent their Parent Organizations who Benefit From Government Legilsation which is legislated by bought and paid for legislators and presidents.

      After abolishing the Bureaucracy, we also have to Abolish Lobbyists who are the Real Brokers of Power in the USA today. We, the People, mereley Elect The Politicians who when they get to office, Do the Bidding of the Highest Bidders who are Bought and Paid For By Lobbyists and the People Behind the Scenes who Hire the Lobbyists.

      It is no more complicated than this. But, do we the people, have the courage to Take Our Country Back from these Incompetent would-be leaders who are working for Very Effective Lobbyists with Deep Pockets who have Deep Pockets because Our Elected Politicians Have Taken The Monies from You and Me through Taxes with a Boot On Our Throats, and Redistributed to Companies and Individuals Who Lobby Them For Their Favors?? It is a Zero Sum Game for You and me, the Citizen who works for a living, and a Win-Win situation for Congressmen, Presisdents, Lobbyists and the Deadbeats who Live On The Dole.

      But, the cash cow has run dry. This corrupt system has bankrupted the nation, and they now have to borrow from our enemies in the Federal Reserve, China, Japan, Germany, Saudi Arabia and other Enemies of The USA and We, The People.. Now, they are trying to take the last vestiges of our freedom and any assets we might have left.

      Obama’s class warfare statements are aimed at getting public support for seizing the monies and properties of those few citizens who still own private property and capital. He is not concerned with the vast majority of American Citizens as he sees us as Debt Slaves or Government Deadbeats on the Dole. He does not have to be concerned with the parasites the government created who are now on welfare as he knows he and any other socialist will always have their support as long as the free checks, food stamps, free health care, free rent, etc. keep coming. And, he believes he does not have to fear the debt slaves as he continues to offer Bailouts in the Form of Expanded and Extended Un Employment Checks, Mortgage Forgiveness, Rebates if You Buy Government Motors Cars, etc.

      The only people the Obama’s fear are those who still have enough Wealth, Power and Influence to Put Up A Real Fight to Save The Country.
      That is why he is Attacking the Rush Limbaugh’s and Others on the Right who have Wealth, A Voice and Power. That is why Obama is Doubling Down with his Class Warfare Strategies.

      Wake Up Americans, do not be duped into believing that you will be spared when these Marxists sieze complete fascistic power. You will not be spared. Right now, We, the People who are Debt Slaves or Welfare Deadbeats, are just Useful Idiots who supply votes on voting days. But, once these despots have complete and absolute power and control, elections and useful idiots are no longer necessary.

      November 2, 2010 can mark a turning point to Right This Ship. It truly depends on We, The People To Get Out The Votes To Elect Real Americans Who Have Not Been Bought Yet. And, once we elect them, we have to Martial Them and Make Sure They Do Not Join The DC Beltway Club of Criminals, Subversives, Socialists, Marxists and Lobbyists who Do The Bidding of The Power Brokers behind the Scenes who could care less about loyalty to You and Me or to A Sovereign United States of America. The Power Brokers Have no Aleigance to You and Me or to the USA or to the U.S. Constitution. They see You and Me, and A Powerful USA and the U.S. Constitution as Impediments to Their Power and Wealth.

      Wake Up America!!!!!

  • libertyatstake

    The republic depends on it.

    http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com/
    “Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive”

  • Conservative_not_Republican

    No more “we have to elect Jeffords to get a majority,” “elect Chaffee to get a majority,” “elect Specter to get a majority.” And then watch them change parties or be part of “gang of” deals to undermine the agenda.

  • youngsterz

    Excellent points. People who get so worked up about inexperienced conservatives squeaking it out in the primaries don’t understand that most of us are willing to take a stand and stick with it for the long haul. If we get some conservative Reps in November who don’t cut the mustard, then we’ll boot them out the next go round and put in some new conservatives, just as we are doing now.

    The bigger strategic error going forward will be for the GOP to pout over the loss of their chosen candidates, and not get wholeheartedly behind whoever their final candidate is for November. After being wrong on so many of the primaries, when will they accept that just maybe they can win with the underdog conservative candidate.

    Even Karl Rove and Charles Krauthammer are wrong sometimes.

    Time and time again, the public is showing some principled backbone and voting for the conservative, and not the RINO. Regardless of what the left thinks and says, conservatives aren’t stupid. We see that for the long haul, we must have conservative candidates, not moderates and/or RINOs.

    You are seeing so much of that response in the primaries. Now we all have to get together and continue the battle all the way through Nov 2.

    And then, we will celebrate for a moment, before rolling up our sleeves and getting down to the business of putting the country back on track.

    I truly believe that a majority of the country is on hold, waiting to see what happens in November, to decide whether to charge forward into a recovery, or just hunker down for the next two years. More and more, I have hope for the former.

    • GopTiger

      Even Sarah Palin, Rush, Hannity, and DeMint are wrong sometimes too.

      • Tbone

        Now you’re plumb out.

        • Aaron Gardner

          You always bring teh funny.

  • INC

    a list which pales in comparison to the power they would wield as the broker for both sides.

    I was thinking earlier today that if Castle became senator, he would be the replacement for Specter!

    • cwilson

      When Jeffords jumped, he actually took the Majority with him.

      • america1st

        But I’ll give Castle credit for representing himself as a liberal (er, “moderate” ) at home as well as in Congress. Jeffords campaigned much further to the right than he actually was.

        And let us not forget, if jumpin’ jim had not beat him to it, juan mcAmnesty would have been the defector.

  • d_lamar

    Thanks for your excellent analysis of why RINO’s do more harm than good for the conservative cause.

    And one thing that I think is also extremely important. The progressive / marxists always point out, even if they only get one Republican to vote for their legislation, that it was a bi-partisan vote.

    We need to get rid of all the RINOs so that the marxists can never use that bi-partisan crapola argument. They need to be held accountable for their stupid legislation.

  • crosley

    Not every moderate Republican is an Arlen Specter in disguise that can’t wait to betray conservatives.

    I just don’t think the GOP’s main problem is the handful of moderates. Our main problem is lack of numbers. We can’t pass legislation if we don’t win.
    Sticking up the middle finger at the “establishment” is not going to help forward the sound policy that our country so badly needs right now.

    If nothing else, even the worst RINO will support the party on procedural matters that help forward conservative goals and legislation. If we win a majority, Republicans gain control of powerful committees that have all sorts of oversight.

    I absolutely believe we should support the eventual Republican nominee, I’m not making that argument at all, but I don’t think it’s out of bounds to criticize a decision primary voters made.

    I hope I eat crow and these candidates win, but this is not a mistake we can afford to keep making. Nothing is gained by a “more” conservative candidate that gets crushed at the ballot box.

    • cwilson

      All the way to the end?

      He actually addressed these points, from the point of view of a Hill staffer whose actually seen how your theory works out in practice.

      • edintexas

        There were no pictures.

    • General_Confusion

      Wasn?t it one of the Maine twins that voted the Dem Heathcare bill out of committee thus setting the stage for its passage?

      Seems to me that having them on committee really didn?t do us much good.

      • INC

        who voted ObamaCare out of committee.

      • texasgalt

        http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33290417/

        Snowe is up in ’12 and recently 63% of Maine Rep want her GONE.

        http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2010/09/63-say-trade-out-snowe.html

      • walter_hanson

        I’m not a big fan of Snow, but give her a break on that.

        The Democrats without her vote got the bill out of committee. Harry used that to ram the health care bill because he had sixty votes.

        When it came to the final votes opening debate, clouture, and the final vote she did vote no.

        The big question to judge her is will she support a total repeal of Obama Care.

        Walter Hanson
        Minneapolis, MN

        • rightwingmom52

          so why should we give her one?

          Lest we forget, their votes are not just about legislation. We have five RINO’s to thank for Justice Kagan: Collins (ME), Graham (S.C.), Gregg (N.H.), Lugar (IN) & Snowe (ME) and nine RINO’s to thank for Justice Sotomayor: Alexander (TN), Bond (MO), Collins (ME), Graham (SC), Gregg (NH), Lugar (IN), Martinez (FL), Snowe (ME) & Voinovich (OH). It is important to remember what “moderates” do in a year when they are not running for re-election or when they retire. Even if they vote to repeal Obamacare, they’ve left their stain on the court and we won’t know the full effect for years to come.

    • Conservative_not_Republican

      that included moderates? I remember turning over the selection of judges in “Gang of” deals led by john McCain and supported by the moderate Repubs.

      Notice that the “Gang of” deals ended with a Dem majority.

      • zornorph

        Frankly, I’m glad we didn’t go with the constitutional/nuclear option. Now we have a filibuster to save us from some of Obama’s worst people. Count me among those who liked the gang of 14′s deal. And I look forward to Supreme Court Justice Janice Rogers Brown when Obama is defeated in 2012.

      • securitymom

        It is now a numbers game… The last 18 months should have taught us that.

    • davesinsanantonio

      is to keep electing RINOs and expecting to be anything but RINOs! The main problem is not a “handful of moderates”, but that we have only had a handful of actual conservatives. If we had a majority of principled conservatives in office, then we would not have lost our majorities in Congress, and McPain In The Neck would not have been the candidate on the R side, and Obummer would not be in the White House.
      The issue is not that we “can’t pass legislation”, but that we have passed bad legislation, or let the Dems do it. And your claim that “even the worst RINO will support the party on procedural matters that help forward conservative goals and legislation is so much hogwash. It doesn’t fit actual history. Especially, when those RINOs are happily crafting “bi-partisan” bills that take this country down the road to ruin.
      Being a “moderate” who thinks our greatest goal is to travel down that road at a slower pace is not what this country needs. We need to support those people for office who want to keep us off that road, not think that it is a good road if we “travel it together”!!!

  • d_lamar

    Did anyone see Karl Rove on Fox news tonight slandering Christine Odonnell? He sounded more like Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid than a Republican.

    I’ve had it with him and his so-called expert opinions. It’s people like him who probably persuaded George W to lean liberal, and brought the country to the point that an idiot was elected potus.

    • texasgalt

      with Bush. He is more into strategy than being right or doing right.

      I won’t say more, as I am feeling charitable tonight and a bit hopeful.

    • Doc Holliday
      • aesthete
        • aesthete
    • davesinsanantonio

      His most important political party is Karl Rove. Badmouthing the actual candidate is wrongheaded, but typical of a petulant sore loser. Rove is so full of himself that he would rather see a candidate he didn’t back lose. How sad is that? The problem is that Fox News keeps putting him on the air, and that makes some on the Right think he is on our side. He is only on the side of Karl Rove.

    • ithos

      I was so disgusted with his condescending whining. Instead of supporting the winner for the good of the party he was intentionally trying to scuttle Christine’s chances of winning by giving the Dems more fodder. He and the other elitists want her to lose out of spite.

      This jerk is probably more responsible for the Dem super majority than any other figure except Pres Bush. I truly despise him.

  • neum432

    It is time to go all out. Time to challenge RINO’s at every level. This is what squishy moderates and liberals do not understand. They think we are dividing the party. We are in reality, changing the party. Let’s make it a conservative party again!

    • cactusjack

      This is exactly where Reagan was in 1978-79. Can’t win, too old, too , well, fanatical, needs to show some “seriousness” and well, learn how to get along with power in DC the way Repubs like Jerry Ford did. Can’t sabre rattle either, don’t want to upset the Russians or Chinese, can’t do that. History had other ideas, didn’t it?.

      • texasgalt

        when Reagan challenged Ford. He fell short but supporters at the Convention kicked up their heals a bit and actually formed a long chain which snaked through the aisles and all over the floor of the convention. There’s not been anything like it since.

        The astonished network talking heads all said the same thing: These people are enthusiastic but they just are out of touch with the main stream. Time has passed them by.

        The Reagan wave shut ‘em up four years later. There’s a new wave rolling in that is gonna shut-up a lot of people come November.

        • audax
          • texasgalt

            The remarks Reagan made at the podium after Ford went over the top were amazing. The attendees were looking like “Darn, we picked the wrong guy.”

            And they were right. Listen:

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-p-Nuu8hYQ

            Have you noticed how respectful the older Reagan people are compared to the “Bush people” like Karl Rove and so many others.

            Kinder and gentler my a**.

            But never mind, we must get it right this time and again in ’12..

          • eburke
          • audax

            that was the last line of that wonderful speech.

          • audax

            As true today as in August of ’76.

        • davesinsanantonio

          that they are not the mainstream. The mainstream has just quietly gone about its business and let them have office because they were such petulant, demanding children that we just gave in as the tired parents and let them have it. Then, as usually happens in such cases, they began to think they ran things. So, in 1980, and again this year, we had to step up in the parenting role and practice tough love and set the kids straight. They are up in their rooms railing to themselves about how we are ruining their lives because we have decided to be the adults and not let them get away with their self-destructive behavior any longer. Let us hope they finally grow up, and also let us hope that we do not go back to being the disinterested parents any longer. We need to be in charge for the good of the country, and we cannot let the selfish children run things again.

    • chamberD

      to have a choice, not an echo.

      Karl Rove embarrassed himself tonight. I watched his dismal performance on Hannity, and I was appalled and disgusted by his comments on O’Donnell. I will never forget who he revealed himself to be, EVER.

      But I’ll tell you this: Sean held his ground and argued his points persuasively. I will remember this, too.

  • Doc Holliday

    I am a glutton though, I want conservatives AND I want the majority. I also want them to use their power to reduce their power.

  • GopTiger

    IMO, neither Castle or O’Donnell deserved conservative support. Both are hopelessly flawed candidates. I thought the choice between Castle and O’Donnell was like choosing between a heart attack and a stroke.

    Just like some of you worry about the Republican brand being tarnished (I share that sentiment) by RINOS, we conservatives need to protect our brand as well. Not ever candidate who is a “conservative” deserves our support. Conservatives candidates need to meet a threshold as well.

    Sometimes BOTH candidates tarnish the brand.Tonigh in Delawaret is a prime example.

    • d_lamar

      That is no reason to support a Castle, Spectre, Snowe, Graham, McCain, etc. who we know should be registered Democrats.

      I can accept a tarnished conservative in the Congress who votes right, notwithstanding that they’re not perfect. And if she gets defeated in November, we’re no worse off than if Castle were elected. In fact, we’re much worse off with Castle for all the reasons that have been previously stated.

      • GopTiger

        1.When you support irresponsible, ethically-challenged conservatives, you hurt our movement.

        2.When you support RINOs, you hurt our movement.

        Some of you get #2, but have a hard time understanding #1.

        Sometimes its better to punt with BOTH candidates, and wait for a responsible conservative the next time around.

        If Charlie Rangel were using campaign donations to pay his mortgage, I bet every one of you would be outraged. O’Donnell gets a pass. This makes “conservatives” look like flaming hypocrites.

        • Aaron Gardner

          Conservative in the primary, Republican in the general.

          We have a nominee, accept that and do no harm, or you will lose your posting privileged.

          Right now there is no room for talking down a GOP Senate nominee. Not any of them.

          • Doc Holliday

            I don’t see anyone responding to these admonitions.

        • gekster

          She won.
          The people in her state picked her.
          She is who they wanted.
          Get over it.

          Something just tells me you won’t.

        • Bill S

          Come back tomorrow with a better attitude.

          As I just told a colleague, this DE race will actually be fascinating to observe. It’s a test case for how we go forward with conservatives in blue states. If O’Donnell can somehow pull it out, our strategies will be in for a big change – for the better.

          To do it, we all have to be rowing the same direction. The primary is over. We have a winner. We now have to support her, whether we like the outcome or not.

          • congressworksforus

            This race has the chance to prove all the “conservatives are unelectable in blue states” people completely wrong.

            Which is why the establishment GOP isn’t about to throw any weight behind her in the election unless they are forced to if she gets close enough in the polls…

            Which is why ALL of us need to be busting our rear ends to make sure she wins. A win by O’Donnell in DE in Nov changes everything!

          • chamberD

            congressworksforus. The establishment will bust their buns to leave O’Donnell hanging out to dry because if she wins she weakens their power structure and their argument for fielding ‘middle-of-the-road,’ big government candidates.

            But the Republican leadership had better watch out. This is a warning not a threat. The people want a return to Constitutionalism and limited government. If we sense that the Republican Party is thwarting us in our efforts, we WILL bolt.

            Our allegiance is to the country, not the party. We’re on the brink of national bankruptcy and the fed’s monetizing of our debt; we’re on the brink of societal chaos, thanks to the Cloward-Piven nutcases currently at the helm — and their Republican enablers.

            We need some Pattons, some Churchills, some Reagans and more: we need the truth-talking of a man like Chris Christie — OR WE ARE DOOMED — if it’s not already too late, and like the towers burning, the moment will come when all of a sudden this financially impaired structure we call America will collapse. This is what we face — . This is no time for that idiot Rove to whine because another LIBERAL Republican got his just desserts, for heaven’s sake. Another RINO weasel bit the dust. And all I can say is it took way too long to get rid of him!

          • aesthete

            a good test case for the lower bounds of conservatives in blue states in a conservative wave, since Christine is outside of what the “normal” generic conservative candidate would be. Regardless, it should be enlightening for candidate recruitment and strategy going forward, ditto strategy in primaries (which I imagine will be much more competitive going forward, as well: a good thing, IMO).

        • realskinny

          It’s illegal to even “borrow” campaign money for personal use. If this were true, expect an indictment before the election. Unlike Democrats, Republicans have to obey the law…..That’s why I wouldn’t believe these kind of stories unless they are coming from the AG’s office.

          I wish Hannity had flat out asked Rove if he wanted people in Delaware to vote for the Dem.. It was disgusting to see someone who’s supposed to be so smart stupidly throwing mud just because they’re angry.

          • eburke

            the use of campaign expenditures to fund a campaign headquarters in your home.

          • realskinny

            n/t

          • JSobieski

            (1) House sold to campaign manager to avoid foreclosure
            (2) Portion of house rented for use of campaign—so campaign monies used to pay that portion of the rent, where the mortgage is held by the campaign manager
            (3) No campaign money used to fund portion of house used for personal use, with the money going to the campaign manager

            I believe that the FEC issues actually pertain to disclosure rules, but on that I am not sure.

    • neum432

      For even Delaware to have a choice. A somewhat fllawed conservative versus a liberal. At least they have a choice this time.

      For years it has been: leftist R vs. leftist D. If Delaware rejects the conservative choice, then so be it. They can stew in the abyss they created for themselves!

      • GopTiger

        Delaware has had this “choice” before.

        How did it turn out?

    • http://www.newledger.com Ben Domenech

      As Dan is fond of saying, ideas don’t run for office — people do.

      So the question in a race like this, where there isn’t another option, becomes whether you favor flawed people, or flawed ideas.

      We all may answer that question differently, depending on the flaw. I know how I would.

      • GopTiger

        Thanks for tacitly acknowledging the good faith in which my post was intended.

        Godspeed to all of our Republican nominees and all that bear the moniker of conservative.

      • GopTiger

        I mean Ben. It is late. :)

    • powertothepeople

      but in the same breath, it is full of holes.

      No one claimed, or at least no one I have seen, that O’Donnell was the new face of the conservative movement.

      Even if you are correct that O’Donnell comes with baggage, do we reject her for a guy, Castle, that is nothing more than a liberal claiming membership in the republican party.

      Are you really suggesting that when faced with an imperfect candidate and an obvious liberal, we should refrain from voting which in turns guarantees a win for the democrat?

      Bunch of hogwash to be honest. Our job is to first put as many conservatives in the running as possible, follow that up with voting for them and putting them up against the dem, and finally voting as many dems out of office as possible. But even a questionable conservative or a dope for a candidate but who has conservative values is much better than an openly liberal republican who if they win gives the dems yet another vote. We would have backed Castle had he won, but thankfully we sent him to the unemployment line where he belonged. Win or lose in the general, the right choice was made and the only thing left to do in DE is fire another democrat.

      • GopTiger

        I’m a bit unsure if I can respond honestly without being “banned”. My goal isn’t to flame this woman. I’m simply wanting conservatives to self-reflect about the quality of candidates we support and are associated with.

        Sometimes the conservative candidate is such a “dope”(your words), the movement loses a bit of credibility by being too closely identified with that candidate.

        Considering all the publicity about this election (all over FOX, Drudge headline), the mainstream media, ironically aided by some conservatives, is going to try to make her one of the faces of conservative movenment, or at least the Tea Party. I think this is rather unfortunate for the above stated reasons. I want the Tea Party to succeed, but in my view, that must exercise some quality control. Otherwise, they risk losing their well-earned reputation of putting principle above party.

        When we say something like “yea, he or she might be a dope, but at least she is a conservative dope, aren’t we sounding much like the liberals?

        I completely-TOTALLY agree with your comments about Castle. I think he would have been a disaster. We don’t need another Jeffords or Specter. But then again we don’t need someone who has some very real ethical issues either. Ironically, I agree with the O’Donnell supporters about Castle and the Castle supporters about O’Donnell.

        She is the nominee. For those of you who support her, I wish her well.

        And thank you RedState. You good people have helped give us some fine conservative choices this fall-Rubio, Angle, Buck, Toomey, etc. This is just one time I think you shouldn’t have played ball.

        • Right Reason

          We had a choice between Castle and O’Donnell. What are you saying we should have done?

  • AndrewHyman

    I am concerned about the analogy to Ted Stephens. By opposing Stevens, many conservatives ensured Begich would win. By opposing Castle, a win for Coons likewise becomes more likely.

    Begich single-handedly gave us ObamaCare. What Coons might give us is unknown, but note that he would take his seat at the start of the lame duck session.

    I sure hope O’Donnell can provide sufficient assurances about her integrity so that she can upset Coons.

    • AndrewHyman

      Stephens >> Stevens

    • Conservative_not_Republican

      Maybe you remember him. We had to swallow hard and elect him to get/ or keep a majority. Then he switched parties. Somehow the Dems were smart enough to say they didn’t want him enough to keep their majority. Interestingly, the media didn’t call them intolerant for booting old Snarlin Arlen. Specter was the man who betrayed Robert Bork and set back the Supreme Court for years.

      • AndrewHyman

        Santorum and Bush thought Specter was a better bet to beat Hoeffel in 2004. Had Hoeffel won that election, Specter would not have been around to get Roberts and Alito confirmed to SCOTUS.

        Of course, I would have preferred Toomey instead of Specter, but it’s not clear that Santorum made the wrong call. Maybe he made the wrong call, maybe not. I don’t know what the polls were saying about a Toomey-Hoeffel matchup. But the polls are heavily against O’Donnell beating Coons. I would like to see those polls proved wrong.

        • IJB

          In fact, it probably cost him his job a couple of years later.

          • AndrewHyman

            I agree Santorum was wrong if Toomey had the ability to beat Hoeffel, but I don’t know if Toomey could have.

            Here’s an excerpt from a recent news report:

            “Specter, Santorum said, had agreed he would support then-President George W. Bush’s Supreme Court nominees no matter what, and Santorum wanted to make sure the court was as conservative as possible. ( Specter denies this assertion .) “You questioned my judgment, and you have every right to do so,” Santorum said. “But please don’t question my intention to do what’s right for those little babies.” Still, the decision to back Specter — who is now a Democrat — won’t help Santorum in his quest to emerge as a viable alternative to the two expected entrants to the GOP primary field, Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty….”

          • IJB

            As a result, he’s probably finished in electoral politics whether he realizes it or not.

            He would have been better off supporting to the hilt and going down with Toomey in a “Dem” year (if you believe that would have happened, and I’m not sure I do as Hoeffel was a *terrible* candidate that Toomey would have beaten like a drum, even in a “Dem” year…) than he was with selling out with Specter.

            In the end, that choice has cost Santorum everything.

          • AndrewHyman

            I’ll have to disagree a liitle bit. If what Santorum did cost him his job and his career, but nevertheless was necessary to get Roberts and Alito onto the Supreme Court, then Santorum did right, IMHO.

          • nepanyrush

            Specter had supported Santorum’s bid for the Senate (in the general) and Santorum returned the favor. Bush pushed Specter because he felt he had the best chance to win.

            Within two months of the election, Specter was back to blasting conservatives, promoting liberal policies, and blasting Bush by the way. He was always liberal. Santorum put politics over conservative principles, but because Specter and he were GOP colleagues. But I felt he went way out of his way to support Specter, beyond what he had to do, attending rallies, etc. (By the way, Santorum infuriated me this year by his support of the liberal candidate in the Republican primary for Congressional District 10, over a great conservative candidate.).

            Toomey could have won. It is not much different than this year, when the Republican establishment was saying to support Specter over Toomey, because Toomey is unelectable, up until the point Specter switched parties.

      • DavidS1787

        always a true democrat! Spector was a democrat before switching to republican then back to democrat. Spector always showed his true colors in the senate.

        • DavidS1787

          I am glad the voters booted Spector! Go Pat Toomey!

  • juumanistra

    I would note that there’s nothing wrong with a majority of 51 that hinges upon Mike Castle-like figures so long as you know, going in, that the GOP intends to pursue a legislative agenda which appeals to his more conservative leanings: If, in this hypothetical, Castle were a reliable vote to repeal and positively reform Obamacare, push for implementing Paul Ryan’s Roadmap, and defunding EPA for its CAA shenanigans — and only those things — he’d be perfectly tolerable, given that those legislative fights would consume a vast bulk of the Senate’s time, so that his invariable digressions and fig leafs tossed to the Dems wouldn’t matter much in the grand scheme of things. No battle plan survives contact with the enemy and there’re always unforeseeable contingencies, of course, but if you’ve got the majority and have a plan you can set the tone and pace for an entire Congress if you’ve made preparations for such.

    All of that said, it’d mean knowing far enough in advance what the legislative program would be so that candidates in all primaries would have to speak out on it and bear scrutiny of their records vis-a-vis where a GOP Congress would like to go. That certainly won’t be happening anytime soon due to the average politician’s fear of taking a stand on anything. (And the far more real risk that if you’re talking about your legislative aspirations in January of the election year, that gives the Democrats and their allies in the media ten months to tear you limb-from-limb for the temerity of having ideas.)

    • cwilson

      Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Oh, that’s funny. The man is a supporter of cap and trade. He LOVES the EPA, thinks it does such a great job he wants to give it power to regulate any business that uses electricity…

      • juumanistra

        There’s a reason why I used the term “hypothetical”. Yes, I know the man voted for cap-and-trade: Hell, it was what kept me from pulling the lever for him. It was abstracting to be illustrative: You could just as easily replace Mike Castle with the the zombified remains of Caesar Rodney and the point would remain the same.

        Because trying to come up with conservative things the real Mike Castle would’ve been reliable for is hard.

  • natlanthem

    If Republicans come to the polls in the same 3:1 margin as today, O’Donnell will win. The ONLY way she will lose is if those same people don’t get over it and get on with it and BRING IT in November.

    You want that 51+ in the Senate? Get your butt in gear and bring the votes in for O’Donnell and every other Republican candidate. There are NO candidates to pass over or not support.

    • davesinsanantonio

      5555555!!!

  • onemovoter

    When broken down it’s a reflection on the population of the USA. The real battle isn’t at the political level, but at the societal level. The socialists and progressives have realized this along time ago. They filtered into the educational system, took it over with ‘public’ schools. We must work to take back the educational system, otherwise we will always be disappointed when they swing to democrats like they did in 2008. Lets work together to do an “All of the above” strategy with politics, education, and business to fix this country once and for all.

    • davesinsanantonio

      it is a never-ending process! We are in the current jam because of the attitude that the country would run itself, that it was “fixed” as soon as the ink on the Bill of Rights was dry. It is not, and never will be, fixed once and for all. “Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom”! We cannot ever go back to that complacent attitude, because the next time the Leftnuts get in power, they will destroy this country “once and for all”! We have to be forever engaged and alert to the tricks and deceits of the Left, And to the fact that they truly do want to “fundamentally change America”. Those fundamentals that they insist on changing are property rights, personal liberty, free speech, freedom of religion, the right to bear arms ( to protect ourselves from the the government), the right to choose our own health care, etc., etc.. They want to strip us of all rights and privileges, and next time they will. We have to be on our toes from now on.

  • zollistar

    <>

    I’m going to be repeating the above three sentences to wavering friends again, and again, and again — and again and again.

    Sometimes I might use shorthand. “Arlen Specter”, “Charles Crist”, “Olympia Snow” for example — and that’s just on the Republican side.

    Don’t get me started with my Dem side shorthand re: those who give aide and comfort to the left.

    • zollistar

      Career politicians abhor principle, and adore power and fecklessness. Their presence in Washington provides constant aid and comfort to the Left. They dilute the brand, confuse voters and sell out conservatives just at the moment they are needed most.

      The above three sentences were there when I first clicked “Post Comment”. We all need to remember them.

  • AceInTX

    • audax
  • Tbone

    and move on with the parade.

  • indylawyer

    I can see the point to preferring Democrats to “RINOs” in an extreme case like Chaffee or Jeffords. Maybe Castle is in that class. But I see a real danger in a “no-RINOs” policy if it becomes too encompassing. I’m no fan of senators like Lugar or Graham, but they are far better than any Democrat who might replace them. By all means challenge them in the primaries, but make sure the conservative candidate is someone who can win the general.

    Frankly, I’m also worried that our willingness to take chances with upstart conservative candidates will in future years outstrip our ability to get them elected. This year we can get away with rejecting candidates with proven track records in Congress or statewide office in favor of candidates with resumes more commonly associated with a run for the House or state legislature. Most years that won’t work.

    I’m remembering the 1996 presidential primaries when conservative split their vote between three unqualified candidates (Buchanan, Forbes & Keyes), and thereby handing the nomination to Bob Dole by default rather than uniting behind Phil Gramm, who was the one conservative in the race who was actually qualified for the job.

    • IJB

      ‘Nuff said.

    • zornorph

      I’ve always disliked that term, but I feel if one is going to use it, one should also use it on people who are also on the other fringe of the party. Former NH Sen Bob Smith was a true RINO and I think Sam Brownback is far enough out there to get that label, too.

      • IJB
        • zornorph

          Smith was such a RINO that he actually LEFT the party for a while, so I don’t see why I can’t call him out on it.

          • IJB
          • zornorph

            Brownback wanted to go after IVF – InVitro Fertilization. I’ll never forgive him for that. That was way beyond the pale for me. Anybody that tries to stop me from having children is never, ever, ever going to get my vote for anything.

          • mboyle1988

            That’s actually an ultra-conservative position…

          • zornorph

            It’s so untra-conservative that I no longer consider it a Republican position at all, so that makes him a RINO. For damn sure it’s not part of the platform and I would leave the party in a heartbeat if it ever was put in.

          • cwilson

            If I recall correctly, he wasn’t against IVF in principle — just how it is currently performed: multiple eggs are fertilized simultaneously, and only one or two are implanted while the rest are frozen. Permanently.

            I think Brownback was in favor of only fertilizing the eggs actually implanted, and preserving the others unfertilized: no snowflakes. Then, if the pregnancy didn’t take, thaw and fertilize another one. This raises the cost (slightly) but only for those women with whom the initial implantation doesn’t take. It IS less efficient…but so are most drug testing procedures when ethical restrictions are imposed.

          • zornorph

            That’s actually not at all an accurate assessment on how this would impact IVF; having gone through it myself, I’m something of an expert in the area. What Brownback wanted to do would have made IVF nearly impossible for most people. Thus, he’s a RINO to me.

          • cwilson

            that ANY particular position on IVF was an official Republican Party Platform position. Unlike, say, opposition to abortion on demand, or support for lower tax rates.

            You disagree with (what you think is) Brownback’s position on IVF. That’s about as relevant to Brownback’s RINOism (or yours!) as whether you agree with me on the Atlanta Braves’ chances for the pennant this fall.

            (Now, I’ve got some OTHER issues with Brownback, related to ACTUAL party platform issues and party discipline, but that’s a whole ‘nother thing).

  • UpLateAgain

    In what appears to me to be a fit of sour grapes, the RNC announced tonight that they do not think O’Donnell is electable, so they will not be providing her any financial support.

    I advised them that I would no longer provide the RNC any financial support, choosing instead to place any funds I have available for political consideration with individual CONSERVATIVE candidates of my choosing.

    I then had them remove me from their rolls. I am officially no longer a Republican after being so for over 30 years. If they want my vote, they’d better put up conservative candidates from here on out.

    • audax
    • davesinsanantonio

      “she cannot be elected”, so we are going to do everything to make sure she cannot be elected!
      Actually, I think they believe she can be elected and that scares the crap out of them. I hope she does get elected, and that she helps stir up, and maybe replace, the RINO leadership in both the Senate and the RNC.

    • cordpt

      C’mon, that’s ridiculous. They wouldn’t support Castle either (and it’s the NRSC).

      They have limited resources and have to make options. They’ll finance the candidates that show they can be competitive, those who have money and polls to show. How have you been a republican for 30 years? During that time span, hundreds of candidates weren’t funded under this same criteria. Heck, do you think they’re treating our candidates in Vermont, Hawai or Maryland any differently? Of course not. So, what’s up? Why the selective outrage? Why the divisionism?

      Those who supported O’Donnell in the primary knowing of her very limited fundraising abilities and her bad standing in the polls now have the moral duty to finance her. If they don’t – and start to complain about the same NRSC they maligned so much during the primary instead – they have to be held responsible for it.

      • Scope

        it’s because no one is buying what they are trying to sell. Most people that I know of are donating directly to the candidates of their choice. That’s why they have limited funds.

        Also, there are no races that are not worth fighting for, including the O’Donnell race. The NRSC is not not supporting her because of their limited funds, they are not supporting her because she is a conservative, which is never their choice. Conservatives with principles are their worst nightmare, because they can’t pull their puppet strings and have them walk in lockstep.

        If there is one very clear message with the O’Donnell win, it is that the NRSC has no credibility, and, they have clearly been exposed for what they are. There demise pleases me. DeMint, and his Conservative PAC has just earned his stripes once again. At least he doesn’t abandon who he has supported. Hopefully Palin will do the same.

        • cordpt

          I hope you have something to back it up.

          The NRSC is not not supporting her because of their limited funds, they are not supporting her because she is a conservative

          This is big.

          I mean, the NRSC’s modus operandi has always been to fund republican candidates that show they’re competitive, regardless of their ideology. You’re now accusing Cornyn of favouring some candidates over others not. That would be a major corruption of NRSC’s stated goal: to elect republican candidates to the senate and of their proclaimed and common-sense criteria to locate resources.

          Plus, they’re supporting candidates like Rubio or Angle. Accordingly to you, they “don’t support conservatives” “because they can?t pull their puppet strings and have them walk in lockstep”. So, you’re actually accusing Rubio of not being a conservative or being a sell-out. Wow!

          Why are you attacking fellow republicans and conservatives with such a ferocity, Scope?

          I think this is becoming too much and that strong justifications are needed. I’m not seeing this from supporters of candidates that are not being financed by the NRSC. I’ve donated to Britton but I fully understand Cornyn’s decision of not throwing NRSC’s money into his race for the time being.

          But you’re now accusing Cornyn and the NRSC of extremely serious wrongdoings.

          I really hope you have the hard evidences that support your extraordinary claim. I think everybody in this blog will be waiting for it.

          • cordpt

            ..you should immediately apologize to Marco Rubio and every other NRSC funded candidate as well as to Cornyn and the NRSC leadershup.

          • Scope

            all the way up until he left the party. They supported Castle. They supported Murkowski, even after she lost. They support their incumbent friends, or whoever is the most moderate in the primaries, who they know will go along with their “bipartisan” crap. They shouldn’t even be involved in the primaries to begin with. The voters in the state’s should be making their choices without undue influence from the NRSC. So far they have chosen more losers than winners. Also, I repeat, there is a reason they have only limited funds.

            I don’t have to apologize to anyone. And yes, the NRSC is responsible for wrongdoing in trying to prevent the best conservative candidates from winning. Too bad for them that this election cycle isn’t about who has the biggest war chest, it’s about the candidates that are of we the people, the Country class so to speak. I didn’t see you asking EE to appologize for his diary yesterday, pointing out just how out of touch the NRSC is, and, he made of great point about there losing streak.

          • Scope

            and can’t win, as was stated by the NRSC, then why is DeMint willing to put the max into her General Campaign coffers? I’d be willing to bet there will be more money coming her way from many sources. She can win without the NRSC, and, fortunately will not be beholden to the moderates in the Senate.

          • cordpt

            because he’s being supported by the NRSC and accordingly to you, the NRSC “doesn?t support conservatives because they can?t pull their puppet strings and have them walk in lockstep?? And I say Rubio but I could say Angle, Paul, Johnson and many others.

            Once again: you need to come up with some evidence.

            I didn?t see you asking EE to appologize for his diary yesterday, pointing out just how out of touch the NRSC is, and, he made of great point about there losing streak.

            I don’t know which diary is that.

            But let’s make one thing clear: I disagreed with many of the NRSC’s recruiting efforts and with many of their decisions on whom to support in the primaries. There’s nothing wrong in pointing that out.

            However, what YOU DID is completely different. Don’t try to confuse things.

            You accused Cornyn and the RNSC of sabotaging conservative candidates that won the primary! Completely different stuff. So, where’s the evidence? Either you have something to backup your statements or you can’t be taken seriously and you’re just a troll who’s trying to hurt our chances on purpose. People need to know which is it.

          • Jack_Savage

            The NSRC supported Crist. Rubio won the primary. Crist bolted the party. Rubio is being supported by the NSRC because he is the only Republican in the race.

            And is far as not being a troll goes, you are the one that needs to prove that negative.

          • aesthete
  • UpLateAgain

    When posting similar sentiments earlier this year, I had a number of bloggers tell me that demanding that the Republican Party field conservative candidates under threat of withholding support would just guarantee Democratic victories, and that I should push for conservatives in the primaries, but ultimately support whomever the Republican nominee turned out to be.

    Well, conservative candidates are taking the primaries, often from well-established incumbents, and now the “Party” is seemingly reluctant to fall in behind them. I guess they’ll have to learn the hard way.

  • asleep06

    We’ve had enough short-term thinking in politics. It’s time to play the long game.

  • sundesy

    I am tired of the party. This time I am donating to the candidates directly. I care about candidates who reflect my values even if they are outside of my constituency.

    Country needs choice. O’Donnell clearly offers voters the choice. If the people of DE still vote for the dems we will have to face the consequences. At least in the next election cycle people will know who was responsible.

    Candidates like Christine muddle the GOP brand. No wonder many voters are cynical and club all politicians are same.

  • expatuae

    of the Deleware valley, a conservative, there is nothing to celebrate here.

    O’donnell is a lame candidate who will lose very badly even to a weak competitor. Castle was more moderate than I’d like but not a Jeffords/ Chafee RINO, The idea- that electing lame candidates in the primary to make a point against moderate Republican’s is really stupid strategy. O’Donnell is no Mark Rubio, or even a Rand Paul.

    Sure we give away a Senate seat for 6 years to a leftist Democrat, but more importantly we make it MORE difficult to elect other conservatives now and in the future. Although partisans like to deliver payback to moderates in their party, payback is a losing strategy for communicating a conservative message.

    Did nominating doctrinaire liberals to run in the South in the 1980′s help liberal Democrat’s? Sure we know their candidates lost, but by holding true to their principles, they must have helped the population become more enlightened and responsive to the liberal message?

    Of course not. If anything such a tact pushed people away from considering dem/liberal arguments/candidates by reminding Southern voters that doctrinaire northeast and CA liberals were running the show.

    Now, apparently you need approval from South Carolina to win a Republican primary in DE. Everyplace has regional pride and no one likes to be dictated too, whether that is from DC or elsewhere.

    Conservatives can win in the Northeast, but we need solid local candidates to build the brand- the Bush/Delay brand of supposed conservatism, huge spending, huge deficits, extra constitutional federal meddling in all sorts of local issues is a losing message nationally, and especially in the Northeast.

    Fringe candidates do nothing but harm the ability of real conservatives to communicate and win elections.

    • Doc Holliday

      did you see his concession speech? I will summarize “blank blank uh, blank uh, uh uh uh and so on.

      I am not for purity over victory. But I know when a man wants the citizens disarmed, he is not worth of high office.

      Maybe O’donnell will lose, but that is not our fault. The fault will be with those who chose to quit rather than to fight. The fault will be those that consider themselves to be political experts, chatting and harumphing, not Americans trying to follow the Constitution.

    • Flagstaff

      “we make it MORE difficult to elect other conservatives now and in the future.”

      If our principles are correct, it will make it easier, because he will be wrong on the issues.

      “Sure we know their candidates lost, but by holding true to their principles, they must have helped the population become more enlightened and responsive to the liberal message? ”

      How about, “They lost because they were wrong.”

      “Fringe candidates do nothing but harm the ability of real conservatives to communicate and win elections.”

      Okay. Where were those “real conservatives”? Mike Castle wasn’t one of them. If O’Donnell loses, perhaps one of them will realize he has a chance in six years.

      Mike Castle is an example of another bad thing–politicians who serve in office too long. Couldn’t the *** get a real job? He grew to believe he deserved it, and that he “knew best.” The people (or should that be the People) decided otherwise. Let’s see if he congratulates his opponent or leaves in a blue 2010 Snit.

      • calgacus

        It will lessen any “bi-partisan” credentials for various legislative schemes. Castle would be a vote to repeal ObamaCare, but 2013 is the key for that, and I think we will have a clear majority by that point. I am not sad to see Castle defeated.

      • cordpt

        this year. That would have helped us to start building a bench there.

        • Flagstaff

          Coattails?

    • walter_hanson

      Do you know why Al Franken is in the US Senate today?

      There were Republicans in Minnesota who thought I can’t stand the spending that Norm Coleman supported so I won’t vote for him.

      I can’t stand that Norm Coleman might support open borders so I won’t vote for him.

      I can go on, but thanks to those people who were so mad at Norm Coleman they didn’t give him their vote (either Barkley or no vote). Thanks to those voters Al Franken is in the Senate today.

      I just hope those voters in Delware didn’t repeat that history.

      Walter Hanson
      Minneapolis, MN

      • Flagstaff

        Yesterday was a primary. Coleman lost in the general. Some states do that. DE may do it too.

        DE is a blue state that we might have won with a RINO. We can still win there, and if we do, what a victory.

        Consider Scott Brown. We’re still batting .500.

        Have you noticed there’s no such thing as a DINO? Why is that? Even Joe Lieberman is a DIIC (Democrat in Independent clothing).

    • cwilson

      Linc Chafee: lifetime ACU 35% in 2006
      Mike Castle: lifetime ACU 52% in 2009. So, yes, Castle was, over his entire career in the House, more conservative than Jeffords and Chafee were in the Senate.

      However, this misses a few important points: Senators are in general much less constrained than House members are by their respective leadership. Also, because state boundaries are fixed and not subject to jerrymandering, elected Senators who represent entire states tend to position themselves closer to the middle than House Reps who represent more homogenously drawn districts (not applicable to DE with its single state-wide Rep). But also…let’s review Castle’s per-year ACU ratings:

      2009: 52%
      2008: 27%
      2007: 20%
      2006: 52%
      2005: 28%
      2004: 52%
      2003: 44%
      2002: 76%
      2001: 48%
      2000: 68%
      1999: 44%
      (Can’t go back farther because the ACU archives start 404ing).

      With the exception of 2008 (a massive D election year) and 2009, I notice a clear pattern: Castle votes MUCH more often with the D’s during non-election years — about like Jeffords and Chafee — and manages to nudge his ACU rating up to about 50% or a bit more during election years. And, the trend has gotten progressively worse over the years.

      This tells me he WOULD be more like Jeffords and Chafee if he thought he could get away with it, and still be elected.

  • robertthewriter

    “….a 51 member Senate with Mike Castle is a Senate where Mike Castle is the most important vote in the room. As Specter and others before him, that Senator will set the terms of policy debates, determining in advance what can succeed and fail. Those who advance the argument that a majority with Castle is better than being in the minority tend to place priorities on Senate committee chairmanships and staff ratios and lobbyist cash? a list which pales in comparison to the power they would wield as the broker for both sides.”

    Absolutely. A Senate balanced so close would let a RINO set its agenda. It’s that simple.

    • mboyle1988

      We already have Snowe and Collins still, plus we have Kirk coming from IL. I just don’t see how it makes sense to say you’d rather have 50 seats without Kirk than 51 seats with Kirk.

      • robertthewriter

        . . .as an end, but as a means to an end. Viewed from the perspective of a free-market/limited-government agenda, a RINO-dependent majority brings nothing to the table but obstacles. Just yesterday, RINO Voinovich sold out the party by “crossing the aisle” to invoke cloture on a Dem-sponsored business subsidy bill. This crap happens all the time now. It would have continued to happen all the time in the future had Chameleon Castle been added to the Senate GOP caucus.

        It will happen far, far less in the future, with the addition of a half-dozen constitutional conservatives to GOP ranks (often replacing RINOs and pragmatic careerists). And — most important — the O’Donnell/Tea Party triumph will terrorize the fewer remaining “moderates” like McCain, Graham, and Maine’s liberal Bobbsey Twins about “crossing the aisle.” Looking ahead to their own re-elections, they’ll now see Tea Party bulls-eye’s painted on their backs. I predict that they’ll all begin to start talking and voting like Barry Goldwater, for fear of losing their own cushy seats.

        O’Donnell’s win means “business as usual” is over. Kaput. Finished. GOP congressmen now know that they either move en masse to the right, no longer selling out their principles, or they’ll be finished. Tell me exactly how that isn’t a huge net plus for our cause?

  • Oz

    The question for me as a “Vote for the most conservative person who can win” since I got into politics is:

    Can you keep a majority if you carry this out? In the House, the answer is yes.

    In the Senate, can you make to 51, 55, 60 votes using this.

    While I have been a big supporter of Castle in this race based on hoping to win (NOTE: I will support the Republican in any case), I am willing to consider the philospophical change based on the general idea that what most independents want to see is smaller government leaving them alone.

    And I think that if we as conservatives are faithful to that call then we can (to answer my own question) get and keep independents behind us in the long run.

    Either way, it’s time to move on for November and vote for the Republicans that are on the ballot and take back what we can.

    As for Delaware in particular, the Tea Party and friends put O’Donnell on the ballot and now they will have to finance her.

    Oz

    Change Jar Conservative

  • nvrepub

    nt

  • cordpt

    was tolerating conservatives who didn’t behave conservatively when in power.

    It was tolerating bad conservatives who lacked integrity.

    • expatuae

      RINO’s, though a nuisance, were hardly THE problem in the recent past. They have never been too numerous anyway, not enough to swing the balance of power. And half the time, they do the right thing. After all, we do have Arlen Specter to thank for Clarence Thomas.

      Former “conservative” favorite Delay, his lobbyist favor factory, and their record (pre-Obama) deficit spending was what destroyed conservative Republican credibility and lead to 2006.

      It wasn’t RINO’s that brought farm subsidies back from the dead or jammed through Medicare expansion, or expanded the federal education bureaucracy. All lead by supposed conservatives.

      Letting them hijack the ’94 movement was the biggest mistake.

      • cordpt

        I’m surprised more people don’t’ see that.

        I suppose it’s because so many of them were staunch supporters of the DeLay’s branch of “conservatism”. It’s human nature, I guess.

        RINOs like Snowe&Co are just being used as the scapegoats. They weren’t the ones in leadership, they weren’t the ones responsible for the public to associate conservatism to irresponsible spending and cronyism because they don’t even claim to be conservatives.

        • aesthete

          I’m not keen on “moderates”, but they haven’t been the driers of the moribund and unconservative leanings of the current Republican Party.

  • JadedByPolitics

    the GOP establishment and I believe that the crucible that the Republican nominees have survived will now make them the WINNERS in their states!

    I thank God everyday for the internet and its ability to make these changes in the Republican Party possible. The whole listening to the Beltway gang tell US what WE should and shouldn’t support and having the Media Wing of the Democrat Party support what they tell US as fact are now LONG PAST GONE and they are not coming back, It was of course ignorance on OUR parts and a desire to want to help the Republicans to beat those dastardly Democrats that kept US electing, Specters and Bennetts, NEVER AGAIN!

    The TEA Party Movement along with its members ie”: WE The People are indeed SURGING this election cycle and Washington is never going to be the same again.

    Final note, it certainly has been fun to watch those “insiders” gnash their teeth and whine and cry as the Political Class DIES a most necessary death!

  • Right Reason

    n/t

  • daveoconnor

    “What was often thought but n’er so well expressed” to quote Carlyle.
    This post makes the point that RINO’s have been ruinous to the GOP and conservatism. If it takes a couple of election cycles to get it “right” then so be it and O’Donnell strikes me as a good candidate in any case.

  • swi2522

    the conservatives that are elected better not compromise with the libs and rinos
    stand on principle, i can take loosing if it occurs
    i think odonnell will win despite not being endorsed by nrsc and after this election its time to clean house at the republican party

  • southernpatriots

    It was the “old” line in the GOP which spent our tax money like they were Demonrat lite and then would not support Huckabee or Romney because they were too conservative but wanted McCain because he was a moderate and that was needed to defeat Obama and/or Hillary Clinton. How did that work out? We need conservatives who will support personal freedom and personal responsibility, who will work immediately to undo the Obamacare and other socialist government mandates. These are serious days and the future of this republic depends on what our near future elected officials do. There is no time to be accommodating or bipartisan (which actually means supporting the legislation and policies of the left and departing from those supported by most Americans). We must have elected representatives who immediately begin to bring us back to Constitutional government. May the sleeping giant of conservatives awaken fully and become involved. Keep up the great work Erick and thank you for a good piece Ben!

    • Ausonius

      Incumbency – depending on the politician – tends to lead to arrogance, complacency, and nest-feathering. The electorate can also become complacent, automatically goose-stepping toward the same name election after election. Or worse, the electorate can become dependent on the hand-outs from a career politician.

      Byrd and West Virginia show this blind, self-reinforcing feeding frenzy: until one realizes that despite over 50 years of pork barrel spending, West Virginia remains one of the worst states in the nation.

      Why expect things to change, if you have the same people in power? With MAObama we indeed have received change…for the worse! But it at least proves the point! :)

      I can agree that some politicians might have shown themselves to be good public servants for more than 2 or 3 terms. But Republicans are not immune to the virus of D.C.-itis, and need to be shown the door also, if they are more hindrance than help.

  • natlanthem

    The PEOPLE wanted O’Donnell … not Sarah Palin, not Tea Party Express, not ads, not some vast conservative network … the PEOPLE voted her in as the Republican candidate, and they came out in droves to do it.

    We are not here to please the loser, or to please the NRSC, or RedState or whiny hand wringers or excited tea partiers. We are here execute on the wishes of the Republican base, and it seems pretty clear that base wanted Christine O’Donnell.

    I am fine with NRSC, Karl Rove and the loser not supporting her. That says more about them than it does about her. But you would be foolish to send any money to the RNC/NRSC at this point, if you felt like backing candidates who have won the people and won their primary, but for whom they had to do it in spite of the GOP leadership. BUT, you are also foolish if you think these candidates can’t win without support … just as foolish as thinking they can’t win no matter the support.

    I sent money to the O’Donnell campaign last night, because it was the right thing to do and it was the smart thing to do. I wasn’t the only one, because it took a while to get through to the site … thousands were contributing as well.

    We need to win them ALL, guys. Get over it.

  • apen

    We are in a new age of communication where the old media can not propagandize in harmony and get away with it. All they had to do is lie in unison and have it be discovered to finally put people in charge of their own vetting via the net. It was a slow start while the old art of discerning truth was relearned and tuned in but as more and more people have arrived at that sweet spot where they trust what they can confirm it is a sweet victory not for politicians but for we the people. Now we can assume the power of the press and negate the interference of the highly paid production staff who can’t tell a story without trying to manipulate it somehow. We win when the truth can not be hidden.

  • kowalski

    OK folks before I post my diary about this later today or tomorrow, I want to emphasize the main point:

    The Tea Party is here to stay, and thank God it is. I was a doubter, myself. I had all the little worms gnawing away at me about whether it would help or hurt Republicans (most of those worms work for the MSM) but last night’s victory for O’Donnell combined with the statements from (unattributed) staffers at the NRSC tells me two things:

    1) The Tea Party is here to stay because it represents the people voting at the booth.

    2) If we want those candidates to do something other than win the primaries, now is the time to *fight* – and that means the NRSC too.

    I’m going to be donating $100 to the O’Donnell campaign next Monday. I’m also going to be lending my words here at Redstate to support her victory in the general.

    It is time for the State of Delaware to stop electing RINOs, and that is what last night’s primary victory signals, very clearly. Now we need to back it up, and I am going to do everything I can.

    • kowalski

      And yes, that was the 111th comment in this thread, because when my voice in favor of real change in Washington and also in the Republican Party gets started, it goes to 111. ;)

      All kidding aside, don’t listen to the naysayers and don’t believe the hype. It’s the NRSC that needs to change its tune, not the Tea Party. We’re going to have to persuade them by following through, and keeping up the pressure. In the end, they will do so if we do.

      When you send your contribution to the O’Donnell campaign, I’m suggesting you also send an email to the NRSC telling them you just did. Keep reminding them that we’re not interested in supporting RINOs in this election cycle, and they should start reevaluating what and who they’re fighting for.

      • The_Rebel

        And I think we should demand that those staffers at the NRSC who stated that they will not support O’Donnell be summarily released from their jobs.

        Idiots like that and Rove (and others) are what gives credence to those who say we are the stupid party.

        • kowalski

          Well, I can understand a little crying in your coffee but there’s also a moment when the NRSC has to take stock and reevaluate who it is supporting and why. O’Donnell won in the primary in DELAWARE because Republicans in Delaware are tired of the mealy-mouthed candidates.

          She won without any NRSC support and with a constant barrage of borderline sicko commentary by the MSM. And she won handily.

          Folks, if that’s not a true sign that everyone needs to start getting with the program, I don’t know what is.

          There’s a lot of good they can do to help her in the General and I hope they have a “moment of clarity” and start thinking about it. I know I don’t need one, I’m supporting her.

          I respect Karl Rove and I understand that he knows the numbers as well or better than a lot of people, but there is a point where the numbers can change with momentum and some concerted effort instead of grousing and backbiting, and that’s the transformation the NRSC and Bill Kristol, et. al., need to undergo.

          Stop pumping Kos’ negative narrative and start moving some chips onto her side of the table. I’m a relatively poor person and I’m going to be moving mine, so the fatcats at the NRSC should think about following suit.

          You know that when Harold Robinson *AND* Ruth Marcus of the Washington Post are on the wrong side of this, you’re on the right side. The NRSC needs to get behind the winner.

          Karl, are you listening? People without a lot of money to spare are putting it on the line to keep this momentum building. Get in the game, buddy.

          • kowalski

            Ever driven over the Delaware Memorial Bridge to get to Maryland, passing through what I call the “hump state?”

            That section of the roadway has been “under repair” or in various states of disrepair for the better part of 30 years. In fact the concrete and the railings in that area are more cracked and broken and beaten up than they were when I was 10 years old — and this is after 3 decades of “leadership” and numerous toll increases on the DMB. It’s still a disaster and it’s probably one of the most dangerous areas to drive in the region, after billions of dollars in tolls have been collected.

            Drive through it sometime. You can find the place where you scrawled your name as a leftist anarchist 15 years ago still there on the railing.

            Delaware is all about sucking money from people and then not spending it on what it was supposed to be spent on. That’s why Joe Biden has been their Senator for so long. It’s time that changed, definitively. And the people in Delaware agree with that.

          • The_Rebel

            the NRSC and other Republicans to do the same. She won without NRSC support so that shows she can do it. Scott Brown won here in MA without much support from them until the end. By then, he was already heading for the win column. I remember the Globe putting him 15 points down with a little over a week to go, and he ends up winning by 7. We can’t let the Washington Post start putting out phony polls like that in attempting to disillusion the O’Donnell voters.

  • http://liberty2076.squarespace.com Liberty2076

    It depends on how you define the problem.

    Is it a definite tactical win of every possible seat in the Senate this year, regardless of how much “Republican” can be said to be no different than “Democrat” because Republicans are, well, voting against the Republic in the Senate?

    Or is it about holding out a clear alternative for two more years, when the opportunity to do this AGAIN with another group of Senators appears?

    The objective is a 6-year-cycle, complete house-cleaning of the Senate to establish a clear majority that will support the Constitution not just against new tyranny, but against the tyranny already in place since the New Deal.

    I actually believe that the world is breaking in that direction and that the myth of Progressivism – that the way forward is toward archaic socialism that didn’t work – is actually not true. By the end of Reagan’s terms, scores of new constitutional republics had emerged across the world.

    Ask yourself – how much good did having these people in power do for us, in terms of making their agenda disastrously clear in a way that greatly hurt their brand. It’s not because they are Dems. It is because they are Progressives.

    America is disgorging this stuff – why would Republicans ask them to swallow more?

    If, worst case, we don’t get the Senate this time, let the Progressives show that they are in the way of this massive tidal wave for two more years, and in 2012 the amount of energy focused against Progressives up for reelection will match or exceed this year.

    Only in 2012, we won’t be picking at the edges of 50%, but cutting deep into filibuster territory. And in 2014 we cut again.

    liberty2076.squarespace.com

  • RedBeard

    Thank you.

  • Marcus_Traianus

    in my case for why you should post more at RS.

    Miss your voice of reason brother- in a manly sort of way, of course.

    A conservative is defined by his principals, which are unbending in their quiddity. That does not mean we are unwilling to work with others to solve problems and preserve our collective liberty. However, it does mean we will sagaciously explain the positive qualities of our approach without compromising the pillars of our philosophy.

    Adopting into our coalition those who believe in the converse for their occasional support or to build tenuous, fleeting majorities is a destructive capitulation. It destroys the pillars which undergird our basic premise for existence and erodes the public’s confidence in our reasoning. I can think of nothing more destructive to our country. One would have thought the past few years provided us a cardinal example on the failure of that approach.

  • mboyle1988

    1. Christine O’Donnell is too conservative to win in DE.
    2. She doesn’t even have enough money to make the election competitive.
    3. Even if such a conservative candidate could win in DE, Christine couldn’t because she has ethical issues comparable to Rangel.

    I am very very disappointed in Palin, DeMint etc. Supporting O’Donnell’s candidacy essentially eliminated GOP hopes of taking back the senate. Before last night, it was a 50/50 prospect. Today, it’s about a 10% chance.

    • eburke

      Either back Republicans everywhere or go elsewhere. If you can’t say something positive about a candidate, find a candidate that you can say something positive about.

      Period.

    • RedBeard

      What will you be doing now?

  • limbchicken

    Eric,

    You said it as accurately as it can be said:

    “It?s not about being right rather than winning, it?s about the definition of winning in the long term, which cannot be done with elected politicians who don?t believe in conservatism.

    In the end, it?s really that simple.”

    All these people who think any Republican is better than no Republican are as dumb and stupid as can be. What is happening in this country is about what is RIGHT, not necessarily what will win. The Dummocrats haven’t learned this yet and obviously a lot of the radio and TV talking heads haven’t either.

    Thanks for a great Red State today.

    • cordpt

      All these people who think any Republican is better than no Republican are as dumb and stupid as can be.

      I’d add that

      All these people who think any Conservative is better than no Conservative are as dumb and stupid as can be.

      • walter_hanson

        Those were the complaints thrown at Senator Norm Coleman. People were refusing to vote for him because of certain issues.

        I rather have Senator Coleman than Franken if you ask me. At least Senator Coleman wouldn’t have voted for Obama care.

        Walter Hanson
        Minneapolis, MN

        • cordpt

          I would have voted for Coleman and very easily.. Actually I donated to him to fund the recount effort.

          I think those suggestions are better used in the primaries. Vote for a conservative republican, don’t worry much about electability. On the other hand, be ready to vote for the non-conservative republican over a fake/bad/flawed conservative – because the later will tarnish the conservative brand a lot more if nominated.

  • Scope

    at this time. Does anyone know what is happening with that race? Have the votes all been counted?

  • Scope

    with such an important message for all of us conservatives. Never go back to the mistakes of the past- Amen.

    We the people are speaking out, and, as Rush likes to say, Conservatism works every time it’s tried. On to victory in November.

  • Return to Revolution

    the practical side being the chances of a win, which is the source of the controversy. Observe that O’Donnell won by more than double what polling predicted. Lets see what post primary polling says.

    Buckle up folks. This is going to be a wave even for those expecting a wave.

  • Charles Cianfrocca

    That was the gut level answer.

    On consideration: I am reminded of that phaenomenon most parents of a teenager are familiar with, where your kids are rebelling against you on principle – the principle that they can’t stand your confidence that you are ‘always right’. To be sure, they do know that you are; they just can’t stand YOU seeming to know it too.

    So they then do exactly the opposite of whatever you say, because nobody is right ALL the time. It’s an interesting bet. Though the cost is being wrong 99% of the time, the payoff is that, when the time does come that you aren’t right, they’re guaranteed to be on the other side from you, gloating.

    Don’t be those kids, people. When someone is right most of the time, the vast majority of the time – 99 freaking percent of the time- be their friend, not their enemy.

    • Charles Cianfrocca

      … this was supposed to be in reply to GopTiger’s “Just a thought”, saying “Even Sarah Palin, Rush, Hannity, and DeMint are wrong sometimes too.”

  • redneck_hippie
  • etexfisherman48

    As we saw with the health care bill because of the RINOS in the Republican Party the bill was allowed to go to the floor for debate. Had they the conservative principles needed the bill would have died in the senate by not allowing it to go to the floor for debate. And by doing so the rule changed that allowed only 51 votes to pass the monstrosity of a freedom destroyer. It takes 60 votes in the senate to pass a bill so had they stood firm with “what thus sayeth we the people” it would not have passed. On other words, these RINOS need to be fired pure and simple and these states wouldn’t be spending precious scarce resources to fight this socialist takeover of medicine that will inevitably be a lost cause.

    After Hillary care went down to defeat only a naive person would believe this time around the master planners that pull the strings wouldn’t be fully prepared to jump all hurdles this time around. Proof of which is no one cared to read the bill because they knew it was as good as done.

    They have left us in a difficult situation that demands we demand our state’s elected rebel and not enforce the new federal law. We must do this to preserve our freedoms or else we must accept the fact the communist have won out over our freedoms.

  • mnroadwarrior

    except when it finally truly mattered to the country:
    1832 – Defeated for state legislature
    1833 – Failed in business
    1834 – Elected to state legislature
    1838 – Defeated for Speaker of the Illinois House
    1846 – Elected to U.S.Congress
    1849 – Failed to get appointment to U.S.Land Office
    1855 – Defeated for U.S.Senate
    1858 – Defeated for U.S.Senate
    1860 – Elected President of the United States

    I point this out as an argument against the concern (which I believe is sincere) of comments about Christine O’Donnell’s previous losing efforts in running for office. Now, let’s be serious, I am NOT comparing her to Lincoln by any stretch of the imagination. What I am saying is:

    1.She may be flawed to some extent, but she is one heck of a lot better than Mike Castle representing Delaware in my U.S.Congress.
    2.For the times, they are achanging….(to paraphrase a famous native son!)

    Seriously, folks, 2008 was probably the toughest time in my life for me to vote: McCain for POTUS and Norm Coleman for my U.S.Senator. I did my duty and voted Republican, but I am concerned about doing permanent damage to my olefactory sense! Many of the comments above reflect what I have been feeling for a while now: I am sick of compromising, I want to live or die by the conservative sword. (And I am not a big believer in moral victories.) But again, as I stated above, I am starting to believe that times are changing, only this time for the good.

    I put a check in the mail today to the NRSC for a previously promised (a while back) contribution. It will be the last. I have gone to direct contributions and to supporting Jim DeMint’s PAC. Even though I have been unemployed for five months I will be contributing directly to O’Donnell’s campaign. In this race, she was the RIGHT choice. Supporting her is now the RIGHT thing to do.

    ————————————————————————————————————————-

    ?What we’ve got here is… failure to communicate. Some men you just can’t reach. So you get what we had here last week, which is the way he wants it… well, he gets it. I don’t like it any more than you men.? Captain, Road Prison 36: Cool Hand Luke

  • Pingback: GOOGLE'S ANNOUNCEMENT !

  • Pingback: kizi

  • Pingback: Obdulia Clara

  • Pingback: Agnus Stakelin

  • Pingback: Myles Stoudymire

  • Pingback: Nick Bouquet

  • Pingback: Burl Hinish

  • Pingback: Tessie Stoffa

  • Pingback: Jose Krul

  • Pingback: Mikel Asplin

  • Pingback: Otha Papich

  • Pingback: Ming Thomson

  • Pingback: Azucena Moya

  • Pingback: edu links

  • Pingback: Tommie Colley

  • Pingback: Tonda Blomstrand

  • Pingback: Sid Bogacki

  • Pingback: Man Davda

  • Pingback: Carter Guyton

  • Pingback: Dona Northcut

  • Pingback: Lonny Hassenger

  • Pingback: Quincy Seaburg

  • Pingback: Erick Kopps

  • Pingback: Dorian Landerman

  • Pingback: Taren Baize

  • Pingback: Elana Fantroy

  • Pingback: Emilio Malott

  • Pingback: Raymundo Try

  • Pingback: Owen Mccallough

  • Pingback: URL

  • Pingback: Eliseo Throgmorton

  • Pingback: Samatha Embelton

  • Pingback: Darrell Gillum

  • Pingback: Rosetta Toguchi

  • Pingback: Corey Heddlesten

  • Pingback: Darron Zarro

  • Pingback: Devon Tiemann

  • Pingback: Anisha Jarreau

  • Pingback: Jacinto Ramsby

  • Pingback: Ramiro Generous

  • Pingback: Julian Taibi

  • Pingback: Brooke Kahao

  • ihateliberals

    this wake-up call. It is time fo rthe GOP to get back to the basics and return to its conservative roots. conservatism is what put the GOP on the map and for some reason after Ronald Reagan left office and that RINO George Bush took office they have consistently moved to the left. GW Bush was one of the biggest RINO’s of recent history. Bush I gave us the Clinton’s and then Bush II gave us Obama and the far left congress. When is the GOP going to wake-up and figure out that it is the conservatives that gave them the power they seek. If they don’t get it very soon there may not be a GOP after the Mid-terms or the 2012 elections.