O'Donnell's Kinda-Kooky Lawsuit

Conservative or RINO? Glib, I know, but this doesn't seem the work of a principled conservative. It seems like someone who needs money.

O'Donnell... sought $6.95 million in damages. In a court complaint, she extensively detailed the "mental anguish" she suffered after allegedly being demoted and fired because of her gender. And, although she didn't have a bachelor's degree until this year, O'Donnell implied she was taking master's degree classes at Princeton University in 2003.
O'Donnell alleged in a July 1, 2005 complaint filed in district court that she had been demoted because ISI's conservative philosophy dictated that women must be subordinate to men. She claimed she was fired when she contacted the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission regarding her demotion. ISI told the Delaware News Journal that she had been "terminated for operating a for-profit business."

That would be running her PR business out of her ISI office.

Her own complaint went on to allege she was sort of crazy.

Miss O’Donnell was and is profoundly humiliated by this demotion of being asked to perform clerical and administrative tasks[!!! -- ace] after appearing on national television as a media and public relations expert and spokeswoman, for a man who was hired straight out of college as ISI’s receptionist and clerical assistant, and whom she had been asked to train previously [emphasis in original]. [...]

So, she was operating a side-business out of a non-profit's office, and she got demoted, and she was traumatized by having to do clerical work after appearing on national television, and it caused great anguish that her former subordinate was promoted above her. (Or she was demoted before him.)

Pay me, baby.

For at least six months after being fired, Miss O’Donnell suffered enormous pain, cried frequently at the sense of personal loss and failure caused by ISI, and at the sense of injustice, and could not sleep at night, often wide-awake, replaying the whole scene in her mind, until 5:30 am, and has suffered from understandable and resulting depression.

This is her own complaint, remember. Submitted by herself.

Miss O'Donnell's mother and sister both noticed and spontaneously told her at the time, prior to litigation, that she was differently [sic], and urged her to seek medical evaluation...

Again: From her own complaint.

It is worth pointing out that we just replaced a Castle-level RINO, Murkowski, with a true-red conservative, so we have a RINO slot open.

I would be willing to forgive this stuff and put on the pom-poms if I thought she could win. Okay, so maybe she's never before spoken at any great depth on fiscal issues, so maybe she doesn't really have any actual accomplishments apart from getting on national tv a few times on a freebie basis, so maybe she will file lawsuits if you ask her to do some light clerical work, and so maybe she's not really going to be threatening Antonin Scalia as a thought-leader anytime soon.

I support JD Hayworth and he was a bit of a dolt. But I figured that if he was a flaky dolt and needed the job that means he'd owe us and so would be a good Senator for us. Not a leader, but a good minion.

There is something to be said for that.

Assuming the flaky dolt you have in mind can actually become a Senator.

People get annoyed when we on the anti-O'Donnell side bring this stuff up. Surely you don't believe that if not for us mentioning it the Democrats wouldn't hear about it. Does it make me a traitorous jackass, as Mark Levin would apparently have it, if I help warn people about the derailing train they're about to board?

I know she can get the nomination -- I'd say that's pretty much the most likely outcome now. But can she actually do the job of getting elected?

It's worth noting that the Democrats will have twice as many Senators up for reelection in 2012 as we will, including many from red states where the Democrat really shouldn't have won in the first place.

Is this really the best place and best time to make our stand for a deep red Senate?

Posted by: Ace at 11:04 AM

Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1 Purge the RINOs now. We aren't going to get the Senate this time, anyway.

Posted by: Hell'sComingWithMe at September 13, 2010 11:06 AM (HdAS4)

2 All that flaky crazy shit just makes her a Democrat.

Posted by: kansas at September 13, 2010 11:08 AM (mka2b)

3 Who cares about this? No repugs are gonna win anyway because I have a new Twitter campaign that's going to get all my fans to vote democrat, we're goin' viral, you feel me? oh yeah.

Posted by: Justin Bieber at September 13, 2010 11:10 AM (YYkW9)

4 Dolt?
Shouldn't be a problem. Will fit right in.

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 13, 2010 11:10 AM (RkRxq)

5 If she wins the General, the activists can say "We told you so."
If she loses the General,the Castle folks can say "We told you so."
Either way, we will know which was the best approach.

Posted by: CJ at September 13, 2010 11:10 AM (9KqcB)

6 #1
We CAN if you fucking look at the polls and voter enthusiasm-we lead in the likely voter model in 10 states:
WA, CA,WI,CO,IL,IN,DE,AR,PA,ND
Thats 10. Thats the Senate.

But don't let facts get in the way of your mania.

Posted by: CAC at September 13, 2010 11:11 AM (lV4Fs)

7 Aiiiiyeee. Another O'Donnell thread.

Posted by: toby928 at September 13, 2010 11:11 AM (S5YRY)

8 So along with being crazy, she is a hyper sensitive, trouble making feminist as well?
Yeah this is a hill I want to die on. Good grief.

Posted by: Delta Smelt at September 13, 2010 11:11 AM (A0VTZ)

9 #8
BUT SHE IS THE CONSERVATIVE! SHE SAID SO! SHE WENT ON RADIO AND TV!
!!!!ELEVENTY!!!!

NOTHING ELSE MATTERS, EVEN IF SHES A HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE CANDIDATE AND WE ARE THROWING AWAY A SEAT!

YOU MUST BE A RINO YOU RINO LOVING RINOER LIBERAL! OMGZ ACEOFSPADES = DAILY KOS!
//
Pretty close to the reasoned responses we had last night, hunh?

Posted by: CAC at September 13, 2010 11:13 AM (lV4Fs)

10 Ace, you forgot the disclaimer again.

This ad was paid for by the Republican National Committee

Posted by: dick at September 13, 2010 11:13 AM (TroKZ)

11 Talking point powers active! Form of a circular firing squad!

Posted by: toby928 at September 13, 2010 11:13 AM (S5YRY)

12 Jim DeMint has come out in support of her.

Anyone hear from Alvin Greene lately?

Posted by: Jane D'oh at September 13, 2010 11:13 AM (UOM48)

13 According to the Club for Growth, in 07 and 08 Castle earned a 35% and 26% respectively. In every year, Castle has had the most liberal voting record of any member of the 175+ Republican caucus.

Specter earned a 44% in 08.

Can't wait for Castle's party switch presser with Obama!

Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 11:13 AM (h8R9p)

14 Every unemployed RINO is a victory. Scorched Earth. Rebuild on their dead bones.

Posted by: Hell'sComingWithMe at September 13, 2010 11:13 AM (HdAS4)

15 I think we are now at the point where people have gotten emotionally invested and will just react to stuff like this with even greater support of O'Donnell.

Because, like, she's being treated unfairly by the establishment and elites and cocktail-party circuit. Jeffrey Lord at the American Standard continues that grim tradition of spinning genuine problems as somehow being the creation of the ruling class who just wants to keep "good ordinary folks" down and all that stuff.

Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 11:14 AM (KUUXH)

16 She is not the hill to die on.
She isn't worth it.

Posted by: Ben at September 13, 2010 11:14 AM (wuv1c)

17 Eat A Dick Repugs!
and you wish your hair looked as good as mine.

Posted by: Justin Bieber at September 13, 2010 11:14 AM (YYkW9)

18

If Castle wins the primary I refuse to vote for him in the general.

Simple enough?

Posted by: Ed Anger at September 13, 2010 11:14 AM (7+pP9)

19 Castle's Kinda-Kooky Vote for Cap-and-Tax.

Posted by: Alternate AoS Headline at September 13, 2010 11:14 AM (z+/2Q)

20 might as well not run anyone in de.

Posted by: daddy 8 my eyes at September 13, 2010 11:14 AM (mrv0s)

21 If she were a Democrat, everyone on the right would be mocking her relentlessly.

Posted by: rob at September 13, 2010 11:14 AM (f/lPF)

22 This cocksucker Castle will be a Democrat by Thursday.

Posted by: Hell'sComingWithMe at September 13, 2010 11:15 AM (HdAS4)

23 dick, I'm sorry, are you suggesting the lawsuit and quoted language aren't real?

Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 11:15 AM (KUUXH)

24 I cannot wait for this to be over so we morons can start talking about boobies again.

Posted by: Mike Castle at September 13, 2010 11:15 AM (zgZzy)

25 Anyone hear from Alvin Greene lately?
Posted by: Jane D'oh at September 13, 2010 11:13 AM (UOM4

No, but I hear he endorsed her as well. Solidarity and all.

Posted by: Delta Smelt at September 13, 2010 11:15 AM (A0VTZ)

26 With the candidates they keep putting up, up there, maybe they should change their name to Delaunaware. Or maybe Delajustplainfuckingnuts.
I don't know... Just tryin to help.

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 13, 2010 11:15 AM (RkRxq)

27 Just pathetic: we have a chance to cast Barbara Boxer and Patty Murray out of the Senate, yet some "conservatives" want to send up a purportedly conservative doppelganger.

In a blue state, no less. Oh, Lord.

Cordially...

Posted by: Rick at September 13, 2010 11:16 AM (pT/Ao)

28 Is there EVER a hill worth fighting for?

Apparently not.

Posted by: tsj017 at September 13, 2010 11:16 AM (4YUWF)

29 So along with being crazy, she is a hyper sensitive, trouble making feminist as well?
Yeah this is a hill I want to die on. Good grief.
Posted by: Delta Smelt

Actually, we don't have much in the way of hills here.
In any event, I propose that we convert this here blog into an all-Delaware blog, at least for the primary! Let's make the fun we've been having last!

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 11:16 AM (R2fpr)

30 Lots of noobs chiming in with portents of doom around here.

Posted by: nickless at September 13, 2010 11:16 AM (MMC8r)

31 Bring on teh crazee!! At this point our federal overlords have gotten so fat that cutting the budget down to a reasonable size is not within the sphere of polite debate. Insanity is the only thing that can save us now.

Posted by: John Galt at September 13, 2010 11:16 AM (F/4zf)

32 No, but I hear he endorsed her as well. Solidarity and all.

I'd buy her action figure IYKWIMAYD.

Posted by: toby928 at September 13, 2010 11:16 AM (S5YRY)

33 @ 3 I have a new Twitter campaign that's going to get all my friends to vote democrat

Yep, Justin -- you'll have the 13-year old vote locked up for the Democrats. What? 13-year olds can't vote? No prob. We've got it well in hand.

Posted by: ACORN at September 13, 2010 11:17 AM (PZLW0)

34 Simple enough?
Posted by: Ed Anger at September 13, 2010 11:14 AM (7+pP9)
Yes very simple. You couldn't care less about who chairs Senate committees in 2011.

Posted by: Delta Smelt at September 13, 2010 11:17 AM (A0VTZ)

35 #15
That and EVERY POSSIBLE NEGATIVE against her must be invented by this giant anti-O'Donnell machine.

It's nauseating, like arguing with 9/11 truthers. They can't admit their premise absolutely stinks, but its not about it.

oh, and if its castles intention to flip parties, because, you know, he is SOOOOO going to do that, why didnt he do it when it would be enormously advantageous to him- 2006, 2008- after which he would win the Dem primary in a walk for Senate?

Specter did it when politically advantageous to him (he actually did it twice, once from D or R and then R to D)- Castle hasn't, once. Your argument is based on bias, fear, and a blind loyalty to an Edsel of a candidate, sorry.

Posted by: CAC at September 13, 2010 11:17 AM (lV4Fs)

36 We've spent a great deal of venom on Republicans who won't accept that they lost the primary and then run as something else. Are you "purity" folks willing to support the Republican over the Democrat, whatever the outcome of the primary? I am, but I hear a lot of "if Castle wins, I'll stay home" statements from your quarter. What say you?

Posted by: pep at September 13, 2010 11:17 AM (YXmuI)

37 She is a sub for Hannity people. That means she is dumber than Hannity.
do we really need that in the senate?

Posted by: Ben at September 13, 2010 11:18 AM (wuv1c)

38 I want some reparations...7 millions dollars...some hugs and kisses...and a lollipop....

Posted by: Christine O'Donnell channeling her inner Spaulding at September 13, 2010 11:18 AM (pLTLS)

39 It's like this:
We're lined up for an easy field goal to tie the game (elect a so-so Republican in a Blue state) and take our chances to win it (certain issues/votes)later.
Some players on the team want to go for a fake FG and the touchdown - win it all now.
If you try it, you better fucking make it. She better win the General.

Posted by: CJ at September 13, 2010 11:18 AM (9KqcB)

40 Yes, Ed Anger, I'm talking to you. If not, how are you better than Lisa Murkowski, Charlie Crist, or Arlen Spectre?

Posted by: pep at September 13, 2010 11:19 AM (YXmuI)

41 >>>Is there EVER a hill worth fighting for?

Yes. In case you didn't notice, most of the people (including myself) against O'Donnell also supported Rubio, Toomey, and Miller.

Incidentally, this is the wrong analogy. It is not a question of a hill being worth dying over, as that suggests it's the fighters who want O'Donnell.

In fact it's the people giving up who want O'Donnell. Everyone who supports O'Donnell quickly backs up their support with the statement that it doesn't matter if we win the seat or not and in fact maybe it would be better to NOT win it.

Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 11:19 AM (KUUXH)

42 She's toast.

I don't really care too much anyway. What will happen will happen, and it's Delaware voters who are going to decide the matter, not me. My only question was whether to give her some cash, and the answer is "I think not."

I'm all in favor of full red-blooded conservatives as candidates, but this nutjob? In six months, she'd be National Enquirer material, guaranteed.

Posted by: Wodeshed at September 13, 2010 11:19 AM (MFbfZ)

43 She is a sub for Hannity people. That means she is dumber than Hannity.
Not possible . . . and you're a great American!

Posted by: Sean Hannity at September 13, 2010 11:19 AM (zgZzy)

44 http://tinyurl.com/6qvsrq

Purity of essence baby!

Keep the senate in democrat hands until we have a tidal wave of pure, unadulterated conservatives in each seat.

100 senators or nothing!

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo ( NJConservative) at September 13, 2010 11:20 AM (LH6ir)

45 Delaunaware. Or maybe Delajustplainfuckingnuts.
It's Delawhere?
I'm listening to WDEL talk radio right now. The PPP poll is energizing the Castle voters, most of whom really were Delunaware that Castle was in trouble.

Posted by: kallisto at September 13, 2010 11:21 AM (+FkcS)

46 she may SUE YOU just for blogging about it.

Posted by: beelzebub's burp at September 13, 2010 11:21 AM (I+7Zv)

47 #43

I am so glad that I am not the only one who is irritated by that fucking moron and his "great American" shtick.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo ( NJConservative) at September 13, 2010 11:21 AM (LH6ir)

48 #36
Its not about winning in the real sense- hence the American-killing stupidity of a 30 DeMints ONLY against 70Dem senate.
its about "being right" and other bullshit abstractions.

Is it based out of a feeling of alienation against a party that has abandoned them?Yes, so the anger is understandable.
But doing nothing practical does nothing to stop Obama.

They don't care about winning this cycle. Since they don't care, their whining on an election is about as useful as Code Pink Protestors- loud, annoying, and useless.

Posted by: CAC at September 13, 2010 11:21 AM (lV4Fs)

49 When did Mark Levin become the Grand Inquisitor of the conservative movement?

Look, if William F. Buckley kicked you out of the movement, you were out. If Mark Levin tries to throw you out, you should just laugh and go back to what you were doing.

Posted by: DrewM. at September 13, 2010 11:21 AM (ycZcD)

50 O/T: I love this ad, who is this guy?

Posted by: curious at September 13, 2010 11:22 AM (p302b)

51 Castle garners an F from the NRA and Gun Owners of America. He hasn't earned anything but a 0, F, or F- from a pro 2nd amendment
group since the early 90's.

I wonder what his first bi-partisan vote presser with Obama will be about....how wonderful the new VAT Tax will be for America?

Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 11:22 AM (h8R9p)

52 34
Simple enough?

Posted by: Ed Anger at September 13, 2010 11:14 AM (7+pP9)
Yes very simple. You couldn't care less about who chairs Senate committees in 2011.

Posted by: Delta Smelt at September 13, 2010 11:17 AM (A0VTZ)

But losing is FUN!

Posted by: rob at September 13, 2010 11:22 AM (f/lPF)

53 I am so glad that I am not the only one who is irritated by that fucking moron and his "great American" shtick.
Don;t forget my trademark fake laugh! Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha.

Posted by: Sean Hannity at September 13, 2010 11:22 AM (zgZzy)

54 Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 11:14 AM (KUUXH)................................................................

You can make fun of it all you want, that's certainly some of what's going on here, but doubling down on the attacks isn't going to help Castle any, so your side just ends up looking as incompetent as you claim O'Donnell to be. And that's what's really going on here, the attacks made people look negatively on Castle. He had a ten point lead two weeks ago and the only thing that's occurred in the meantime is the smear campaign against O'Donnell. You guys want to blame the "true" conservative crowd, but the reality is, you're the ones who blew it.

Posted by: martha stewarts left nipple at September 13, 2010 11:22 AM (THrql)

55 I am not going to re-comment on this hit job from Neocon central.

In fact, this is my last comment on the Castle-O'Donnell race. I agree with the other site that posted all talk about it was banned because all it did was create flame wars.

The primary is tommorrow, positions ar hardened to where they are going to be. That is it.

Posted by: Vic at September 13, 2010 11:22 AM (/jbAw)

56 Castle is a 2nd Amendment Squish. Fuck him in the ass.

Posted by: Hell'sComingWithMe at September 13, 2010 11:23 AM (HdAS4)

57 Without mentioning the word "win", what reason is there to vote for Castle?

As I said in the last thread, Castle ran a shitty primary campaign.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at September 13, 2010 11:23 AM (FkKjr)

58 Liberals and tea baggers marching hand in hand trying to put the same name on the GOP !!

Posted by: beelzebub's burp at September 13, 2010 11:23 AM (I+7Zv)

59 Scorched earth, baby. Nice blow for unity.

Posted by: someone at September 13, 2010 11:23 AM (DfAwB)

60 She is a sub for Hannity people. That means she is dumber than Hannity.
do we really need that in the senate?
Wow you must not be A Great American.

Posted by: kallisto at September 13, 2010 11:23 AM (+FkcS)

61 she may SUE YOU just for blogging about it.
Posted by: beelzebub's burp at September 13, 2010 11:21 AM (I+7Zv)
No kidding. I'm sure we are all causing her distress, and only because she is a woman. A pioneer, fighting against the patriarchal rinos.

Posted by: Delta Smelt at September 13, 2010 11:23 AM (A0VTZ)

62 Ace, you really missed it last night.
The ODonnelltards were on a screaming rampage about how AoS is now a liberal site, because we don't accept a fraud wrapped in a Palin book cover.
We MUUUST be liberals or RINOs because we don't support a paranoid lunatic.

Nevermind we backed Miller, Buck, Angle, Toomey, Rubio, and on and on. None of that matters. Its like a very badly made Venn Diagram where you are either in the circle of madness or outside in the wilderness of evil.

Posted by: CAC at September 13, 2010 11:23 AM (lV4Fs)

63 Hoping for an invite on the cocktail circuit, Ace? I know you don't have any now, but a fellow can dream, can't he? Seems to have worked out well for Ms. Parker. Keep up the good work. I'm sure the Castle campaign/RNC establishment are making no overt promises, but anyone can recognize a reliable team player when they see one.

How was BlogCon? Make any good connections?

Posted by: countrydoc at September 13, 2010 11:23 AM (Fwb9h)

64 Is there EVER a hill worth fighting for?Apparently not.
Yes there is. Joe Miller was. Pat Toomey was in 2004 primary against specter.
There are so many reasons to not vote for O'Donnell
1.She can't win.
2. She is bat shit crazy
3. She is incompetent
4. She can't win.
5. She can't even handle minor scrutiny from the right
6. She can't win
7. Shet is bat shit crazy
8. She can't win.
So what if she would vote with conservatives 100% of the time, she can't vote jack when she isn't in the senate.
Delaware is a BLUE state. It is one of those states where we need to take what we can get.
To the people who say all or nothing, get ready for a lot of nothing.
She isn't worth it. She says she is a conservative, but does seem to live or act like one.

Posted by: Ben at September 13, 2010 11:24 AM (wuv1c)

65 O'Donnell wouldn't even stand out from the herd if she was in California, where being batshit crazy is a prime requisite for holding public office.

"...enormous pain, cried frequently at the sense of personal loss and
failure caused by ISI, and at the sense of injustice, and could not
sleep at night, often wide-awake, replaying the whole scene in her mind,
until 5:30 am, and has suffered from understandable and resulting
depression." Yep. Batshit crazy.

For some reason, Rash Fatblob, "Angry Kermit the Frog" Levin and the Divine Sarah are overlooking some serious strangeness just because O'Donnell is mouthing "conservative" principles. I doubt they -- especially Palin -- would be so tolerant if she had a penis.

That doesn't exactly send a good message to conservatives.

What next? Will she sue Congress when someone there makes her feel a "sense of personal loss and failure?"

I don't know a thing about Castle. But this would push me to vote for him, no matter what her stated positions on serious issues might be. Shit, it might even make me vote for the Democrat, which ranks high up on my list of personal no-nos.

I'm glad I'm not in Delaware.

Posted by: MrScribbler at September 13, 2010 11:24 AM (Ulu3i)

66 Sounds like she was mistreated, got really pissed, and came back swinging. What's not to like about that?

Posted by: emrys at September 13, 2010 11:24 AM (msqTW)

67 Delaware Chicks - seriously, they are NEVER a good idea. Been saying this since 1987.

Posted by: BlackOrchid at September 13, 2010 11:24 AM (SB0V2)

68 She is a sub for Hannity people. That means she is dumber than Hannity.
do we really need that in the senate?
Wow you must not be A Great American.
heh.
the thing that is killing me is i like Mark Levin and i think he is just all in on her because she is friends with Hannity.

Posted by: Ben at September 13, 2010 11:25 AM (wuv1c)

69 Full of win!
Homegirl is like the Al Sharpton of the conservative movement.
Pass.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at September 13, 2010 11:25 AM (pLTLS)

70 63 Hoping for an invite on the cocktail circuit, Ace? I know you don't have any now, but a fellow can dream, can't he? Seems to have worked out well for Ms. Parker. Keep up the good work. I'm sure the Castle campaign/RNC establishment are making no overt promises, but anyone can recognize a reliable team player when they see one.How was BlogCon? Make any good connections?
Wow, and I thought I was bitter.

Posted by: Meg McCain at September 13, 2010 11:25 AM (zgZzy)

71 Thank goodness. I was just thinking this Delaware crock-o-shit needed another good stir.

Posted by: Heorot at September 13, 2010 11:25 AM (Nq/UF)

72 Liberals and tea baggers marching hand in hand trying to put the same name on the GOP !!
Follow your parents example and STFU, dunce.

Posted by: toby928 at September 13, 2010 11:26 AM (S5YRY)

73 ODonnell will be the poster child of the MSM , if she steals this with her campaign of lies. They will probe all her bull that is clearly itemized here today,, and splash it all over to make fun of other, well qualified Pubs.

ODonnell is a poor candidate, she will run a bad campaign. She will start fights in other districts, and she will not turn out enough voters to win. DE will be Obama country... happy?

Posted by: martha coakely at September 13, 2010 11:26 AM (Ki7fm)

74 Christ, when "RINO" means anyone who disagrees with you, or anyone with less than a 110% "Conservative" voting record, isn't it time to admit that the RINO card is as maxed out as the race card. The people arguing for scorched earth and purity and "principle" are either children who have never really had to deal with the compromises the real world demands of all of us every day, or worse, children who think politics isn't the real world at all. I have been right "in principle" and my boss wrong on countless occasions, but since my creditors demand real money at the end of the month rather than self-serving testimonials to my greatness and integrity, I end up compromising. The same goes for every relationship with every woman I've ever had. Grow up.

Posted by: MikeinAmman at September 13, 2010 11:26 AM (elcpe)

75 Sounds like she was mistreated, got really pissed, and came back swinging. What's not to like about that?
yeah, she sounds like the girl who goes to a frat party, gets black out drunk, has sex with some guy, regrets it a week later after people make fun of her, and then reports a rape in an attempt to save face.
Sounds like a hell of a person.

Posted by: Ben at September 13, 2010 11:26 AM (wuv1c)

76 I enjoy being called a RINO for expressing the most modest of skepticisms of O'Donnell's ability to win. Apparently consideration of electoral reality means one is no longer a Republican (despite never having been one in the first place). Way to win friends and influence people.

Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 11:26 AM (+gX1+)

77 Dear Ms O'Donnell

In regards to your recent lawsuit:

Blow Me.

Yours Sincerely,

Gary.

Posted by: Gary LongSchlong President, ISI at September 13, 2010 11:26 AM (f3Tf1)

78 Aiiiiyeee. Another O'Donnell thread.

Could be worse. You a creationist, by chance?

Posted by: Johnson, Charles at September 13, 2010 11:27 AM (IhHdM)

79 Yeah, I'm convinced she's a real champion of conservatism who'll work hard for tort reform.

Posted by: Y-not at September 13, 2010 11:27 AM (osFsP)

80

40
Yes, Ed Anger, I'm talking to you. If not, how are you better than Lisa Murkowski, Charlie Crist, or Arlen Spectre?

Posted by: pep at September 13, 2010 11:19 AM (YXmuI)
Heh. I'm not voting for O'Donnell either. I don't live in Delaware.

Posted by: Ed Anger at September 13, 2010 11:27 AM (7+pP9)

81 Yeah MikeinAmman!

Posted by: martha coakely at September 13, 2010 11:27 AM (Ki7fm)

82 yeah, she sounds like the girl who goes to a frat party, gets black out drunk, has sex with some guy, regrets it a week later after people make fun of her, and then reports a rape in an attempt to save face.

I love girls like dat!

Posted by: Michael Vick at September 13, 2010 11:27 AM (zgZzy)

83 RINO hit job. Wow, Mike Castle's people are seeing the same polls we saw last night--or worse. And they are doing what scared RINOs do when they see the ship is sinking.

Posted by: louis tully at September 13, 2010 11:27 AM (K/USr)

84 this guy Ace is showing me something. Wonder if he is committed for the '12 elections?

Posted by: Lindsey Graham at September 13, 2010 11:28 AM (K/USr)

85 77 Dear Ms O'Donnell In regards to your recent lawsuit: Blow Me. Yours Sincerely, Gary.

But first you will blow ME!

Posted by: Mel Gibson at September 13, 2010 11:28 AM (zgZzy)

86 You can make fun of it all you want, that's certainly some of what's going on here, but doubling down on the attacks isn't going to help Castle any, so your side just ends up looking as incompetent as you claim O'Donnell to be. And that's what's really going on here, the attacks made people look negatively on Castle. He had a ten point lead two weeks ago and the only thing that's occurred in the meantime is the smear campaign against O'Donnell. You guys want to blame the "true" conservative crowd, but the reality is, you're the ones who blew it.
Posted by: martha stewarts left nipple

This. It's not like she's gotten better. it's not like she's put out more signs.Those have actually been dissappearing. Though Castle signs just started appearing last week. I just saw the first mailer this weekend. But she's now getting endorsements, and there's been a load of negative ads and attention.
This is looking here like a party that was trying to hold a coronation and was interrupted. This isn't new for the Delaware GOP; it's actually the norm in this little hole. But the national attitude this year is very different.
What isn't different is the general electorate here.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 11:28 AM (R2fpr)

87
As to the lawsuit, you're a day late and a dollar short on reporting on it, Ace.

And to the rest of you ladies, she's a head in the polls and will win the primary. Fkn deal with it already.

Posted by: Moi at September 13, 2010 11:28 AM (Ez4Ql)

88 It seems to be ever the case that when we need a sensible non-kooky common sense conservative to run, we get these peculiar people stepping up. Hayworth and O'donnell being just the latest examples. Maybe it's because kooky people are deluded enough to think they can win while a rational person knows better than to try.

Posted by: Diogeneslamp at September 13, 2010 11:29 AM (eVJ7T)

89 Hoping for an invite on the cocktail circuit, Ace?
Posted by: countrydoc at September 13, 2010 11:23 AM (Fwb9h)

This should get a name like Goodwin's Law and people whom employ it should automatically be declared the loser of the argument.

Posted by: DrewM. at September 13, 2010 11:29 AM (ycZcD)

90 I enjoy being called a RINO for expressing the most modest of skepticisms of O'Donnell's ability to win. Apparently consideration of electoral reality means one is no longer a Republican (despite never having been one in the first place). Way to win friends and influence people.
Those kind of questions are the firstsymptoms of RINOism.

I am as right wing as almost anyone here, but this scrunt can't win. She is a terrible candidate. Take ideology out of it for a second and just consider electability.

Posted by: Ben at September 13, 2010 11:29 AM (wuv1c)

91 Sounds like she was mistreated demoted, got really pissed had her eggshell-thin skin abrased, and came back swinging curled into a fetal position and filed a frivolous lawsuit. What's not to like about that?

Posted by: angler at September 13, 2010 11:29 AM (bCDmD)

92 This ODonnell person sounds like some of the gals Bill spends time with...

Posted by: hillary Clinton at September 13, 2010 11:30 AM (Ki7fm)

93 I've watched RINOS and done "compromise". It means bend over and we'll let you make payments on the K-Y. I want them all out of Government. Every last fucking one of them.

Posted by: Hell'sComingWithMe at September 13, 2010 11:30 AM (HdAS4)

94 Is this really the best place and best time to make our stand for a deep
red Senate?

Shock and awe is the only way to stop a totalitarian Washington.

Posted by: Valiant at September 13, 2010 11:30 AM (UKSRV)

95 19 If you have conservative principles, the primary is EXACTLY where you stand up for them. IF you lose, THEN you worry about holding your nose and voting for the winner.

If you don't believe you can win with a conservative message in a state suffering from its highest employment in decades, then you might as well stop calling yourself conservative.

Not unlike the CA GOP.

Posted by: slumming white liberal at September 13, 2010 11:30 AM (FwaRQ)

96 Well except I recall that Miller wasn't that sure a thing, by your lights, and as the NRSC and the Murkowski campaign contined to try to fix the election, you were pining for the fjords, nowwhat you have to understand about RINOs and the the DIABLOs subset, is that they don't care about principles, they will sign on to some garbage like McCain/Feingold or the DSCLOSE act, because it sounds good, the consequences of such a decision are never considered.

Posted by: dr. lizardo at September 13, 2010 11:30 AM (bz+co)

97 There is an election.
You have Smeegal, and a literal swollen bag of rotten meat and Del Taco diarrhea. But but but that giant bag is wrapped with the word conservative.

We don't think Castle is great, we dont even particularly LIKE Castle. But to rally around an absolute disaster and to call it anything but what it is...lunacy.

But keep calling us all RINOs or part of the machine. This isn't They Live, your sunglasses are making you see things because of the bad acid.

Posted by: CAC at September 13, 2010 11:30 AM (lV4Fs)

98 I see this campaign against O'Donnell (the same accusations, by everyone at once) as analogous to the campaign against Boehner (the same accusations, by everyone at once).

The word went out from on high: PROTECT OUR GUY.

Posted by: tsj017 at September 13, 2010 11:31 AM (4YUWF)

99 CRAP. I have GOT to remember to turn off my sockpuppets.

Posted by: richard mcenroe at September 13, 2010 11:31 AM (FwaRQ)

100 yeah, she sounds like the girl who goes to a frat party, gets black out
drunk, has sex with some guy, regrets it a week later after people make
fun of her, and then reports a rape in an attempt to save face.

So now you're calling her a lying whore. Yes, rise above the fray. Your sterling example shames us all.

Posted by: countrydoc at September 13, 2010 11:31 AM (Fwb9h)

101 17
"Eat A Dick Repugs!

and you wish your hair looked as good as mine."

Stuff it punk. You've got squat.

As for the rest of you....

Suck it, bitches.

Posted by: Blago's Admirable Do at September 13, 2010 11:31 AM (NqKeT)

102 I see this campaign against O'Donnell (the same accusations, by everyone at once) as analogous to the campaign against Boehner (the same accusations, by everyone at once).The word went out from on high: PROTECT OUR GUY.
or maybe, just maybe, it is a contentious race, and major issue in the party, therefore all republican leaning blogs are talking about it.
p.s. I hear the jews got phone calls to leave the message board before this hit.

Posted by: Ben at September 13, 2010 11:32 AM (wuv1c)

103 And to the rest of you ladies, she's a head in the polls and will win the primary. Fkn deal with it already.
Posted by: Moi at September 13, 2010 11:28 AM (Ez4Ql)
Oh I'm dealing with it. Preparing for Senator Coons!

Posted by: Delta Smelt at September 13, 2010 11:32 AM (A0VTZ)

104 Is filing a lawsuit for inappropriately using your employers resources a conservative thing to do, I wonder?

Does expressing that thought make me a RINO?

Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 11:32 AM (+gX1+)

105 So now you're calling her a lying whore.
Well whores get paid. She was looking to get paid, right? Seems apt to me.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at September 13, 2010 11:32 AM (pLTLS)

106 16

She is not the hill to die on.
She isn't worth it.
Posted by: Ben at September 13, 2010 11:14 AM (wuv1c)
Maybe, maybe not, but I just sent her $20.
Dear GOP, quit handing us shitbirds like Mike Castle and we can stop having these kinds of discussions. I'll take my chances, but Castle will still be unemployed.

Posted by: Jim in San Diego at September 13, 2010 11:32 AM (oIp16)

107 Castle is so darn SMART SANE that he scored in the 20's in 05, 07, and 08, with the American Conservative Union.

Can't wait till his presser with Obama touting the passage of a carbon tax!

Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 11:32 AM (h8R9p)

108 I agree that this will hurt Castle, if he wins. You have already weaken him as a candidate, getting his turnout down in the general..

Happy?

ODonnell is not going to win.
She is not a closer.

Posted by: ford sells volts at September 13, 2010 11:33 AM (Ki7fm)

109

I'm glad the primary is tomorrow. I like watching peoples' heads asplode as much as the next guy but this is getting tedious.

Posted by: Ed Anger at September 13, 2010 11:33 AM (7+pP9)

110 Shock and awe is the only way to stop a totalitarian Washington.
Posted by: Valiant at September 13, 2010 11:30 AM (UKSRV)

Yeah, letting the Democrats win a seat they had written off that will really show those bastards who is boss!

Of course, who those bastards actually are isn't quite clear but the hell with clarity, we got some anger to vent!

Posted by: DrewM. at September 13, 2010 11:33 AM (ycZcD)

111 There is an election. You have Smeegal, and a literal swollen bag of rotten meat and Del Taco diarrhea. But but but that giant bag is wrapped with the word conservative. We don't think Castle is great, we dont even particularly LIKE Castle. But to rally around an absolute disaster and to call it anything but what it is...lunacy. But keep calling us all RINOs or part of the machine. This isn't They Live, your sunglasses are making you see things because of the bad acid.
EXACTLY!
I don't care for Castle, but Castle winning is better than Coons winning.
And she isn't a freaking conservative just because she calls herself a conservative.

Posted by: Ben at September 13, 2010 11:34 AM (wuv1c)

112 Diogeneslamp - We do sometimes get a good candidate anyway though - See Miller in Alaska. The problem is that a lot of people we'd like to see run against say, McCain, won't because even in a good cycle its not a sure thing that they can win.

Posted by: Ryan Frank at September 13, 2010 11:34 AM (818kI)

113 As you said about ODonnell before.Way to keep it classy.

Posted by: polynikes at September 13, 2010 11:30 AM (m2CN7)
Crazy is relevant is it not? Stability, cool under fire, and all the rest translate into selling well with voters and winning elections.
Notice how Allen Keyes has never won anything?

Posted by: Delta Smelt at September 13, 2010 11:34 AM (A0VTZ)

114 I just want to know how MrWizard in Group1 got 9 of 11 yesterday.

Posted by: toby928 at September 13, 2010 11:34 AM (S5YRY)

115 Good to see you all show your RINO colors when the going gets ugly. You are the problem. RINOs must be punished and eliminated.

Posted by: Hell'sComingWithMe at September 13, 2010 11:34 AM (HdAS4)

116 Oh look! I get to be Senate Majority Leader for two more years! Thank you Purity Republicans!

Posted by: Nancy Pelosi at September 13, 2010 11:34 AM (8AyDn)

117 The only real question is do you move to support the winner of the primary? RINO or nutbag, is that shit over once it becomes a Democrat who might keep Harry Reid calling the shots, or the candidate you didn't like in the primary? Do you want the Dems or the GOP controlling the Judiciary committee (which will have a lot more ramifications than dipshit Mike Castle or squirrel-bait O'Donnell as 1% of the Senate)?

Posted by: nickless at September 13, 2010 11:35 AM (MMC8r)

118 Why are we spending so much time on this one race? What is it about this particular race that's captured the blogger's collective attention? There are 33 senate races this year. We're spending about half our time on one. PRIMARY.
The world may never know.

Posted by: Truman North at September 13, 2010 11:35 AM (HLGCA)

119 She is not a closer.
PUT THAT COFFEE DOWN! Coffee is for closers!

Posted by: Alec Baldwin at September 13, 2010 11:35 AM (zgZzy)

120 Delaware Chicks - seriously, they are NEVER a good idea. Been saying this since 1987.
OH SNAP - orchid, you went there.
I got fired from a job once. I called about ten of my friends for about six hours telling them all my sad tale. Then I applied for unemployment. I hung out doing fun things for a week or two, then I went and got another job.
I guess that makes me a RINO.

Posted by: kallisto at September 13, 2010 11:35 AM (+FkcS)

121 She'll be another Michael Steele if she gets in. Imagine the hilarity that will ensue if she doesn't get the committee assignment she wants from the GOP leadership and she pulls another claim of gender discrimination.

Guys, she broke her employer's rules and paid the consequences. Then, she used an attack against her conservative employer that played straight into the liberal meme of conservatives being sexist pigs.

She'll be a terrific senator.

Posted by: Y-not at September 13, 2010 11:35 AM (osFsP)

122 Anyone donating a dime to ODonnell should match it with a donation to a candidate who ACTUALLY HAS A SHOT OF WINNING- like Angle, Buck, and others.

I am more irritated with just the sheer level of waste to prop this nutcase up and energy blown to help her in the primary- money and energy better served to help Angle in Nevada.

Posted by: CAC at September 13, 2010 11:35 AM (lV4Fs)

123 I wouldn't support anyone who was/is in favor of Cap n Trade. Coming from a major coal producing state, it's a wallet/pocketbook issue, no matter how bad the challenger.

Posted by: Downsized Upscale at September 13, 2010 11:35 AM (IhHdM)

124 Jim in San Diego?? You haven't had a conservative there in how long??? CA is so blue it is midnight blue, and you want to tell other states how to vote?? Clean up CA...is Whitman one of those nasty RINO'S too??

I guess you want the rest of us to enjoy Boxer some more, and give the D's another vote in DE?

Stupid.

Posted by: ford sells volts at September 13, 2010 11:36 AM (Ki7fm)

125 My name? My name is Fuck You.

Posted by: Hell'sComingWithMe at September 13, 2010 11:36 AM (HdAS4)

126 @113 letting the Democrats win a seat they had written off

If O'Donnell wins they'll have to spend money in DE to keep the seat... money that won't be spent elsewhere in other tighter races.

Posted by: Gran at September 13, 2010 11:36 AM (xmjMj)

127 Oh look! I get to be Senate Majority Leader for two more years! Thank you Purity Republicans!

Posted by: Nancy Pelosi at September 13, 2010 11:34 AM (8AyDn)
Wrong chamber, Nan.

Posted by: angler at September 13, 2010 11:36 AM (bCDmD)

128 Good lord why would you want to give the dems ammo with this post?

Posted by: ryukyu at September 13, 2010 11:36 AM (MOHSR)

129 i like Mark Levin and i think he is just all in on her because she is friends with Hannity.

Posted by: Ben at September 13, 2010 11:25 AM

Ding, ding, ding. ^^^This^^^.

I too am refraining from any more comments on a race in a state I don't know between two candidates I don't know.

When the whole things devolves into a pissing match in which the ideological purists can only be snarky and hurl accusations of RINO-ness instead of supporting their candidate with facts that refute numerous public displays of nuttiness, there's no purpose.

Apparently, Delaware will be a loss for us no matter what happens.

Posted by: MrScribbler at September 13, 2010 11:36 AM (Ulu3i)

130 This should get a name like Goodwin's Law and people whom employ it should automatically be declared the loser of the argument.

I think not. He has already admitted that he has pulled this kind of stunt before for exactly the same reasons. Normal people call that "using past experience to judge present circumstances".

Posted by: countrydoc at September 13, 2010 11:36 AM (Fwb9h)

131 119
Oh look! I get to be Senate Majority Leader for two more years! Thank you Purity Republicans!

Posted by: Nancy Pelosi at September 13, 2010 11:34 AM (8AyDn)

My God, it's full of dumb!

Posted by: Dave Bowman's last transmission at September 13, 2010 11:36 AM (FkKjr)

132 Is filing a lawsuit for inappropriately using your employers resources a conservative thing to do, I wonder?Does expressing that thought make me a RINO?
Yes, yes it does. Please turn in your card and go join those of us who want a senate majority in the corner.

Posted by: Ben at September 13, 2010 11:37 AM (wuv1c)

133 90 Hoping for an invite on the cocktail circuit, Ace?Posted by: countrydoc at September 13, 2010 11:23 AM (Fwb9h) This should get a name like Goodwin's Law and people whom employ it should automatically be declared the loser of the argument.
Posted by: DrewM. at September 13, 2010 11:29 AM (ycZcD)
GO FUCK YOURSELF DREW.
From some asshole (that would be YOU Drew) that throws around the accusation of "BIGOT" for anyone that's not on the gay marriage bandwagon, you have absolutely no room to talk. Assholes like you are part of the problem and not the solution.

Posted by: Jim in San Diego at September 13, 2010 11:37 AM (oIp16)

134 Aside from her most generic of pronouncements, has anyone demonstrated any sort of conservative bona fides in favor of O'Donnell? I keep hearing that she's more conservative, and she probably is... but prove it.

Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 11:38 AM (+gX1+)

135 123. lol kallisto, I used to cruise the Pike and stare at roaches in the Charcoal Pit - I know from whence I speak.

She's a CLASSIC example of a Delaware Chick I'm afraid. And there are a lot of mens here making fools of themselves over her . . .

Posted by: BlackOrchid at September 13, 2010 11:38 AM (SB0V2)

136 polynikes -

As pointed out, we don't have to insinuate that she is crazy, she basically claimed it herself as part of a lawsuit.

Either

A) She's telling the truth, and she is actually disturbed (hey, maybe she's better now)

or (more likely in my mind)

B) She lied in order to get a payout in a lawsuit - I seem to recall tort reform is usually near and dear to conservatives hearts to prevent exact this kind of thing.

Posted by: Ryan Frank at September 13, 2010 11:38 AM (YuibW)

137 128 My name? My name is Fuck You.
You see this watch? This watch cost more than Christine O'Donnell's house!

Posted by: Alec Baldwin at September 13, 2010 11:38 AM (zgZzy)

138 ....Are you "purity" folks willing to support the Republican over the Democrat, whatever the outcome of the primary?
...Yes, Ed Anger, I'm talking to you. If not, how are you better than Lisa Murkowski, Charlie Crist, or Arlen Spectre?

Heh. I'm not voting for O'Donnell either. I don't live in Delaware.

So then, no.

Posted by: pep at September 13, 2010 11:38 AM (YXmuI)

139 This situation is, I would like to point out, Castle's fault. If this tard hadn't gone into this thinking it was a coronation we wouldn't be here.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at September 13, 2010 11:39 AM (FkKjr)

140 If Castle is too much of a RINO, so is Fiorina, Rossi, and Kirk.
Who needs 4 seats in a legislative body made up of 100?

Posted by: Ben at September 13, 2010 11:39 AM (wuv1c)

141 I guess you want the rest of us to enjoy Boxer some more, and give the D's another vote in DE? Stupid.
Posted by: ford sells volts at September 13, 2010 11:36 AM (Ki7fm)
So I can only talk if I live in a state that is red enough? Get bent. I'll send money to whomever I want.

Posted by: Jim in San Diego at September 13, 2010 11:39 AM (oIp16)

142 My name? My name is Fuck You.

Posted by: Hell'sComingWithMe at September 13, 2010 11:36 AM (HdAS4)
Nice to meet you, Fuck You. You know, Fuck You, you have an interesting perspective. As a matter of fact, Fuck You, when ever I hear as sage and balanced and well-expressed position as yours from here on in, I will have Fuck You come to mind. Thank you, Fuck You.

Posted by: nickless at September 13, 2010 11:40 AM (MMC8r)

143 How many threads will there be about this race? Seriously, this kind of stuff exposes the republican party for what it is. But that's ok, you and the lib/dems just keep creating more independents.

Posted by: curious at September 13, 2010 11:40 AM (p302b)

144 Is this really the best place and best time to make our stand for a deep
red Senate?

I thought the primary was exactly where we do this. Remember? Argue it out in the primary and get together in the general. That's what we were told was a good strategy, right here on this blog.

I look forward to Ace Co.'s hearty endorsement for her after she wins the primary.

Posted by: countrydoc at September 13, 2010 11:40 AM (Fwb9h)

145 Aside from her most generic of pronouncements, has anyone demonstrated any sort of conservative bona fides in favor of O'Donnell? I keep hearing that she's more conservative, and she probably is... but prove it.
+1000000000
Her saying she is a conservative is like when Democrats say they love america.
we just have to take their word for it, no matter how much evidence leads us to believe otherwise.

Posted by: Ben at September 13, 2010 11:41 AM (wuv1c)

146 Get bent. I'll send money to whomever I want.
Jim, can you send me a few bucks? Philly detectives make crap.

Posted by: Wyatt Earp at September 13, 2010 11:41 AM (zgZzy)

147 watching patiently

Posted by: Banhammer at September 13, 2010 11:41 AM (7+pP9)

148 I thought the primary was exactly where we do this. Remember? Argue it out in the primary and get together in the general. That's what we were told was a good strategy, right here on this blog.
Posted by: countrydoc at September 13, 2010 11:40 AM (Fwb9h)
That

Posted by: Jim in San Diego at September 13, 2010 11:41 AM (oIp16)

149 If O'Donnell wins they'll have to spend money in DE to keep the seat...
money that won't be spent elsewhere in other tighter races.
Posted by: Gran at September 13, 2010 11:36 AM (xmjMj)

No they won't.

It will be a safe Democratic pick up. It will be as easy for them to win against her as it would have been for Castle to win before all of this.

Well played guys. Well played.

Posted by: DrewM. at September 13, 2010 11:42 AM (ycZcD)

150 Hoping for an invite on the cocktail circuit, Ace?Posted by: countrydoc at September 13, 2010 11:23 AM (Fwb9h) This should get a name like Goodwin's Law and people whom employ it should automatically be declared the loser of the argument.
Posted by: DrewM. at September 13, 2010 11:29 AM (ycZcD
TOTO Tactic: The Only True Outsider

Posted by: CJ at September 13, 2010 11:42 AM (9KqcB)

151 O'Donnell implied she was taking master's degree classes at Princeton University in 2003.

I wouldn't know her specifics. Was she taking ANY classes at Princeton?

There ARE instances when a specific "graduate course" permits seniors to take when provided with the instructors' permission.

Posted by: maverick muse at September 13, 2010 11:42 AM (H+LJc)

152 150
Get bent. I'll send money to whomever I want.
Jim, can you send me a few bucks? Philly detectives make crap.
Posted by: Wyatt Earp at September 13, 2010 11:41 AM (zgZzy)
Your site is down.

Posted by: Jim in San Diego at September 13, 2010 11:42 AM (oIp16)

153 Why are we spending so much time on this one race? What is it about this particular race that's captured the blogger's collective attention? There are 33 senate races this year. We're spending about half our time on one. PRIMARY.
The world may never know.
Posted by: Truman North

No. Sales. Tax. That's why.
Seriously, if O'Donnell wins, this race becomes one of the ones that the Dems will try to defend. They may not defend everywhere, and they may be forced to cover or abandon incumbents, but this offers them one of thebest chances for retaining the seat.
1. Numerical voter registration advantage
2. Higher than national average favorability rating for Obama
3. People here, including some Republicans, actually like Biden.
At the very least, they'll have his sorry but hanging here, abusing his office. She would need big money, heavy hitters and a decent organization to hope to pull this off. And the local GOP here would have to do a 180 to make anything happen.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 11:42 AM (R2fpr)

154
Kinda-kinky lawsuit... hmm... let me read on... wait a minute.. not another Delaware thread... runnn!

Posted by: IreneFingIrene at September 13, 2010 11:43 AM (JNqU9)

155 Posted by: Wyatt Earp at September 13, 2010 11:41 AM (zgZzy)

Detectives in NY make mega bucks.

Posted by: curious at September 13, 2010 11:43 AM (p302b)

156 Christ on a crutch, just end it already. There are bigger things to worry about.

Posted by: joncelli at September 13, 2010 11:43 AM (RD7QR)

157 You are right Jim, waste you money wherever you want, but Ace takes donations as well....just sayin'

I can see that spending your money in CA would be a waste of campaign investment...so go ahead throw so money at Ms. ODonnell....she likes money according to her lawsuit.

Posted by: ford sells volts at September 13, 2010 11:44 AM (Ki7fm)

158 161 You are right Jim, waste you money wherever you want, but Ace takes donations as well....just sayin' I can see that spending your money in CA would be a waste of campaign investment...so go ahead throw so money at Ms. ODonnell....she likes money according to her lawsuit.
Posted by: ford sells volts at September 13, 2010 11:44 AM (Ki7fm)
I have sent Ace money too, ask him. Now when are you going to stuff yourself?

Posted by: Jim in San Diego at September 13, 2010 11:45 AM (oIp16)

159 In what world does getting demoted, then fired, getting depressed about it for six months, and then filing a wrongful termination lawsuit make one a better conservative?

In what world does claiming to win counties that you didn't actually win make you a conservative?

Also, she filed the lawsuit herself? What's that old axiom about a lawyer who represents himself at trial?

Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 11:45 AM (+gX1+)

160 Detectives in NY make mega bucks.
Oh thanks. Rub it in! Our commish put a stop to all investigative OT. Because we're the ones who out Philly in the hole, obviously. (And Jim, I was kidding. Don't send money.)

Posted by: Wyatt Earp at September 13, 2010 11:45 AM (zgZzy)

161 gonna be alot of folks scratching at the fleas they get from lying down with this dog ... she can't win the general with her crazy baggage ... the Dems will tear her apart from Wed til the election ... the purity police have a scalp and thats all that matters ...
after the Miller win every pundit/wanna be "leader" has been looking for another longshot to back and they found it in O'Donnell ...
Pundits will not lead this revolution no matter what they say ... the Tea Party movement doesn't want or need leaders, they are doing fine without them ...
This movement started with one non political commentatoron TV making a point and has grown exponentially since then ... the pundits trying to become the leaders of this movement are simply trying to get in front of the power train they think will come after Nov ... they are wrong ... you can't lead this movement ...
Riehl and Levin are simply trying to gain prestige as the backers of a longshot winner ... the only problem is that winning a primary is not winning the general and winning the general is all that counts ...
we can have a dozen RINO's in the Senate ... if the GOP takes back the Senate then they won't be voting on liberal bills they will be voting on conservative ones and that is what counts ...
I've noticed that many RINO's will vote Yes with Dems on Dem bills but also will will vote Yes with the GOP on GOP bills ...

Posted by: Jeff at September 13, 2010 11:45 AM (A3tpD)

162 Jim, can you send me a few bucks? Philly detectives make crap.
Posted by: Wyatt Earp at September 13, 2010 11:41 AM (zgZzy)
A thankless job if there ever was one. God love you.

Posted by: kallisto at September 13, 2010 11:45 AM (+FkcS)

163 Why in the hell have a primary then. You sound like a whiney bitch
because your selected guy is having a tough time convincing
conservatives to support him.
Posted by: polynikes at September 13, 2010 11:38 AM (m2CN7)

Well, he ain't my guy because I don't like him.

Still, I don't think that gives a kook like O'Donnell or a guy like Levin to lie and/or (to be more charitable) repeatedly misstate his record to make him look even worse than he is.

Getting conservatives to support Castle will be a hell of a lot easier to do than getting most non-conservatives to vote for O'Donnell in November. I know there are folks who don't like to admit this but...conservative base voters aren't a majority of the general electorate.

Posted by: DrewM. at September 13, 2010 11:46 AM (ycZcD)

164 O'Donnell worked for Pakistan's ISI secret service?

You'd have thought that "ISI's conservative philosophy dictated that women must be subordinate to men," would have been a given when she signed up.

Posted by: andycanuck at September 13, 2010 11:46 AM (3phFo)

165 Well whores get paid. She was looking to get paid, right? Seems apt to me.

Nice! The opposition, even in your own party is not just wrong. They are evil and must be destroyed. And because she is a woman, calling her a whore is a great way to go about it. Lets not argue the issues and where the candidates stand. Pshaw!! Let's just call her a whore.

Pathetic.

Posted by: countrydoc at September 13, 2010 11:46 AM (Fwb9h)

166 A thankless job if there ever was one. God love you.
Thanks. It's never boring.

Posted by: Wyatt Earp at September 13, 2010 11:46 AM (zgZzy)

167 It doesn't matter if O'Donnell wins; it only matters that Castle loses. Castle is the same thing as a democrat. And, we will have one less RINO to contend with in 2012.

So what if she's nuts. As if she'd be the only one. Besides, all she has to do is run her mouth on Fox and vote the way Miller, DeMint, Angle, and Rubio tell her to. How hard can that be?

I'm a deep water sailor just in from Hong Kong. If you give me some whiskey, I'll sing you a song!

Posted by: VADM (Red) Cuthbert Collingwood RN at September 13, 2010 11:46 AM (YZ0iV)

168 167

Jim, can you send me a few bucks? Philly detectives make crap.
Posted by: Wyatt Earp at September 13, 2010 11:41 AM (zgZzy)
A thankless job if there ever was one. God love you.

Posted by: kallisto at September 13, 2010 11:45 AM (+FkcS)

but if you moved to NY you can be loved way more.

Posted by: curious at September 13, 2010 11:46 AM (p302b)

169 If you are going to referencesomeone with a non-sequitur atleast know how to spell their name.
Oh noes! I misspelled his name.
Is crazy relevant?
What do you think of the lawsuit? Is this a sign she is unstable?

You're classy also.
You are passive aggressive.

Posted by: Delta Smelt at September 13, 2010 11:47 AM (A0VTZ)

170 @152
152
I thought the primary was exactly where we do this. Remember? Argue it out in the primary and get together in the general. That's what we were told was a good strategy, right here on this blog.
Posted by: countrydoc at September 13, 2010 11:40 AM (Fwb9h)
That
Both of you-please answer the question posed in 142.

Posted by: pep at September 13, 2010 11:47 AM (YXmuI)

171 I thought the primary was exactly where we do this. Remember? Argue it out in the primary and get together in the general. That's what we were told was a good strategy, right here on this blog.

Yes, but part of that argument must include whether the candidate can, after winning the primary, win in the general.

Posted by: angler at September 13, 2010 11:47 AM (bCDmD)

172 Posted by: Wyatt Earp at September 13, 2010 11:45 AM (zgZzy)
I was born and raised in the 15th Precinct, W/E. Good luck out there....

Posted by: CJ at September 13, 2010 11:47 AM (9KqcB)

173 Delaware Chicks - seriously, they are NEVER a good idea. Been saying this since 1987.
Posted by: BlackOrchid at September 13, 2010 11:24 AM (SB0V2)

If this some idea of a joke? If not, you've just said something pig ignorant about my wife and two daughters.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 11:47 AM (R2fpr)

174
It's laughable to think DE is even winnable. You guys acting like Castle is a shoo-in need a dose a reality.

Posted by: AoS Pirate...now with extra-absorbent wings at September 13, 2010 11:48 AM (uFokq)

175 the Dems will tear her apart from Wed til the election ...
I've been listening to DE media this morning,the Dems are positively drooling over the PPP poll.

Posted by: kallisto at September 13, 2010 11:48 AM (+FkcS)

176
polls shmolls

fuck the polls

Posted by: AoS Pirate...now with extra-absorbent wings at September 13, 2010 11:48 AM (uFokq)

177 but if you moved to NY you can be loved way more.
Shut. UP!

Posted by: Wyatt Earp at September 13, 2010 11:48 AM (zgZzy)

178 Posted by: Wyatt Earp at September 13, 2010 11:45 AM (zgZzy)

not rubbing it in, know so many people on the job I'm an expert at telling you where to go so that you will be monetarily appreciated,

Posted by: curious at September 13, 2010 11:49 AM (p302b)

179 Are either of them wholly or partly Canadian? The only way I can decied between the two of them is to vote against the one who is more Canadian. Because Canadians are all spies sent here to destroy our concept of Bacon and wreck our system of football.

Posted by: Truman North at September 13, 2010 11:49 AM (HLGCA)

180 These O'Donnel clowns gotta be Demoplants. Republicans can be pretty damn stupid, but surely not this stupid.This woman is a disaster. She has not values aside from what pours out of her mouth that will get her what she wants. O'Donnell = Crist.

Posted by: wtp at September 13, 2010 11:49 AM (kC3nL)

181 I agree that this will hurt Castle, if he wins. You have already weaken
him as a candidate, getting his turnout down in the general..

Happy?

But your attacks on O'Donnell won't do the same thing when she wins? I see people here busting on Castle because of his positions and his votes. I see people here busting on O'Donnell because "she's a whore".

Posted by: countrydoc at September 13, 2010 11:49 AM (Fwb9h)

182 If it's to be nose-holding that's the order of the day, maybe (and this is a suggestion, not a litmus test) conclude that Delaware's gonna suck either way, and put at least some of the resources behind Angle in Nevada.

Why Angle? Because Bloomberg just came out for Reid, and one of the conditions of Mikey Shortshanks's support is to be reliably anti-gun. Details at National Gun Rights Examiner (my apologies, I don't have time to tinyurl the URL right now).

The Lairds of Fairfax, towers of courage that they are, punted Nevada (dunno how they can scare the membership with "Majority Leader Schumer" any more after Bloomberg endorsed Reid), so Angle (whatever baggage she has, she'll be a better senator than the Schoolmarm).

Just a thought. Castle and Angle (or O'Donnell and Angle) is better than either and Reid, and neither looks to be worth much on their own respective hooks. Tough call.

Posted by: Ken at September 13, 2010 11:49 AM (fFh95)

183 Nice! The opposition, even in your own party is not just wrong. They are evil and must be destroyed.
And Ace is not just wrong, but opposing your candidate because he's a sell-out looking for a gig, right countrydoc?

Posted by: CJ at September 13, 2010 11:49 AM (9KqcB)

184 Both of you-please answer the question posed in 142.
Posted by: pep at September 13, 2010 11:47 AM (YXmuI)
I don't live in Delaware, so it's moot. I won't attack him, is that like supporting him?

Posted by: Jim in San Diego at September 13, 2010 11:49 AM (oIp16)

185 And yeah, I capitalize Bacon, like I capitalize every other important word

Posted by: Truman North at September 13, 2010 11:50 AM (HLGCA)

186 From now to 2012, we just need to stop the Dims and give as much power as possible to the Republicans.

So we know who (ie, RINOs) to primary for 2012.

An O'Donnell win scares the RINOs, who are afraid of losing their do-nothing jobs.

Always a good thing. They will vote our way.

However, a Senate win possibly gives us the ability to set the agenda and make BO's obstruction evident to the public at large......unless the RINOs go along with BO....again we know who to primary.

Guys like Castle remind me of Specter.

O'Donnell is a flawed candidate.

But I think in the realm of pure power politics, and that's what conservatives have to show this cycle, that we have the power.

You go with O'Donnell.

Posted by: naturalfake at September 13, 2010 11:50 AM (+kzvp)

187 I think there are many trolls on here collecting stimulus money.

DE is in play thanks to a cluster---- of RIHO "s ...Republicans In Hate Offense

Posted by: ford sells volts at September 13, 2010 11:50 AM (Ki7fm)

188 Aside from her most generic of pronouncements, has anyone demonstrated any sort of conservative bona fides in favor of O'Donnell? I keep hearing that she's more conservative, and she probably is... but prove it.

Well according to this she's against masturbation. So I guess that's an uber-conservative position.

But not probably not too popular around the HQ though.

Posted by: Mætenloch at September 13, 2010 11:51 AM (vfNQj)

189 Who's destroying party unity? (And adopting James Carville tactics.)

Posted by: someone at September 13, 2010 11:51 AM (DfAwB)

190 I'm pretty simple-minded, even for a moron, but it seems to me there's a paradigm here to agree on when we're faced with a choice in a primary between a RINO and a gen-u-wine conservative:

If we're sure to win in the general, choose the conservative (see also Alaska; Murkowski).

If we're sure to lose the general, choose the conservative (repudiates the RINO and sends a message).

If the general is going to be close, choose the most conservative candidate who is likely to give us the best chance of winning (this explains many California races).

When the general comes, vote for whoever is the R, despite his flaws (to all the people who refuse to vote for an R because he doesn't pass your purity test, thanks for giving us Obama). The philosophy of "let the Democrat win so we can rise from the ashes" is not a viable strategy.

Posted by: Keith Arnold at September 13, 2010 11:51 AM (Jdtsu)

191 By supporting O'Donnell, her supporters affirm their own snow-white purity.

Kinda like the white-guilt folks who voted for Obama.

It's all about them.

Posted by: Glaucon at September 13, 2010 11:52 AM (mP9Rx)

192
I think some of you know deep down this November won't be the landslide everyone is predicting and you're already preparing your finger-pointing and blame game.

We're on a roll with Tea Party-type candidates but some of just can't let go of the old losing ways.

Posted by: AoS Pirate...now with extra-absorbent wings at September 13, 2010 11:52 AM (uFokq)

193 Just curious but are Dick Armey and Matt Kibble, the guys who run FreedomWorks, nothing but filthy RINOs since they refuse to support O'Donnell?

Posted by: DrewM. at September 13, 2010 11:52 AM (ycZcD)

194 Getting conservatives to support Castle will be a hell of a lot easier
to do than getting most non-conservatives to vote for O'Donnell in
November.

So why the hell hasn't Castle done it? Castle has basically acted like he just going to win the primary because it's his right. He is the genesis of all the problems here.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at September 13, 2010 11:52 AM (FkKjr)

195 But not probably not too popular around the HQ though.
Posted by: Mætenloch at September 13, 2010 11:51 AM (vfNQj)
A woman who is sue happy, plays the victim card,and hates masturbation. Sign me up!

Posted by: Delta Smelt at September 13, 2010 11:52 AM (A0VTZ)

196 ODonnell AND Castle are losing to the Dem by 16 and 18 points according to the latest PPP poll. So for the jackasses that are saying vote for Castle because he's the only 'electable' choice, get another argument because that one is on fire.I'm in TX so I can't tell you yankees what to do, and both choices suck. I think I'd go for crazy over any so-called Repub that has such a shittyCFG rating, during the primary. Then vote for whoever wins.

Posted by: Schwalbe at September 13, 2010 11:53 AM (UU0OF)

197 A woman who is sue happy, plays the victim card,and hates masturbation. Sign me up!

If she hated masturbation she wouldn't go and be so hot!

Posted by: Resident Perv at September 13, 2010 11:53 AM (zgZzy)

198 I don't care what O'Donnell's lackeys think of me anymore than I do what Castle's lackeys think of me. And I am sure they could give a rats ass what I think as well. O'Donnell sounds like an EDP and Castle is a RINO, which one does the DE GOP want as their candidate?

Posted by: Penfold at September 13, 2010 11:54 AM (1PeEC)

199 Kinda like the white-guilt folks who voted for Obama.It's all about them.
Posted by: Glaucon at September 13, 2010 11:52 AM (mP9Rx)
Yeah. It's. Just. Like. That.
There is no difference between us.

Posted by: Jim in San Diego at September 13, 2010 11:54 AM (oIp16)

200 Like Jacobsen in the link, I've been disgusted with the "nuts and sluts" message from the Castle camp (and their influx of OTT O'D haters) for a while now. *This* is the best they've got to win over conservatives? His impending primary loss is his own arrogant fault.

Posted by: someone at September 13, 2010 11:54 AM (DfAwB)

201 I think we are now at the point where people have gotten emotionally
invested and will just react to stuff like this with even greater
support of O'Donnell.

We're at the point where we are sick of RINO sellouts who do nothing but screw us. We're sick of being told the Republicans will make it better to watch them sellout their principles and make it worse, which then leads to bigger socialists making it even worse.

This is a reaction to the Republican establishment giving us the finger for years, then pretending to be our friends in election years.

Posted by: blindside at September 13, 2010 11:54 AM (x7g7t)

202 If this some idea of a joke? If not, you've just said something pig ignorant about my wife and two daughters.
Come on, Blue. You're from Noo Yawk. You know the pecking order:
NY mocks Philly mocks NJmocks DE. It's no thing. Now it's your turn to say something rude about Philadelphia women.
And then I will sue you.

Posted by: kallisto at September 13, 2010 11:54 AM (+FkcS)

203 Castle's BI-PARTISAN votes:

Impeachment investigations for Pres Bush for "lying" about Iraq.
Sanctuary cities.
Defunding missile defense.
Drivers licenses for illegals.
No-confidence vote against the surge.

Can't wait for Castle's presser with Obama, endorsing him for 4 more years!

Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 11:54 AM (h8R9p)

204 Every time I've seen a photo of O'Donnell, I keep thinking "damn, she
looks familiar"... and after some Googling I now remember where I've seen her
before.

It was the 7/19/99 episode of Politically Incorrect where the panel was
debating some religiously-oriented issue (can't remember what it was). All I can remember from that is she and Patrick Duffy (a Buddhist) were getting into it -- she kept interrupting the other guests, he told her to "be quiet" and all she could do in response was giggle.

Wow... if she hasn't changed since that embarrassing appearance, then she is a kook...

Still, if she manages to win tomorrow, the seat stays D, but I still think it will drain DNC resources away from other races to keep it D.

Posted by: Gran at September 13, 2010 11:55 AM (xmjMj)

205 This is the year of the "to thine own self be true" vote. You can't predict the "to thine own self be true vote", you can't poll for the "to thine own self be true vote",, you can only sit and watch in amazement....

Nassau County.....OMG mangano won, he won!!!!

Posted by: curious at September 13, 2010 11:55 AM (p302b)

206 @189I don't live in Delaware, so it's moot. I won't attack him, is that like supporting him?

No, but it's better than attacking him. Unless you haven't expressed an opinion on the 3 I mentioned, which I very much doubt, why aren't you equally obliged to support the Repub candidate here? It cuts both ways.

Posted by: pep at September 13, 2010 11:55 AM (YXmuI)

207 Hey Wyatt; Philly detectives do have the benefit of being immortalized by W.E.B. Griffin though!

That last book was pretty good too.

Posted by: Vic at September 13, 2010 11:55 AM (/jbAw)

208 This just shows how desperate the RNC is for one of "their" candidates to win. They've turned into the "Buggy Whip" Committee. All of their tactics are 100 years old and useless unless you are a Mennonite.

Posted by: Radioactive Satellite Of LOVE at September 13, 2010 11:56 AM (LdYLm)

209 Look, anyone who believes and lives by polls, especially in the conservative domain, is a FOOL. What sort of idiots answer personal questions posed by complete strangers calling from CallerID-blocked phones? Leftards, mostly. Seriously, WTF? Live and vote by what is the right thing to do and or WHAT WILL WORK.

Posted by: wtp at September 13, 2010 11:56 AM (kC3nL)

210 Sorry Ace, but if I had to choose, I'd throw out Castle.

A guy who can't break 60% support for the party he supposedly represents is a major power-broker in a close Senate.

IMO, the last thing we need are more RINO power-brokers.

We don't need control of the Senate this cycle. I think it has been argued at least to a draw on the merits of a weak Senate majority populated by RINOS, vs a strong Conservative minority in the Senate with the prospect for more gains in '12.

We expect to have control of the House, which should be all the buffer we need to defang Obama's agenda, and demonstrate a set of principles for further gains in '12.

I don't have a vote in Delaware, so my opinion matters little. But I'd look at people like McCain Graham and Specter and Jeffords and ask you to remember how often you have hated yourself "the morning after"?

If being a liberal means never having to say sorry, being a conservative to me means never having to regret your vote for opportunistic career politicians.

I think those of you who are hell-bent-for leather to have a Senate majority are letting yourselves forget just why the Republican brand was in the shitter last couple of cycles.

I think you are emotionally tied to the prospect of giving the left the what-for, to salve just how badly you felt the last couple of cycles.

I think we are better than that when push comes to shove. Yes, we'd all love the instant gratification of taking control of the Senate as well -- but at what cost?

If we learn nothing else from the Left's march through the institutions, it must be that an ideological war is one that spans many elections, and many generations, with many individual battles.

You do not have to win all the battles. For the sake of our country, we must win the war.

Ideological wars are not won in single elections. But they can be significantly derailed by single elections where a minority set of principles is given much larger influence over the majority platform.

When these sorts of people must be feted just to get them to not torpedo critical legislation, you risk watering down that legislation to the point that it leaves a bad taste in everyone's mouth and accomplishes little if any of what it set out to do. When critical legislation fails, it counts against the movement - not against that little egomaniac with disproportionate power. Witness: John McCain et al.

Posted by: krakatoa at September 13, 2010 11:56 AM (a0Jhx)

211 ODonnell AND Castle are losing to the Dem by 16 and 18 points according to the latest PPP poll.
True, PPP claims that Coons is moving up on Castle in the polls. That is at variance with Rasmussen's numbers, and also with...TADA!...intrade.

Posted by: kallisto at September 13, 2010 11:57 AM (+FkcS)

212 I started my political life in South Carolina, working for Carroll Campbell when he first ran for Governor against Mike Daniel. I have spoken at length about Conservatism with Gov. Campbell (now dead), with Henry McMaster, SC Attorney General (and my landlord for a time), with Lee Atwater, and with Jim Demint. I have a serious question for some of you: can you name any conservative politician who has ever promoted the strategy of willingly giving up an elected office, at any level, in order to "send a message?" This is not snark. I can't imagine any of the men above giving that advice, but maybe some of you know a prominent conservative who would.

Posted by: MikeinAmman at September 13, 2010 11:57 AM (elcpe)

213 @205 Penfold, shush.

Not because there's anything wrong with what you said -- I just couldn't resist. Sorry.

Posted by: Ken at September 13, 2010 11:57 AM (fFh95)

214 What are you a freaking psychiatrist?
Posted by: polynikes at September 13, 2010 11:53 AM (m2CN7)
What are you a spelling bee champion?
A guy (are you a guy?) who makes a point of correcting my spelling of Allen/Alan, dodges my point entirely,and goes on to sarcastically call me classy is passive aggressive. A very feminine trait.
Forget it. I came at you in good faith to discuss the issue, you chose to be a little turd.

Posted by: Delta Smelt at September 13, 2010 11:57 AM (A0VTZ)

215 O'Donnell's supporters are just so principled and pure. Better than the rest of us. They know RINOs are filthy, impure, corrupt and corrupting. Taboo.

Posted by: Glaucon at September 13, 2010 11:58 AM (mP9Rx)

216 This race can not end soon enough.

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 11:58 AM (OWjjx)

217 Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at September 13, 2010 11:52 AM (FkKjr)

Seriously?

You simply don't accept the fact that Delaware is A FUCKING LIBERAL STATE!

Win all the conservative votes in the state and you'll get about 20-30% of the vote. And that's it.

Congratulations. That's a brilliant plan.

Posted by: DrewM. at September 13, 2010 11:58 AM (ycZcD)

218 If you want to improve the national Republican leadership then you must purge the most liberal members of the party.

Posted by: John Galt at September 13, 2010 11:58 AM (F/4zf)

219 It's instructive to note that Rahm Emanuel is the one who got Obama Care passed. How did he do it? By supporting less then reliable Democrat candidates.

For example Ben Nelson. Recently Nelson has joined with Republicans to oppose climate change and other issues. But they got Obama Care because of him and some Blue Dog Democrats.

The bottom line is is that you can't write legislation if you don't control the legislature.

Posted by: Quilly Mammoth at September 13, 2010 11:59 AM (INEzN)

220 There are almost certainly sockpuppets here from TP and SSP. They've admitted as much on their sites.

We have some dumbass supporters just like the other side. The ones who don't realize that their dumb as rock myopic support group barely constitutes 25% of the country. The same ones who'll cry about shit that passes by an additional vote or two when they've cost it.

Two points to the things stated above.

Ace post was paid from by the RNC? hahaha, says the Dan 'grease my palm with a lincoln and i'll give you a HJ' Riehl 'consultant' fellater?

And yeah Castle might be a train wreck on guns. Just like Casey Jr is a trainwreck for them on abortion or Tester is a trainwreck for them on guns. But at the end of the day, he will vote with republicans on other issues. Some Coons will never do even while he's being sued by O'Donnell for going too manly on her when he spanks her in the general.

Posted by: inyourheadZOMBIE at September 13, 2010 11:59 AM (OKbxw)

221 What are you a spelling bee champion?
No. Everyone here knows I won the AOSHQ spelling bee championship.

Posted by: Mallamutt, AOSHQ Spelling Bee Champion at September 13, 2010 11:59 AM (OWjjx)

222 This race can not end soon enough.
Posted by: Mallamutt

Amen.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 11:59 AM (R2fpr)

223 Both of you-please answer the question posed in 142.

I supported McCain, so yeah. Again, this is what a primary is for!

Posted by: countrydoc at September 13, 2010 12:00 PM (Fwb9h)

224 >>>This is a reaction to the Republican establishment giving us the finger for years, then pretending to be our friends in election years.

You continue to misdiagnose the problem. The problem is that the country itself is not behind a true-red conservative agenda. It can't be implemented without people in office, and it can't be implemented without persuading a majority (or very close to one) of people to support a deep-red agenda.

I don't see how people think we can just implement our agenda -- every bullet-point on it, no compromise -- with 30% support.

Your frustration, as stated, is that the GOP is not the way you wish it to be. I think the real reason for your frustration is that the *country* isn't the way you wish it to be.

What you call "selling out" one's constituents, I often call "listening to constituents." If your constituents themselves aren't deep red -- at least not a near-majority of them -- you have two options: Pursue the national conservative agenda against their wishes, or defer to actual voter desires.

The Democrats did something like the former in ramming ObamaCare down our throats.

I think democracy counts -- and more than ideology, too. I would say democracy is my highest bullet-point when it comes to ideology. I do not see Scott Brown as a "sell out" -- I see him as representing his mix of liberal and soft-conservative constitutents.

And I do not see Mike Castle as a "sell out" for doing the same.

Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 12:00 PM (KUUXH)

225
It's funny how the same crowd who's supporting Castle is the same crowd who were excited about Michael Steele becoming RNC chair and the same crowd who were wetting their pants when Rush said he hoped Obama fails.

You'll come around on Castle, too, and realize we're right. But these arguments are getting tiresome. You'd think you'd start listening to your betters, by now.

Posted by: AoS Pirate...now with extra-absorbent wings at September 13, 2010 12:01 PM (uFokq)

226 @Bevel Lemelisk

No you dumbass. For the millionth time Delaware is a FUCKING BLUE STATE.
If you don't start courting the general voting population early you will suffer for it. Castle assumed the easy path and swerved left because he wanted to ensure he would win the race.

O'Donnell is too fucking stupid to engage in such thought, much like a good chunk of her supporters.

Posted by: inyourheadZOMBIE at September 13, 2010 12:01 PM (OKbxw)

227 Focusing on O'Donnell's politics: what are they? Prove she's a conservative. Seems to me that filing lawsuits for wrongful termination (and sounds like rightful termination) isn't very conservative. Railing about masturbation isn't very... heh. Accusing anyone and everyone that expresses criticism as being jackass RINOs (the Levin piece) or on the take for Castle (http://www.wgmd.com/?p=9496) or wanting onto the cocktail circuit (that guy earlier who attacked Ace) isn't exactly a happy, conservative warrior or attracting such following.

Won't bring up the GAY attacks since she totally didn't GAY condone those GAY rumors at GAY all.

Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 12:01 PM (+gX1+)

228 No. Everyone here knows I won the AOSHQ spelling bee championship.

Posted by: Mallamutt, AOSHQ Spelling Bee Champion at September 13, 2010 11:59 AM (OWjjx)
And then you made your son a sammich. Heh.

Posted by: Delta Smelt at September 13, 2010 12:01 PM (A0VTZ)

229 Amen.
Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 11:59 AM (R2fpr)
Yea, Blue Hen, particularly for you. Taken the phone off the hook yet to avoid the robocalls?

Posted by: Mallamutt, AOSHQ Spelling Bee Champion at September 13, 2010 12:01 PM (OWjjx)

230 @ 131
Good lord why would you want to give the dems ammo with this post?

Oh, like they wouldn't have discovered it on they're own during all the opposition research they'll do if she wins this primary? They're gonna have a fucking field day with all her crazy shit.

Posted by: Groaty Dick at September 13, 2010 12:02 PM (gzjhZ)

231 214 Hey Wyatt; Philly detectives do have the benefit of being immortalized by W.E.B. Griffin though!That last book was pretty good too.
Agreed.

Posted by: Wyatt Earp at September 13, 2010 12:02 PM (zgZzy)

232 If she loses the primary, she'd sue Castle.
If she loses the general, she'd sue the Democrats.
In her wildest dreams, she wins the general.
She would be for the Democrats what Al Franken is for Republicans.
Following a poor performance, the seat would go Democrat 6 years from now.

Question:

If O'Donnell were to be senator, who is willing to take her under the wing?

Posted by: maverick muse at September 13, 2010 12:02 PM (H+LJc)

233 I have come to the conclusion that the choice in candidates is between 3 democrats so I will concentrate on other senate races. I don't see the conservatism in O'Donnell other than she says she is, Castle is more likely than not to switch parties a la Spector.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at September 13, 2010 12:03 PM (L8kaT)

234 @218

They're just flat out lying. They actually don't have any principles. Just blind idiotic thick headedness.

This is the last paragraph of the SSP post:

This race is too
close to call and could certainly go either way Tuesday night. General
election Senate numbers we'll release later this week make it clear the
biggest beneficiary of this primary becoming so unexpectedly hotly
contested is Chris Coons. He would start out with a large advantage
over O'Donnell in a general election match up, and is polling closer to
Castle than he was when PPP polled Delaware last month.

Posted by: inyourheadZOMBIE at September 13, 2010 12:03 PM (OKbxw)

235 And then you made your son a sammich. Heh.
Well, he is the alpha male in the house. This is what happens to you when you have teenage daughters. Now, where the hell did I put my Justin Bieber CD?

Posted by: Mallamutt, AOSHQ Spelling Bee Champion at September 13, 2010 12:03 PM (OWjjx)

236 Has anyone done a poll on how many lefty votes Castle will pull away if he looses and runs third party?

Posted by: ryukyu at September 13, 2010 12:03 PM (MOHSR)

237 "...nothing but filthy RINOs since they refuse to support O'Donnell?"

It's amusing watching the He-Man RINO Hunter's Club go after everyone with less than a 100% ACU rating, which is EVERYONE in the Republican Party. There are real RINO's (Castle certainly fits the bill) who hurt the conservative cause when in office and then there are actual moderates (say, Scott Brown) who do more to help the conservative cause than hurt it.
We're at the point where the term is totally meaningless.

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 13, 2010 12:03 PM (EHI/u)

238 And Ace is not just wrong, but opposing your candidate because he's a sell-out looking for a gig, right countrydoc?

Touche'. Well played sir, very well played. I concede that was below the belt.

Posted by: countrydoc at September 13, 2010 12:04 PM (Fwb9h)

239 If you want to improve the national Republican leadership then you must purge the most liberal members of the party.
But if they can't get elected, they will not affect the national Republican leadership one bit.

Posted by: CJ at September 13, 2010 12:04 PM (9KqcB)

240 Who's destroying party unity? (And adopting James Carville tactics.)

Posted by: someone at September 13, 2010 11:51 AM

I've read the "Legal Insurrection" blog before, and the guy usually makes sense. But he's being a bit one-sided here.

Maybe the lefties use the "nuts and sluts" attack on Palin -- no "maybe;" they do -- but some of her supporters do the same in reverse, elevating her to a lofty pedestal with torrents of verbal fappery.

Read any Palin post on Tepid Air to see them in action.

Before we can attack the leftoids on this, we need to judge our own candidates and possible candidates, male and female, by a single standard: can they successfully apply conservative principles to their job?

Otherwise, we venture into Osama Obama "pants-crease" and "tight Levi's" territory.

Posted by: MrScribbler at September 13, 2010 12:04 PM (Ulu3i)

241 The problem is these TRUE conservatives want power. They don't care that the rest of the country isn't like them. Rather than change the country rationally, as Ace says in 231, they want to ram their agenda down everyone else's throat. They're much like Obambi that way, and they will run into the same wall he is running into.

Posted by: wtp at September 13, 2010 12:04 PM (kC3nL)

242 You simply don't accept the fact that Delaware is A FUCKING LIBERAL STATE! Win all the conservative votes in the state and you'll get about 20-30% of the vote. And that's it.

Drew, you left out that it's getting increasingly liberal as PA and NJ people move into Kent and Sussex counties and bring their voting habits with them. Getting Castle elected keeps the state blue-ish purple for another 6-12 years, as opposed to navy blue indefinitely.

Posted by: Hoss Fuentes at September 13, 2010 12:04 PM (tOCL6)

243 Since to begin rolling back Obamacare and the Obama agenda it is going to take either a veto proof majority in both houses or control of the Presidency, the house and a filibuster proof majority in the Senate, if it were up to me I would go for the sure thing in Castle even though I am much more conservative than he is. Regardless, the silver lining I am taking from the Delaware race is that maybethe factthat some Conservatives are willing to throw all caution to the wind inthis race is a sign of how trully epic the Republican rout of Democrats will be in November.If O'Donnell becomes the nominee, I hope either the gamble was worth it, or the Republicans pick up so many Senate seats over the next 2+ years that in the end it really doesn't matter.

Posted by: Aaron at September 13, 2010 12:05 PM (/Sutq)

244 If O'Donnell were to be senator, who is willing to take her under the wing?
Barbara Mikulski?

Posted by: kallisto at September 13, 2010 12:05 PM (+FkcS)

245 Amen.
Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 11:59 AM (R2fpr)
Yea, Blue Hen, particularly for you. Taken the phone off the hook yet to avoid the robocalls?
Posted by: Mallamutt, AOSHQ Spelling Bee Champion

I've been listening to them, out of morbid curiousity. They're going through about the full list of GOP 'luminaries' pushing Castle. Thus far, I've received one for O'Donnell (Sarah Palin). We talked, we laughed, we made plans, we talked about our future.....and then the recorded message started over.

But seriously, there's been lots of polling calls. If you look carefully on the latest PPP poll, I'm the 47,054th person from the right.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 12:06 PM (R2fpr)

246 Now, where the hell did I put my Justin Bieber CD?
Posted by: Mallamutt, AOSHQ Spelling Bee Champion at September 13, 2010 12:03 PM (OWjjx)
Voting Dim this year huh?

Posted by: Delta Smelt at September 13, 2010 12:06 PM (A0VTZ)

247 >>>131 Good lord why would you want to give the dems ammo with this post?

Good Lord why would you want to give dems ammo with this *candidate*?

Oh wait, I see, you think if conservatives embargo it and keep it secret then no one will know about it.

Right, because we control the media, just like Media Matters For America alleges.

Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 12:06 PM (KUUXH)

248 Before we can attack the leftoids on this, we need to judge our own
candidates and possible candidates, male and female, by a single
standard: can they successfully apply conservative principles to their
job?

Which is where Castle fails. There is *no* excuse for Cap-and-Tax.

Posted by: Ian S. at September 13, 2010 12:06 PM (p05LM)

249 Nate Silver is doing fucking cartwheels because of you dumbasses.

Enjoy permanent minorities. http://tiny.cc/bd7v6

Posted by: inyourheadZOMBIE at September 13, 2010 12:06 PM (OKbxw)

250 Yea, Blue Hen, particularly for you. Taken the phone off the hook yet to avoid the robocalls?

Posted by: Mallamutt, AOSHQ Spelling Bee Champion at September 13, 2010 12:01 PM (OWjjx)
I'm down in Kent County, DE, and I'm not getting that many robocalls, actually. Maybe 5 total over the past week. None today or all weekend.

Posted by: Hoss Fuentes at September 13, 2010 12:07 PM (tOCL6)

251 Castle is Arlen Specter. He needs to be retired. The seat isn't in play. The Senate isn't a lock. Clean up the team and keep plugging. "Hold your nose and vote RINO" is a big part of what got us into this Hell as it is.

Posted by: SurferDoc at September 13, 2010 12:07 PM (HdAS4)

252 @Blue Hen -
All kidding aside, it's lovely the way you stood up for your ladies.

Posted by: kallisto at September 13, 2010 12:07 PM (+FkcS)

253
Delaware -- 2008
Obama: 62%
McCain: 37%

2004
Kerry: 53.4
Bush: 45.8

2000
Gore: 55
Bush: 42

We're better off with O'Donnell.

Posted by: AoS Pirate...now with extra-absorbent wings at September 13, 2010 12:07 PM (uFokq)

254 Touche'. Well played sir, very well played. I concede that was below the belt.
Posted by: countrydoc at September 13, 2010 12:04 PM (Fwb9h)
Cool. Because, don't tell anyone, but I can see....both sides of this debate. Shhhh....Catch me on the right day and I'll be yelling about how I'd gladly lose with Newt in 2012 than win with a mushy type.
Plus, I really like Ace's site and his writing and don't want to chase him off. He seems to put a lot of thought into his stances.

Posted by: CJ at September 13, 2010 12:07 PM (9KqcB)

255 I use Lava, not Ivory soap. One is pure; one actually gets the job done.

Posted by: MJ at September 13, 2010 12:08 PM (BKOsZ)

256 @ Ken,

I know, I know, the adults are still talking, I will go sit in the corner.

Posted by: Penfold at September 13, 2010 12:08 PM (1PeEC)

257 Just curious but are Dick Armey and Matt Kibble, the guys who run
FreedomWorks, nothing but filthy RINOs since they refuse to support
O'Donnell?

Just curious but are DeMint and Palin crazy whack-a-dos since they refuse to support Castle?

Posted by: countrydoc at September 13, 2010 12:08 PM (Fwb9h)

258 Blahhh on both of them. One's a RINO and one's a nut.

Lose-Lose-Lose situation.

Posted by: Ezekiel at September 13, 2010 12:09 PM (eoYse)

259 @countrydoc,

Nobody called her a whore. Someone used a rhetorical technique called a "simile."

But I'm calling you a dipshit because you got me to agree with DrewM, and I hate that.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo ( NJConservative) at September 13, 2010 12:09 PM (LH6ir)

260 Come on, peeps. "Operation Chaos." How much of the "purity drive" are just super-strident all-or-nothing conservatives, and how much of it is a bunch of astro-turfing trying to stir up conflict?

I'm too lazy to go track everybody down, but I'm seeing a bunch of new nicks on various sites pushing the "super strident" line - unfortunately new nicks kind of fits both hypotheses.

Either way, the whole "you sold out, cocktail parties, liberal KOS blah blah" line is freakin' tiresome. What are you folks, 12 years old? Get some new material.

And what's with the "let the dems own it" crap? How could someone look at the last four years of INSANE spending, Obamacare, industry takeovers, political corruption, and SUPREME COURT appointees, and NOT want to gain control of both houses as pretty much the first priority?

They "owned" it and we've just about lost everything. I don't think we can take another cycle of that kind of ownership.

Posted by: Merovign, Strong on His Mountain at September 13, 2010 12:09 PM (bxiXv)

261 "No you dumbass. For the millionth time Delaware is a FUCKING BLUE STATE."
Indeed! And that means Abandon All Hope, Conservatives.

Posted by: Ted Kennedy's Old Seat at September 13, 2010 12:10 PM (9zHDv)

262 Has anyone done a poll on how many lefty votes Castle will pull away if he looses and runs third party?

ryukyu

I'd like to see a similar poll of the purples that have been crying "Castle o la Muerte!" Going to stick with Team Republican, or going to follow your boy off the reservation?

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at September 13, 2010 12:10 PM (BaMir)

263 Castle's BI-PARTISAN votes:

Tax hikes, card check, pork bills,
light-bulb bans, 10-commandment bans, drilling bans, in-state tuition campaign-finance reform, TARP legislation, Disclose Act, extension of McCain/Feingold to the
Internet.

Doubling of S-CHIP, a “bipartisan” tax-dollar giveaway to
Planned Parenthood.

Castle votes with Pelosi 72% of the time.

Can't wait for the MSM and Obama to boast how the climate change Republicans fended off vicious attacks from that fringe/extreme/marginalized Conservative Tea Party movement.

Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 12:10 PM (h8R9p)

264 Just to point out, voters in Delaware do go full retard. Every time. It's the fucking BIDEN SEAT.

Posted by: nickless at September 13, 2010 12:11 PM (MMC8r)

265 I do not see Scott Brown as a "sell out" -- I see him as representing his mix of liberal and soft-conservative constituents.
And I do not see Mike Castle as a "sell out" for doing the same.

I'd agree. Brown and Castle represent their constituents, which is what it's all about.

The sad thing is that a worse than RINO legislator who promotes all kinds of unconstitutional bills into law won Goldwater's seat AGAIN--

/...THANKS TO ROMNEY.
"For now," Meghan fantasizes about becoming a plural wife.

Posted by: maverick muse at September 13, 2010 12:11 PM (H+LJc)

266 Just to point out, voters in Delaware do go full retard. Every time. It's the fucking BIDEN SEAT.
Posted by: nickless

We like to call it, 'going Biden'.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 12:11 PM (R2fpr)

267 272
Just to point out, voters in Delaware do go full retard. Every time. It's the fucking BIDEN SEAT.

Posted by: nickless at September 13, 2010 12:11 PM (MMC8r)

Everybody knows you never go full retard.

Posted by: Kirk Lazarus at September 13, 2010 12:12 PM (LdYLm)

268 "No you dumbass. For the millionth time Delaware is a FUCKING BLUE STATE."Indeed! And that means Abandon All Hope, Conservatives.

Posted by: Ted Kennedy's Old Seat at September 13, 2010 12:10 PM (9zHDv)
Yup, and we all know how much Scott Brown mirrors DeMint Coburn.

Posted by: Hoss Fuentes at September 13, 2010 12:12 PM (tOCL6)

269 "It's amusing watching the He-Man RINO Hunter's Club go after everyone with less than a 100% ACU rating"
Uh, Castle's got less than 30%. That's "everyone with less than 100%"?
The "He-Man RINO Hunter's Club" actually supported Scott Brown in a huge way, knowing he would be far from "pure". That kinda completely blows away this particular narrative, but it's still funny watching it get blared all over this blog like it's dogma.

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 12:13 PM (9zHDv)

270 Castle votes with Pelosi 72% of the time.

I doubt that 72% percent of Delaware voters support Pelosi 72% of the time.

But then, I don't know.

Posted by: maverick muse at September 13, 2010 12:13 PM (H+LJc)

271 Brown and Castle represent their constituents, which is what it's all about

I fail to see how supporting cap and trade represents Delaware, except for the sad fact that there are people here (as in other places) willing to legislate other people's jobs out of existence.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 12:13 PM (R2fpr)

272 271 Castle's BI-PARTISAN votes:
Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 12:10 PM (h8R9p)
Pam's making a pretty damn good case here. Read it again and let it sink in.

Posted by: PoconoJoe at September 13, 2010 12:15 PM (JBby5)

273 PPP Poll from 8/7

Chris Coons (D): 35

Mike Castle (R): 48

Undecided: 17

Chris Coons (D): 44

Christine O'Donnell (R): 37

Undecided: 19

(MoE: ±4%)

Posted by: inyourheadZOMBIE at September 13, 2010 12:15 PM (OKbxw)

274 "No you dumbass. For the millionth time Delaware is a FUCKING BLUE STATE."

Indeed! And that means Abandon All Hope, Conservatives.

-Ted Kennedy's Old Seat at September

Indeed, you can never roll back the tide of Left-Liberalism.

Posted by: Berlin Wall (1961 - 1989) at September 13, 2010 12:15 PM (BaMir)

275 or maybe, just maybe, it is a contentious race, and major issue in the
party, therefore all republican leaning blogs are talking about it.

And they all happen to be saying the same things. Pure coincidence, I'm sure.

Why, just this weekend, I found out that John Boehner is a chain-smoking, cocktail-swilling country-clubber. Just so happened that every major media outlet decided to cover that. At the same time.

Posted by: tsj017 at September 13, 2010 12:16 PM (4YUWF)

276 I fail to see how supporting cap and trade
represents Delaware, except for the sad fact that there are people here
(as in other places) willing to legislate other people's jobs out of
existence.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 12:13 PM (R2fpr)
Um, maybe because the majority of people in this state are dumb shits who like the idea of increased government control? Frankly, I'm baffled as to why Delaware's gun laws are so reasonable compared to Maryland or Jersey.

Posted by: Hoss Fuentes at September 13, 2010 12:16 PM (tOCL6)

277 I just find it amazing how invested a lot of people here are in supporting a guy who's got a worse voting record than Arlen Specter.
You all say "Well, he'll vote with us at least 30% of the time, which is more than Coons would!". Yeah. Except that when you look at the recordof the Specters, Snowes, etc., the problem is that that 30% is always on votes that were completely ours anyway. They'll vote conservative when we've got more than enough votes anyway. Whenever it's a -close- vote, they always, always vote with the Dems. Their 30% votes are completely meaningless, because they're always strategically calculated to never actually make a difference.

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 12:17 PM (9zHDv)

278 8/5

Rasmussen:

Chris Coons (D) 37%, Mike Castle (R) 49%

Chris Coons (D) 46%, Christine O'Donnell (R) 36%

Posted by: inyourheadZOMBIE at September 13, 2010 12:18 PM (OKbxw)

279 Well, after I forgot how long this damn discussion has gone on, here is where we are at:

Mike Castle must go because he is a RINO. He voted for Cap and Trade. If elected, he will become a Democrat, endorse Obama and sell Jim DeMint into slavery (o.k., no one really posted the last one – I thought I just do it first).

Christine O’Donnell must go because she is crazy, lawsuit happy, can not win, is against masturbation and, if somehow is elected, will eat paste on the Senate floor while breaking her crayons (o.k., again, no one really said that).

I have now reached the point where, bluntly, I would just like to give Delaware back to England.

Whoever wins, wins. But, just be prepared to accept the consequences of your decision.

If Castle wins (and I think he probably still will…..barely) and wins the general, he is going to cast votes you are not going to like. That is his nature. Delaware is a blue state…sorry, you may really, really believe that a majority of voters in Delaware are ready to endorse a truly conservative agenda. I have not seen any real evidence to support that.

If Castle wins the primary and loses the General, then Castle supporters have to own the fact the major argument why he should have been nominated, electability, was a false premise.

If O’Donnell wins, and loses the general, and the Republicans are stuck at 50…….O’Donnell supporters own the fact that the GOP did not regain the Senate. If she loses, you still have to own that this was considered a fairly good GOP pick-up that did not materialize.

If O’Donnell wins, and wins the general, better hope that everyone who says she is crazy is wrong. That she comports herself well. If so, congratulations, you had the vision and foresight few had.

Either way, come back November 3 and start the fight all over again.

Now, please continue the inner conservative blood letting…..now.

Posted by: Mallamutt, AOSHQ Spelling Bee Champion at September 13, 2010 12:18 PM (OWjjx)

280
I fail to see ... -- Posted by: Blue Hen
You might recall that I'm impartial choosing the lesser of the two weevils, but leaning towards giving O'Donnell a shot.
Determining just how blue Delaware is, and specifically what the constituents' want done differently seems to be what each of the R-candidates should be highlighting alongside their own platform agenda.
All I hear about is the mudslinging.

Posted by: maverick muse at September 13, 2010 12:19 PM (H+LJc)

281 I have now reached the point where, bluntly, I would just like to give Delaware back to England.

Bloody hell.

Posted by: England at September 13, 2010 12:19 PM (MMC8r)

282 @Ted Kennedy's Old Seat

You didn't catch mama grizzly lambasting Scott Brown for his recent votes did you?

I guarantee tea party folks aren't Scott Brown fans anymore. Mainly because he's the perfect example of how to build a working majority coalition that will advance conservatism.

Posted by: inyourheadZOMBIE at September 13, 2010 12:20 PM (OKbxw)

283 Truman North@121:
"Why are we spending so much time on this one race? What is it about
this particular race that's captured the blogger's collective
attention? There are 33 senate races this year. We're spending about
half our time on one. PRIMARY."

I fear this is really just a dress rehearsal for what's going to happen if Palin runs and gets some traction in the '12 primaries. I predict that the savaging of O'Donnell supporters on the basis of "electability" will be nothing compared to what Palin supporters are going to get if she threatens the ascendancy of Mittens, the John McCain/Bob Dole candidate of '12.

Posted by: Bill Clinton at September 13, 2010 12:21 PM (mEyVv)

284 tsoj,

You are a fucking idiot paranoid cunt, you know that?

I am so tired of your Loser's Vengeance mentality. It's all about getting back at the people you think are putting you down.

Suck my cock you nutjob paranoid loser. I didn't get the "message" from anyone.

Go fap your dick forever to thoughts of finally getting payback against a world conspiring against you, bitch.

Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 12:21 PM (KUUXH)

285 Stupid sockpuppet...

Posted by: Kensington at September 13, 2010 12:21 PM (mEyVv)

286 Folks, this is a plus for O'Donnell because Delaware voters have a history of voting for crazy people. Were talking about Joe Biden's seat here, JOE BIDEN. O'Donnell could have just stepped out of the insane asylum and be less crazy than him.
And, yes, Christine O'Donnell, if you are reading this, I love you and want to bear your children, or you bear mine, whatever it takes. I'm gainfully employed, moderately good looking, and will convert to the Catholic Church for you. If you lose this primary and need a shoulder to cry on, I'll be there for you.
Love,
Doofensmirtz

Posted by: Dr. Heinz Doofenshmirtz at September 13, 2010 12:21 PM (Bs34i)

287 wtp

Conservatives want power to give you back your earnings and your liberty.

Obama wants power to take it from you.

How can you conflate the two?

Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 12:22 PM (h8R9p)

288 Rasmussen:

Chris Coons (D) 37%, Mike Castle (R) 49%
Chris Coons (D) 46%, Christine O'Donnell (R) 36%

There it is.

Posted by: maverick muse at September 13, 2010 12:22 PM (H+LJc)

289 But I'm calling you a dipshit because you got me to agree with DrewM, and I hate that.

Call me whatever pleases you, just don't bother reading the thread because that would be confusing.

Posted by: countrydoc at September 13, 2010 12:22 PM (Fwb9h)

290 Its f'in funny to be lectured by RINOs about "electoral reality" as they are on the cusp of losing yet another "in the bag" election. Do tell! You're the expert!

Posted by: louis tully at September 13, 2010 12:22 PM (K/USr)

291 Frankly, I'm baffled as to why Delaware's gun laws are so reasonable compared to Maryland or Jersey.
Posted by: Hoss Fuentes at September 13, 2010 12:16 PM (tOCL6)
Tradition. See Vermont - socialist Senator, many blue local pols, CCW with no license needed.There are also pockets of that tradition out West - many small mountain communities are packed with hippies but everybody has guns, kind of a bastardized hippie/old west tradition.

Posted by: Merovign, Strong on His Mountain at September 13, 2010 12:22 PM (bxiXv)

292 Has it occurred to anyone that maybe, just maybe O'Donnell WAS discriminated against?

How do any of you know what happened there? Being a conservative does not mean you can't be discriminated against by other sexist conservatives ya know.

On the weekly standard...How come they never call Obama a liar? How come John McCormack never calls Obama a liar? He only saves that description for Christine? TELLS ME ALOT.

Odd huh?

How anyone thinks you are going to scale back this government with people like Castle in there is beyond me. Brown was supposed to shrink government too and he votes for more regulations and new agencies to monitor our financial activities.

Posted by: Dan at September 13, 2010 12:22 PM (1jzSs)

293 Rush currently yelling at everybody for "blowing it," using this race as an example. Heh.

Posted by: Filly at September 13, 2010 12:22 PM (Xcm+S)

294 A bird in the hand beats a dodo in the bushes.

Posted by: Bob at September 13, 2010 12:22 PM (xh3gA)

295 "No you dumbass. For the millionth time Delaware is a FUCKING BLUE STATE."
Indeed! And that means Abandon All Hope, Conservatives.
Posted by: Ted Kennedy's Old Seat at September 13, 2010 12:10 PM (9zHDv)

And that's why the GOP there nominated a hardcore conservative like, um, Scott Brown to take the seat.
No compromise there! Why he's a veritable Jim DeMint.

Posted by: DrewM. at September 13, 2010 12:23 PM (ycZcD)

296 @287 I have now reached the point where, bluntly, I would just like to give Delaware back to England.

I think the Swedes were there first, which is why everything in New Castle Co. is named "Christiana".

Posted by: Gran at September 13, 2010 12:23 PM (xmjMj)

297 I have now reached the point where, bluntly, I would just like to give Delaware back to England.

F that noise. Give us back to the Dutch (who I think ran Delaware for about a week between the Swedes and British). At least that way we can get baked.

Posted by: Hoss Fuentes at September 13, 2010 12:23 PM (tOCL6)

298 Is she a reasonably reliable conservative or not? If so, I'm all for her. If not, vote the imbecile Castle and move on to other states.

Posted by: The Mega Independent at September 13, 2010 12:24 PM (sCyeq)

299 For all the supposed focus of O'Donnell and her supporters upon policies... seems the only thing they got is calling folks RINOs. They don't really do much talking about her, her positions, or history.

Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 12:24 PM (+gX1+)

300 Lets say Castle loses, and then O'Donnell loses the general. That will at the very least send a message to the GOP that they better vote small government or they will be booted in primaries. MESSAGE WILL BE RECEIVED LOUD AND CLEAR and only at the cost of one worthless rino who voted for cap and trade!

Good trade off!

Posted by: Dan at September 13, 2010 12:24 PM (1jzSs)

301 300
Has it occurred to anyone that maybe, just maybe O'Donnell WAS discriminated against?

How do any of you know what happened there? Being a conservative does
not mean you can't be discriminated against by other sexist
conservatives ya know.

On the weekly standard...How come they never call Obama a liar? How come
John McCormack never calls Obama a liar? He only saves that description
for Christine? TELLS ME ALOT.

Odd huh?

How anyone thinks you are going to scale back this government with
people like Castle in there is beyond me. Brown was supposed to shrink
government too and he votes for more regulations and new agencies to
monitor our financial activities.

Posted by: Dan at September 13, 2010 12:22 PM (1jzSs)
No, no, no. Didn't you get the email? Stick to the story I put out....

Posted by: Joe "The Sheriff" Biden at September 13, 2010 12:24 PM (LdYLm)

302 Mike Bloomberg endorsed Reid??????

Posted by: Moi at September 13, 2010 12:24 PM (Ez4Ql)

303 And they all happen to be saying the same things. Pure coincidence, I'm sure.

- tsj017

I picture Darth Armey viewing his minions on the telescreen and force-choking anyone who fails him.

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at September 13, 2010 12:24 PM (BaMir)

304 Those of you calling her Nuts..

Your democrat overlords thank you for doing their work for them:

http://tinyurl.com/2dy5pxx

Other claims attribute to her the assertion that Castle supporters broke into her
house in 2008, but O'Donnell never said that, she simply said in
response to a question that she didn't know who did it. This is the
problem I have with the "nuts" defense; spin replaces facts, and once
the image of the candidate is created in the public mind, there is no
way to undo it.

--------------------------------------------

Posted by: Dave C at September 13, 2010 12:25 PM (4uhuW)

305 "Rasmussen:
Chris Coons (D) 37%, Mike Castle (R) 49%
Chris Coons (D) 46%, Christine O'Donnell (R) 36%There it is"

Now, I'm not saying that's wrong. I don't know, but isn't that an August 5th poll result? Is there anything more recent?

Posted by: Kensington at September 13, 2010 12:26 PM (mEyVv)

306 >>>Has it occurred to anyone that maybe, just maybe O'Donnell WAS discriminated against?

No. Her entire career is one of incompetence.

Further, she was running a for-profit PR firm out of her office at a NON-profit job.

That's grounds for firing.

Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 12:26 PM (KUUXH)

307 How come John McCormack never calls Obama a liar? He only saves that description for Christine? TELLS ME ALOT.
Posted by: Dan at September 13, 2010 12:22 PM (1jzSs)

John McCormack is a RINO sellout?

You do realize this is the same guy who made Dede Scazzafava (whatever) cry and provoked Martha Coakley's goon into shoving him, right?

Now he's a sellout?

There's simply no pleasing some people.

Posted by: DrewM. at September 13, 2010 12:26 PM (ycZcD)

308 My sacred honor compels me to admit that I fap to Ms. O'Donnells picture multiple times per day.

Posted by: Will Folks at September 13, 2010 12:28 PM (DYJjQ)

309 293 tsoj, You are a fucking idiot paranoid cunt, you know that? I am so tired of your Loser's Vengeance mentality. It's all about getting back at the people you think are putting you down. Suck my cock you nutjob paranoid loser. I didn't get the "message" from anyone. Go fap your dick forever to thoughts of finally getting payback against a world conspiring against you, bitch.
Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 12:21 PM (KUUXH)

Eh...Ace, can you explian this again?...I don't think you were very clear in your messaging//

Yeesh.

Posted by: dananjcon at September 13, 2010 12:28 PM (pr+up)

310 The word went out from on high: PROTECT OUR GUY.
Didn't DeMint endorse O'Donnell?

Posted by: maverick muse at September 13, 2010 12:29 PM (H+LJc)

311 Hey! We're... in Delaware!

Posted by: Wayne Campell at September 13, 2010 12:29 PM (Xcm+S)

312 It's pathetic to see O'Donnell supporters just flat out lying.

In 2009 Castle had a 56 rating from the ACU. He has a lifetime rating of 52.

For comparison Joe Biden has a lifetime rating of 13 from the ACU. And that's including his early more moderate years.

Posted by: inyourheadZOMBIE at September 13, 2010 12:29 PM (OKbxw)

313 Lets say Castle loses, and then O'Donnell loses the general. That will
at the very least send a message to the GOP that they better vote small
government or they will be booted in primaries. MESSAGE WILL BE RECEIVED
LOUD AND CLEAR and only at the cost of one worthless rino who voted for
cap and trade!

Good trade off!
Posted by: Dan at September 13, 2010 12:24 PM (1jzSs)

Hey genius, you left something out of the equation....one more Democratic vote.

Right now we have 41 Senate seats. I guess that level of awesomeness allows us to toss back the chance to win in a state normally hostile to the GOP and conservatism in general.

"Good trade off!"?

I'd love to face you in a negotiation. I'd take everything you have and you'd thank me for it after we were done.

Posted by: DrewM. at September 13, 2010 12:30 PM (ycZcD)

314 (pretends to walk around, gives up)

Posted by: Garth Algar at September 13, 2010 12:30 PM (Xcm+S)

315 @poconoJoe

Castle opposed the Lilly Ledbetter pay act, which the ACU described
as a “new Pandora’s Box for trial lawyers.” He voted for a January 2009
bill that would prevent the Treasury from spending the $350 billion
that remained in the TARP program. He opposed the Obama stimulus. He
voted against efforts to water down legislation barring federal funds
to ACORN or other organizationsthat employ people who have been
convicted of election-law violations. He voted to eliminate the earmark
for the airport near Johnstown, Pa., named after Rep. John Murtha. He
voted to cut discretionary government spending in the appropriations
for the Departments of Housing and Transportation by 5 percent.

He supported an amendment to the health-care bill that would ban
using taxpayer funds to provide abortion services, an interesting vote
for a self-described pro-choice Republican. He voted against the
health-care bill.

(from NRO)

But yeah, let's put in Chris Coons and make the perfect the enemy of the good.

Posted by: inyourheadZOMBIE at September 13, 2010 12:30 PM (OKbxw)

316 Lets say Castle loses, and then O'Donnell loses the general. That will at the very least send a message to the GOP that they better vote small government or they will be booted in primaries. MESSAGE WILL BE RECEIVED LOUD AND CLEAR and only at the cost of one worthless rino who voted for cap and trade! Good trade off!
But are you willing to trade control of the Senate for that…….

Are you willing to take subpoena power out of the hands of Inahoef, DeMint, Coburn to teach a RINO a lesson?

Are you willing to increase the leverage a Snowe or a Collins may have as a minority member of a committee to teach a RINO a lesson?

If you are, fine.

But I think it should give one pause before hurling full bore in.

Posted by: Mallamutt, AOSHQ Spelling Bee Champion at September 13, 2010 12:30 PM (OWjjx)

317 ace, so glad you you set me straight since you were there and know all the facts of the case.

Come on buddy. None of us were there and have no idea what the whole truth is. That is hardly grounds for disqualification for a senate seat where outright theft is the norm.

Posted by: Dan at September 13, 2010 12:31 PM (1jzSs)

318 Your democrat overlords thank you for doing their work for them:

Ok. But so what? All of us criticizing her are just RINOs, so that's expected. Also... so what? Losing the seat is acceptable, so long as it sends a message.

Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 12:31 PM (+gX1+)

319 Posted by: Dan

In two years when (most likely, but definitely if he goes too far Right) Scott Brown is replaced by a 100% Democrat-voting Liberal in the mode of Kennedy, Frank and Kerry who will stay in the Senate for decades, his value will be recognized.

Until then we should enjoy having an (R) in the seat and hope that we can get the nine (?) seats we need before he's gone.

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 13, 2010 12:31 PM (EHI/u)

320 tsoj,

You are a fucking idiot paranoid cunt, you know that?

I am so tired of your Loser's Vengeance mentality. It's all about getting back at the people you think are putting you down.

Suck my cock you nutjob paranoid loser. I didn't get the "message" from anyone.

Go fap your dick forever to thoughts of finally getting payback against a world conspiring against you, bitch.

Jesus, ace! Too much caffeine, or not enough?

Check my posts in this thread (28, 100, 283). Maybe a bit snarky, but hardly deserving of this level of vitriol.

"Fap my dick forever"? Way ahead of ya on that one.

I'll let others decide if you protest too much.

Posted by: tsj017 at September 13, 2010 12:32 PM (4YUWF)

321 Hey, we just got in an enormous order from Daily Kos. Thanks guys!

Posted by: Jiffy Pop at September 13, 2010 12:32 PM (Xcm+S)

322 DE is lost, no matter who wins in the end.

Repeat after me.
It just doesn't matter. It just doesn't matter. It just doesn't matter. It just doesn't matter.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at September 13, 2010 12:32 PM (L8kaT)

323 "Hold your nose and vote RINO" is a big part of what got us into this Hell as it is.

Sometimes even our guys have a whiff to them.

I really think complacency and a lack of conservative participation at the primary level has been the biggest problem for the last decade. If our guys would have won the nominations, we wouldn't have had to hold our noses.

Posted by: toby928 at September 13, 2010 12:33 PM (S5YRY)

324 325, yes i am willing to do that. 51 senators with our band of RINOS that we all know and love will not stop Obama's left wing supreme court nominees and it will not shrink government.

Posted by: Dan at September 13, 2010 12:34 PM (1jzSs)

325 I'd just like to say that I support DeMint on the basis of his name alone. He sounds like a walking York Peppermint Patty, sweet and refreshing.

Posted by: Filly at September 13, 2010 12:34 PM (Xcm+S)

326 How come John McCormack never calls Obama a liar?

That's Wilson's line. Besides, did McCormack ever join McCain's refrain to besmirch Wilson's cojones?

Posted by: maverick muse at September 13, 2010 12:34 PM (H+LJc)

327 Filly at September 13, 2010 12:34 PM

He's counting on that when he makes his potus bid.

Posted by: maverick muse at September 13, 2010 12:35 PM (H+LJc)

328 @Guy Fawkes

Are you deliberately ignoring polls and other facts which make your posts absurdly stupid?

Posted by: inyourheadZOMBIE at September 13, 2010 12:35 PM (OKbxw)

329 I just want one house and it's subpoena power. Just one and I'll sleep better in November.

Posted by: toby928 at September 13, 2010 12:35 PM (S5YRY)

330 Castle Voted AGAINST speeding up construction on the border fence

Voted FOR bailing out the auto industry

Voted FOR Cash for Clunkers

Voted FOR the economic stimulus bill of September 2008 (

Voted FOR the $700 billion bailout of the financial industries (TARP) in 2008

Voted AGAINST 2007 Earmark Reform

Voted AGAINST the right of workers to a secret ballot

Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 12:36 PM (h8R9p)

331 I really think complacency and a lack of conservative participation at the primary level has been the biggest problem for the last decade. If our guys would have won the nominations, we wouldn't have had to hold our noses.
Posted by: toby928

In truth, conservative participation at the primary level in an otherwise blue state is the problem. If we canot shift the general electorate, then we should align the primaries to match that. Otherwise, we are sending out victims ans statements, not viable candidates.
I've said before that the GOP here should switch to an internal strall poll or caucus. The problem now is that they tried yet another coronation in the middle of a primary.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 12:37 PM (R2fpr)

332 Sorry, I wandered away and have to get back to work anyway, but re Pam @296:
>Conservatives want power to give you back your earnings and your liberty.>Obama wants power to take it from you.>How can you conflate the two?
They also want to tell people who they can marry, what they can take into their bodies, and what they do with their bodies. Not that there's anything wrong with their positions on these issues, per se, but the problem is THEY WANT TO USE THE POWER OF THE GOVERNMENT TO FORCE PEOPLE TO DO LIKE THEY PLEASE. Not the sort of people the vast majority of Americans trust. But hey, principles of smaller government be damned. Let's all ram our heads into the wall one more time!
Also, don't see why I must absorb all that extra baggage to get my (well, actually more like my employer's taxes) reduced.

Posted by: wtp at September 13, 2010 12:37 PM (L51+P)

333 Vote for Castle..

Because we really, really want our leadership positions back.

It's not for the good of the country, that's for sure.

Posted by: Senate Republicans at September 13, 2010 12:37 PM (4uhuW)

334 DrewM, So what if we win with Castle?

That will not help us shrink the government and get our fiscal house in order ONE BIT. It will give some people chairmanships so they can buddy up with their lobbyist pals, thats about it.

Yes and I am sure you would take all my money in a negotiation when you have no idea who I am or what I do lol. I still love your posts though

Posted by: Dan at September 13, 2010 12:37 PM (1jzSs)

335 Posted by: tsj017 at September 13, 2010 12:32 PM

That doesn't even fly as an unapologetic non-apology for calling out Ace:

"The word went out from on high: PROTECT OUR GUY."

Consider yourself the last straw, and remember you put it out there.

Posted by: maverick muse at September 13, 2010 12:38 PM (H+LJc)

336 @Zombie

Are you deliberately ignoring the metal pole in your head and the stick up your ass which make your posts more absurdly stupid?

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at September 13, 2010 12:38 PM (L8kaT)

337 yes i am willing to do that. 51 senators with our band of RINOS that we all know and love will not stop Obama's left wing supreme court nominees and it will not shrink government.
O.K. But if it works out that way…..no screaming about a lack of investigation into this, that or the other things.

This is not a cost free choice. If your disdain for RINOs outweigh giving Republicans the opportunity to investigate, lets say, the Sestak affair in Pennsylvania in time for 2012, then fine, I can accept that. I think it’s a little short sighted, but we will have to agree to disagree.

Just understand, this is not a free choice. There is a cost to it.

Posted by: Mallamutt, AOSHQ Spelling Bee Champion at September 13, 2010 12:39 PM (OWjjx)

338 Is Drew M. turning into a version of me at AoSHQ?

Posted by: Kilgore Trout at September 13, 2010 12:39 PM (4uhuW)

339 I hear there's no such thing as a lost race, or something.

Posted by: Kensington at September 13, 2010 12:40 PM (mEyVv)

340 Voted FOR the Democrat's Mortgage Bailout (Round One).

Voted FOR the Paycheck Equality Bill

Voted FOR the 2009 omnibus bill that meant an additional 8% increase in spending, on top of the stimulus

Voted FOR permanently raising taxes on businesses while temporarily extending tax credits on “green” initiatives

Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 12:40 PM (h8R9p)

341 342
Vote for Castle..

Because we really, really want our leadership positions back.

It's not for the good of the country, that's for sure.

Posted by: Senate Republicans at September 13, 2010 12:37 PM (4uhuW)
This.

Posted by: tsj017 at September 13, 2010 12:40 PM (4YUWF)

342 Jesus, ace! Too much caffeine, or not enough?Check my posts in this thread (28, 100, 283). Maybe a bit snarky, but hardly deserving of this level of vitriol.
Exactly. Who are notteam players? Who started throwing the mud?
In both questions, the answer is the Castle Camp.
Yes, we will all support him should he win primary.
But will he do the same should O'Donnell win, or will he be like Loser Lisa and havea RINO hissy fit?

Posted by: Curmudgeon at September 13, 2010 12:40 PM (ujg0T)

343 The thought of Holder taking the Fifth on the NBP case gives me a boner.

Posted by: toby928 at September 13, 2010 12:41 PM (S5YRY)

344 @pam

Can you not post your things in giant letter and bolded. It makes you look more insipid than you already have clearly made yourself out to be.

We get it. Castle is a centrist. He's not a good conservative.

He's a fuckton better than Chris Coons and you typical Delaware democrat though.

You're apparently too dumb to understand that and are more than willing to trade all the things he did vote correctly on just so that you can keep your purity rings on.

Posted by: inyourheadZOMBIE at September 13, 2010 12:41 PM (OKbxw)

345 I've completely ignored this issue, not living in Delaware and whatnot.

But after reading through this thread, holy crap. This issue is awesome. People are totally freaking out here. It's like a classic flame thread... only with extra authenticity. I love it.

(On a more boring note, let me see if I grasp the issue here: there are two crappy Republicans to choose from, neither of which is particularly likely to win. Is this a fair summary? This is, like, new to me.)

Posted by: sandy burger at September 13, 2010 12:41 PM (Pson9)

346 If Castle wins the general, and even -a single one- of his "30-50%" conservative votes happens to be in a vote that wasn't already completely ours, a vote that -actually makes a difference-, I'll eat my hat. His conservative votes will only happen when there's no danger at all ofit changing the outcome. Just like with Specter, the Maine sisters, etc. Keep banging the "we want the chairmanships" line, cause as weak as a tradeoff it is for bearing the brunt of the damage this guy will do to our brand name as he votes Dem in every close vote, it's at least better than the "he'll vote our way 30-50% of the time" nonsense.

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 12:41 PM (9zHDv)

347 @Curmudgeon

yeah, because accusation of being gay, random floating party switch accusations and questioning his supporters loyalty is all kosher in your book

Posted by: inyourheadZOMBIE at September 13, 2010 12:42 PM (OKbxw)

348 The thought of Holder taking the Fifth on the NBP case gives me a boner.
Personally, I dream of Inhofe grilling Al Gore.

Posted by: Mallamutt, AOSHQ Spelling Bee Champion at September 13, 2010 12:42 PM (OWjjx)

349 there are two crappy Republicans to choose from, neither of which is particularly likely to win.

Heh.

Posted by: situation normal at September 13, 2010 12:43 PM (S5YRY)

350 Ace, I disagree with your analysis about Castle. I hope that you realize that this is a respectful disagreement.
I also hope you will respond.
One argument for Castle is that he will vote for us half the time, and Coons none of the time. This isn't really true; Castle only votes for us half the time when the NRSC is promising him a Senate seat in return. He voted with the ACU 26% of the time in 2008, and 35% in 2007.
However, even that is not the most important issue.
Coons will indeed vote conservative between 0 and 5% of the time.
More importantly, however, Coons will have a vote on the GOP leadership none of the time. Castle will have that vote all the time.
You sound as if you think the GOP leadership--and which Republicans will be seated on which committees--is written in stone.
It's not. These matters are chosen by the GOP Senators. If Castle wins, he will have a vote in these matters. And his vote will always be to the left.
This may not seem like a big deal. Presumably, he will support Mitch McConnell, who although not really conservative is no Mike Castle. But he won't give his vote for free either. What if Mike Castle demands, in exchange for voting for McConnell and his favorites in the committees, a resuscitationof the "assault weapons ban" that is hugely unpopular with the GOP rank and file, and not even all that popular any more among independents and even many Democrats? Do you want Mike Castle determining the issues that the GOP will be saddled with in future elections?
Mike Castle would arguably do less harm if he actually did switch to the Democrats.

Posted by: Ken at September 13, 2010 12:43 PM (CDrOo)

351 Is this really the best place and best time to make our stand for a deep red Senate?

I don't really buy this. I do not think the people voting for O'Donnell are walking around with rose colored glasses thinking she will restore true conservatism or that she is some genius. I think this is about a referendum on the republican leadership in DE. There was only one reason to run Mike Castle this year and that's because it was easy. He wanted it, had the name recognition and campaign cash. It was easier not to buck the system. It was a fundamental mistake for this election year. Mike Castle is a liberal and an incumbent and nobody seems to want that this year. The Dems, like Schumer, will win in their strongholds because no one will dare oppose them. But these fools in DE thought they would promote the most liberal republican in the House to a Senate seat and everyone would just sit idly by? In the republican primary yet? Have they been watching the news for the past 2 years? They should have strongly urged Castle to try to keep his House seat or retire. They could then have recruited someone like Brown or McMahon or Fiorina would would be only slightly less "moderate" then Castle but without his awful baggage and they would have cruised in the primary too. If you want to blame the loss of this Senate seat on anyone, if indeed it is lost, then the persons most responsible are the R leadership in DE. Without a Mike Castle there is no Christine O'Donnell. I think the fact that the non-party endorsed candidate in the House race is also leading in polls for the primary is indicative of this dynamic.

The republican voters in DE have had enough of the leadership of their party.
This is just as much, if not more, about the leadership in DE Rs being too Blue than about the Senate not being Red enough. You can say "Not now" to them till you are blue in the face but it isn't going to do much good. They have been hearing that for 20 years.

Posted by: Rocks at September 13, 2010 12:43 PM (ivAmM)

352 ...Still waiting for someone to demonstrate that a O'Donnell win will be a definite victory for conservatism and shrinking government...

Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 12:43 PM (+gX1+)

353 @sandy burger

read the polls. we're talking a moderate/centrist who is a pretty good bet to win versus a crazy purported conservative who has just about no chance

and Qwinn, its great that you'd prefer a guaranteed six year of shitty liberal as fuck votes from Coons over the alternative

Posted by: inyourheadZOMBIE at September 13, 2010 12:44 PM (OKbxw)

354

Suing ISI is like suing your grandma because she got you teh Mercedes with black leather instead of creme leather. Fucking ingrate.

ISI is a group that takes college kids and shows them that conservatives can be intellectuals, too. Flies you out to the sticks of Michigan to hang out with a bunch of other proto-conservative smartass punk kids.

Suing ISI is UBER creepy, and makes me firmly against this batshit crazy bitch.

I was formerly completely uninterested, but after this, I hope she goes down in flames.

Posted by: s'moron at September 13, 2010 12:44 PM (UaxA0)

355 Exactly. Who are notteam players? Who started throwing the mud?
In both questions, the answer is the Castle Camp.
Well……..in fairness, I believe the first post about this race started when O’Donnell’s camp started floating accusations that Castle was gay.

Posted by: Mallamutt, AOSHQ Spelling Bee Champion at September 13, 2010 12:44 PM (OWjjx)

356 Pam just listed a number of things that add up to increased spending, and which refute the notion of fiscal sanity, whih is the one positive thing that they've been using here in Delaware.

He has opposed other spending and control grabs, such as Obamacare. But Pam's documentation should be what we are considering, instead of disgusting gay rumors, or unfounded rumors that Castle will switch parties.

Our problem here is that if we are going on electability, we efectively need to do what we've been doing; hold our noses, vote for Castle, and move on. And that is, and should be antithetical to how we wish to participate in public policy formulation.

And yet here, we must.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 12:45 PM (R2fpr)

357 Wow...who pissed in all of your Cheerios this morning?

Posted by: dananjcon at September 13, 2010 12:45 PM (pr+up)

358 "and Qwinn, its great that you'd prefer a guaranteed six year of shitty liberal as fuck votes from Coons over the alternative"
Uh, way to completely ignore the only point I've made: Castle's supposed conservative votes will only happen when everyone knows how the vote will turn out anyway. When his vote will actually matter, when it's a -close- vote, he'll always vote Dem. That's how Specter did it, that's how the Maine sisters did it, that's just the way it is. Those 30-50% conservative votes are utterly worthless.

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 12:47 PM (9zHDv)

359 Wow...who pissed in all of your Cheerios this morning?
Its piss…….crap, I thought I just spilled my OJ in the cereal this morning.

No wonder it tasted salty.

Posted by: Mallamutt, AOSHQ Spelling Bee Champion at September 13, 2010 12:47 PM (OWjjx)

360 @Curmudgeon yeah, because accusation of being gay, random floating party switch accusations and questioning his supporters loyalty is all kosher in your book
Oh really?

Posted by: Curmudgeon at September 13, 2010 12:47 PM (ujg0T)

361 Posted by: Dan at September 13, 2010 12:37 PM (1jzSs)

We're going to need 60 votes in 2012 to repeal ObamaCare. You might say Castle is iffy on that* but I'll take that over a guaranteed no from Coons.

I don't think the GOP has ever had a filibuster proof majority. If we are going to get one in time for the repeal effort, 2e need to steal some seats like this to have a shot at it in '12.

But by your own comment you're happy about throwing that away to send a message. Sorry, I can't get on board with that.

*He's not as iffy as Levin makes him out to be but with a guy like Castle you never know. Still better to have a chance to convince him to come on board than write it off with Coons.

Posted by: DrewM. at September 13, 2010 12:47 PM (ycZcD)

362 One argument for Castle is that he will vote for us half the time,
and Coons none of the time. This isn't really true; Castle only votes
for us half the time when the NRSC is promising him a Senate seat in
return. He voted with the ACU 26% of the time in 2008, and 35% in 2007.
However, even that is not the most important issue.
Coons will indeed vote conservative between 0 and 5% of the time.THIS. IS. A. LIE.His ACU rating in 2009 was 56. His lifetime rating is 52. He has made conservative votes under republican and democratic presidents and in minority and majority chambers. Blankly asserting a lie only diminishes your credibility.And you don't seem to understand how committee voting works. As long as he caucuses with the republicans (which only O'Donnell supporters have circulated as a smear that he won't), the republicans and their leadership will get to choose committee chairmanships. Meaning for example a Sessions on the Judiciary Committee. Something vitally needed to prevent a bunch of Reinhardt's getting confirmed to appellate courts.

Posted by: inyourheadZOMBIE at September 13, 2010 12:48 PM (OKbxw)

363 wtc

Oh, so stealing generations of your family's earnings, and our private healthcare, and a thousand other things....all gets thrown out the window because you (or whomever) want to "marry" their boyfriend?

Good grief.

Dressing up anal sex in flowery civil rights language, and creating a new "oppressed" victim status according to ones sexual habits, is thankfully a job for the States. As is abortion.

Conservatives didn't start this fire....liberals did, conservatives are simply on defense on these issues.

Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 12:48 PM (h8R9p)

364 ...because ISI's conservative philosophy dictated that women must be subordinate to men.
Aye carumba.

Posted by: rdbrewer at September 13, 2010 12:49 PM (+wdm+)

365 Wow...who pissed in all of your Cheerios this morning?

Posted by: dananjcon at September 13, 2010 12:45 PM (pr+up)
F'real. I've cracked mt first beer already and it's not even 1:00 (it's my only day off in two weeks). It's too early for popcorn.

Posted by: ErikW at September 13, 2010 12:50 PM (5Hi4I)

366 Oh, except once in a blue moon he'll swing a close vote to the conservatives, like, you know, actually funding the war, in exchange for the rest of the Republicans bending over on stuff like cap and trade or another gun ban. Those do happen too, once in a while. Course, if he wasn't there to be bought, another Dem would vote for the war because they don't really want -that- hanging on their heads in the next election, but it's easy for them to pretend, and get even more of what they want that way without any risk to themselves. That's what infiltrators are -for-.

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 12:50 PM (9zHDv)

367 I don't really buy this. I do not think the people voting for O'Donnell are walking around with rose colored glasses thinking she will restore true conservatism or that she is some genius.
No, it's honestly not that. It's that we are tired of the RINO sellout treatment. See Hayworth, J.D. We understood J.D. wasn't sterling, but we were fed up with McLame, his bimbo wife and slut daughter.

Posted by: Curmudgeon at September 13, 2010 12:50 PM (ujg0T)

368 wtp
what they can take into their bodies,
THEY WANT TO USE THE POWER OF THE GOVERNMENT TO FORCE PEOPLE TO DO LIKE THEY PLEASE.

From conservatives contrasted with Obama, you reference THEY?
That's Big-O preaching to legislate what you may and may not eat and drink, and RINO McCain legislating to prohibit nutritional supplements without an Rx, not conservatives. Don't forget, it's McCain who constrained free speech as well for years until the SCOTUS knocked down McCain-Feingold.

As far as forcing the government to become involved with marriage, that took the Left's aggression, THEY having already monopolized America's education system that mandates without parental consent the teaching of sexual activity and the "special status" homosexuals "enjoy" before the law, that we are no longer all equal under the law, perverting childhood not to mention inhibiting the legal stability of traditional families, granting the "state" authoritarian and abusive powers.

Posted by: maverick muse at September 13, 2010 12:50 PM (H+LJc)

369 No one pissed in my cheerios, except for tsoj.

I am so sick of the endless, retarded fucking "analysis" whereby not a leaf may fall nor a nut may take seed without some conspiracy of the "elites" against the "people."

It's fucking retarded and it's usually insulting. No one told me to do anything, nor did anyone "suggest" I do anything, nor did anyone promise me anything.

I am sick of people who are so fucking deranged with anger they feel compelled, and justified, at tossing insults about the integrity of people they don't even know, just because they're so unreasonably hateful against the entire world that common courtesy is no longer an ethic.

I didn't insult tsoj or anyone. And in return tsoj tells me I'm part of the Vast Center-Right Conspiracy and I'm getting my talking points from the RNC.

And he wasn't the first. Early in the thread some equally-deranged conspiratorial nutjob advanced the claim this post was "Paid for by the RNC."

Well fuck you too, asshole.

Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 12:51 PM (KUUXH)

370 @Qwinn

even in that scenario (which I disagree with, hell I can immediately point you towards certain appellate nominees where that wsan't true) having a republican who is willing to vote for other putrid legislation is better than having a dem because they can at least win concessions in the legislation.

It's exactly how Snowe held out her vote until they made it slightly more conservative. Even marginal conservative concessions are better than the alternative of none.

Posted by: inyourheadZOMBIE at September 13, 2010 12:51 PM (OKbxw)

371 And
you don't seem to understand how committee voting works. As long as he
caucuses with the republicans (which only O'Donnell supporters have
circulated as a smear that he won't), the republicans and their
leadership will get to choose committee chairmanships. Meaning for
example a Sessions on the Judiciary Committee. Something vitally needed
to prevent a bunch of Reinhardt's getting confirmed to appellate
courts.

Posted by: inyourheadZOMBIE at September 13, 2010 12:48 PM (OKbxw)

The judge who just ruled that DADT is unconstitutional was appointed in 1999 by Clinton when the Rs had 55 seats in the Senate.

Posted by: Rocks at September 13, 2010 12:51 PM (ivAmM)

372 This thread needs DiT's painfully hot cheerleader pic from Saturday.

Posted by: toby928 at September 13, 2010 12:52 PM (S5YRY)

373 "I am sick of people who are so fucking deranged with anger they feel compelled, and justified, at tossing insults about the integrity of people they don't even know"
Sorry, Ace, but...
*reads the topic, and what Ace has said here and elsewhere about O'Donnell*
*laughs*

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 12:53 PM (9zHDv)

374 And that, by the way, is straight out of the leftist playbook -- never credit your opponent's actual stated reasons for arguing a certain way; insist his hidden reasons, his motivation, is illicit.

For some jackass-bitches like tsoj, "elitist conspiracy" is the new "Racism."

Did I insult him? No, I did not. Can I get my *stated* reasons for being against the flaky lawsuit-happy doltish O'Donnell credited as being my real reason?

Or is it too easy and too fun to postulate I'm gettin' paid?

Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 12:54 PM (KUUXH)

375 @Curmudgeon

First good job ignoring the smears the O'Donnell campaign has been running.

Secondly while Jacobsen is usually excellent, that particular post is awful. Ace has actually documented the complaint itself. Jacobsen immediately went to the Hillary sexist defense without any actual analysis of the complaint, despite the fact he's a lawer.

I would love to have you or Jacobsen actually read this post and the complaint and come back to me with a straight face that you aren't skeptical of her complaints. And we're not even touching on the fact that the lawsuit was for about 7 million dollars.

Posted by: inyourheadZOMBIE at September 13, 2010 12:54 PM (OKbxw)

376 This thread needs DiT's painfully hot cheerleader pic from Saturday.
Posted by: toby928 at September 13, 2010 12:52 PM (S5YRY)
Go Bucks!

Posted by: ErikW at September 13, 2010 12:54 PM (5Hi4I)

377 Voted AGAINST the 2008 Republican budget resolution that would have made the Bush tax cuts permanent, capped discretionary spending.

Voted AGAINST reforming the Endangered Species Act
Voted AGAINST a ban on federal eminent-domain seizures

Voted FOR spending an additional $100 million on Public Broadcasting

Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 12:54 PM (h8R9p)

378 "It's exactly how Snowe held out her vote until they made it slightly more conservative. Even marginal conservative concessions are better than the alternative of none."
Um, what? If Snowe weren't a sellout, they wouldn't have passed that crap -at all-. Holy crap, you call this strategy?

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 12:55 PM (9zHDv)

379 Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 12:54 PM (h8R9p)
lol
Geezus, we get it. You don't like Castle. Back away from the big bold font!

Posted by: Delta Smelt at September 13, 2010 12:57 PM (A0VTZ)

380 382
"I am sick of people who are so fucking deranged with anger they
feel compelled, and justified, at tossing insults about the integrity
of people they don't even know"
Sorry, Ace, but...
*reads the topic, and what Ace has said here and elsewhere about O'Donnell*
*laughs*

Thats' funny right there, I don't care who you are.

Posted by: Dave C at September 13, 2010 12:57 PM (4uhuW)

381 Hey, Qwinn?

O'DONNELL IS NOT YOU.

Some of you people are fucking assholes. I say something mean about someone you got a crush on in the last week and you take it as a PERSONAL INSULT AGAINST YOU YOURSELF, apparently justifying personal insults going the other direction.

So I can't point out this woman is lawsuit-happy and without apparently any sort of actual job history without inviting personal insults about my integrity?

If Christine O'Donnell wants to come in here and insult me, she's permitted to do so, on the theory of "You did it first."

You are not, and neither is tsoj.

Idiots. Any justification will do for firing off your anger at a World That Done Ya Wrong.

Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 12:57 PM (KUUXH)

382 What are the reasons to vote for O'Donnell, policy-wise? (Specifics, since we've already seen the same for Castle.)

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at September 13, 2010 12:57 PM (yfJ6g)

383 Yeah, Dave C, it's "funny" but only to a confirmed retard such as yourself.

Apparently I'm not permitted to note someone is unqualified for office without inviting insults about being on the take.

Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 12:58 PM (KUUXH)

384 Again, what is conservative about suing a conservative non-profit group for using their resources? What is conservative about lying about the numbers of counties you won in 2008? What is conservative about accusing a radio host of being bought by Mike Castle? What is conservative about saying Castle is gay or going to bolt the party if he loses?

How is an O'Donnell victory a win for conservatives, rather than just a win for O'Donnell?

Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 12:58 PM (+gX1+)

385 bimbo wife and slut daughter.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at September 13, 2010 12:50 PM (ujg0T)
I resemble that remark!

Posted by: Dina Lohan at September 13, 2010 12:59 PM (pr+up)

386 I NO LONGER CARE ABOUT DELAWARE

BUT I AM AFRAID YOU WILL NOT GET MY POINT UNLESS I PUT IT IN BIG, BOLD BLOCK

Posted by: Mallamutt, Now with 60% Bigger Fonts! at September 13, 2010 12:59 PM (OWjjx)

387 Any justification will do for firing off your anger at a World That Done Ya Wrong.

*scuffles shoes in the dirt*

Posted by: human nature at September 13, 2010 01:00 PM (S5YRY)

388 No, it's honestly not that. It's that we are
tired of the RINO sellout treatment. See Hayworth, J.D. We understood
J.D. wasn't sterling, but we were fed up with McLame, his bimbo wife and
slut daughter.

Posted by: Curmudgeon at September 13, 2010 12:50 PM (ujg0T)

Arizona is a different dynamic from a NE blue state. Most of the people in the NE have not had the opportunity to vote for a conservative candidate, in either party, with even a remote chance of getting nominated in many years. This is especially galling when the R's candidate is even more liberal on an issue then even the general populace of the state such as Castle with guns. There is no logical reason for Mike Castle to have an F rating from the NRA. Even being slightly conservative instead of moderate on the issue would not have hurt him in DE. The problem with Rs in the NE is not that they are too conservative to get elected, they aren't. It's that they are often far more liberal than they need to be simply because they think this will lead to an easy reelection.

Posted by: Rocks at September 13, 2010 01:00 PM (ivAmM)

389 No doubt in my mind that Castle will pull a spector if it fits his needs.

No doubt in my mind that O'Donnell is a paranoid who just thinks it would be cool to be a senator like alvin greene.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at September 13, 2010 01:00 PM (L8kaT)

390 I like the cut of pam's jib and find her thoughts interesting.

Posted by: The Mega Independent at September 13, 2010 01:01 PM (sCyeq)

391 No such thing as a lost race.

Posted by: Dave C at September 13, 2010 01:01 PM (4uhuW)

392 And in return tsoj tells me I'm part of the Vast Center-Right Conspiracy and I'm getting my talking points from the RNC.

Really? Here's what I posted:

28
Is there EVER a hill worth fighting for?Apparently not.100
I see this campaign against O'Donnell (the same accusations, by
everyone at once) as analogous to the campaign against Boehner (the
same accusations, by everyone at once).The word went out from on high: PROTECT OUR GUY.And they all happen to be saying the same things. Pure coincidence, I'm sure.283 Why,
just this weekend, I found out that John Boehner is a chain-smoking,
cocktail-swilling country-clubber. Just so happened that every major
media outlet decided to cover that. At the same time.
And that led to . . .

293
tsoj,

You are a fucking idiot paranoid cunt, you know that?

I am so tired of your Loser's Vengeance mentality. It's all about getting back at the people you think are putting you down.

Suck my cock you nutjob paranoid loser. I didn't get the "message" from anyone.

Go fap your dick forever to thoughts of finally getting payback against a world conspiring against you, bitch.
Honestly, that's something I'd expect from DU or Kos. You're better than that, ace. Really.

Posted by: tsj017 at September 13, 2010 01:02 PM (4YUWF)

393 I like the cut of pam's jib and find her thoughts interesting.
I believe she has a newsletter.

Posted by: toby928 at September 13, 2010 01:02 PM (S5YRY)

394 Your guys are very to good. Maybe you would like to gucci hand bag?

Posted by: Broken English Spammer at September 13, 2010 01:03 PM (sCyeq)

395 If by Rudyard Kipling

Posted by: Radiant at September 13, 2010 01:03 PM (dQdrY)

396 "Hey, Qwinn? O'DONNELL IS NOT YOU. Some of you people are fucking assholes. I say something mean about someone you got a crush on in the last week and you take it as a PERSONAL INSULT AGAINST YOU YOURSELF, apparently justifying personal insults going the other direction."
Holy fucking hell. Mindquoting forme exactly what "PERSONAL INSULT" I lobbed against you, Ace?

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 01:03 PM (9zHDv)

397 @Qwinn

Are you a fucking moron. If we had a liberal from Maine in place of her what do you think the alternative outcome would have been. Do you understand what the word marginal means.

Again we are talking about a DEEP BLUE state. You wholeheartedly take a marginal improvement in a place like that.

and it looks like the last remaining neuron in Pam's head blew its fuse

Posted by: inyourheadZOMBIE at September 13, 2010 01:03 PM (OKbxw)

398

ace, your ISI check is in the mail.

yeesh.

Seriously, insulting this bitch for suing a quiet, diligent, and profoundly effective, hard-core, conservative organization (look up Russell Kirk, fer krissakes) is not only NOT part of teh milquetoast conspiracy, it's positively the most pro social-con thing ace has done in his whole fucking life.

Posted by: s'morn at September 13, 2010 01:04 PM (UaxA0)

399 Sorry guys, didn't know it was bad form to post in bold here. So glad you informed me of this most important issue!

Voted AGAINST UN reform.

Voted FOR funding UN Population Fund.

Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 01:04 PM (h8R9p)

400 I think democracy counts -- and more than ideology, too. I would say
democracy is my highest bullet-point when it comes to ideology. I do
not see Scott Brown as a "sell out" -- I see him as representing his mix
of liberal and soft-conservative constitutents.

And I do not see Mike Castle as a "sell out" for doing the same.

We are in the midst of an electoral revolution, Ace. The peasants are revolting.

There is a big difference between Scott Brown and Mike Castle - Scott Brown was not a DC insider. Brown never served a term in the US House or Senate and he wore a barn coat and he drove a pickup truck during his campaign for Ted Kennedy's Senate seat.

O'Donnell is a political outsider without a Washington affiliation. In a matter of a few weeks, she's gone from crazy nut to a threat to the Ruling Class. She might win, and for the Ruling Class machine pols in a Blue Plantation state, the idea of a "bottom rail up" revolt is just too upsetting to imagine, especially after the Murkowski defeat.

Posted by: mrp at September 13, 2010 01:05 PM (HjPtV)

401 Michelle Malkin
September 13

On August 20, I endorsed Christine Oâ€™Donnell for the Delaware Senate GOP primary race. As I said on Sean Hannityâ€™s TV show last week in repeating that endorsement, she is certainly far from perfect (who is?). But I think nine terms are enough for duck-and-hide, cap-and-tax liberal Republican Mike Castle â€” and it looks like GOP primary voters in Delaware are coming to the same conclusion as the primary looms tomorrow. I repeat: Entrenched incumbency is not an argument for more entrenched incumbency.

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

This isnâ€™t â€œMain Street.â€ This is the road to progressive hell. We already have one too many shady Soros Republicans in the Senate â€” and John McCain doesnâ€™t need any more company.

As I noted a few weeks ago, the stakes are raised â€” not just for Delaware, but for the nation â€” in this race because this is a special election for VP Joe Bidenâ€™s Senate seat. The next Senator from Delaware will serve the remaining four years of Bidenâ€™s term. Which means he or she will be seated immediately after election and will be in place to vote in any lame duck Senate session. Cap-and-tax is on the table for this session. From his record and from his radical enviro associations, we know what Castle would do in the name of â€œRepublican Main Streetâ€ values to screw over not only Delawareans, but all taxpayers.

Nine terms are enough.

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at September 13, 2010 01:05 PM (BaMir)

402 I didn't insult tsoj or anyone. And in return tsoj tells me I'm part of the Vast Center-Right Conspiracy and I'm getting my talking points from the RNC.
Whoa, whoa, whoa. We all should know that Ace has always been "outside the tent pissing in", not vice versa.

Posted by: Curmudgeon at September 13, 2010 01:06 PM (ujg0T)

403 Ya know that ZOMBIE fella must be a fucking genius, because his arguments include calling everyone else stupid, dumb, a moron or questioning fuses in peoples brains.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at September 13, 2010 01:06 PM (L8kaT)

404 Hey dude? You just informed me that I was part of a coordinated conspiracy against O'Donnell. Why? Gee, apparently for the crime of Linking Confirmed Reportage in the First Degree.

Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 01:06 PM (KUUXH)

405 Hitler's gonna be pissed if Castle loses.

Posted by: some1 at September 13, 2010 01:06 PM (JfhXO)

406 ...she's ANTI MASTURBATION!!!111!!!

Posted by: Paul Reubens at September 13, 2010 01:07 PM (pr+up)

407 Posted by: Mallamutt, Now with 60% Bigger Fonts

That font was bigger than the state.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 01:07 PM (R2fpr)

408 Sorry guys, didn't know it was bad form to post in bold here.

Great form is making each bullet point a link to the House Roll Call.

And posting tiny. It's like being a close talker.

Posted by: toby928 at September 13, 2010 01:07 PM (S5YRY)

409 Ah, Zombie, I see what you're saying.
You know what the difference would be? The Dems would totally own their clusterf*ck legislation. As it is, Snowe, and therefore the Republican Party, bears part of the responsibility. You think no conservatives stay home as a result of that?
The "minor concessions" bought by Snowe were pathetic and hardly worth creating the impression among 90% of theconservative basethat both parties are part of the problem.

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 01:07 PM (9zHDv)

410 Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 01:04 PM (h8R9p)

It wasn't just bold, it was ten feet high. But I was absolutely dead serious about the newsletter.

Posted by: The Mega Independent at September 13, 2010 01:08 PM (sCyeq)

411 Um, Ace, was this in response to me??
"Hey dude? You just informed me that I was part of a coordinated conspiracy against O'Donnell."
Seriously, SERIOUSLY, dude, please quote exactly where I even -remotely- suggested anything close to that.

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 01:09 PM (9zHDv)

412 >>>Holy fucking hell. Mind quoting for me exactly what "PERSONAL INSULT" I lobbed against you, Ace?

You did not insult me; you "giggled" at the idea that I thought I shouldn't be insulted by tosj. You claimed that because I was somehow too mean to O'Donnell I had invited that and couldn't complain.

Hey, I'm not even telling you what I know of O'Donnell. I know from people that have attempted to have her at events that she is an inappropriate-anger sort-of-insane nasty diva.

And i know she's a goddamned imbecile.

Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 01:09 PM (KUUXH)

413 Here are O'Donnell's stances on the issues, from her own website: http://tinyurl.com/2ebnjnq.

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at September 13, 2010 01:09 PM (yfJ6g)

414 Hey dude? You just informed me that I was part of a coordinated conspiracy against O'Donnell. Why? Gee, apparently for the crime of Linking Confirmed Reportage in the First Degree.
Posted by: ace

This is getting entirely out of hand. I don't believe for a minute that there is either a conspiracy or a right wing version of Journolist.
by the exact same token, Black Orchids' comment about Delaware women was also uncalled for, especially since it includes my daughters.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 01:09 PM (R2fpr)

415 Even Michelle Malkin's endorsement says nothing about why someone should vote for O'Donnell.

Posted by: AmishDude at September 13, 2010 01:10 PM (T0NGe)

416 For one second, could a O'Donnell supporter stop insulting Ace and others and come up with a pro-O'Donnell reason to vote for her, rather than an anti-Castle one? A reason that can not be easily refuted. Because I've been asking for that for a number of hours, and have yet to get it.

Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 01:10 PM (+gX1+)

417 So you know I haven't been giving it to her with both barrels. Just the one.

I don't even care if she's an emotionally-sketchy dolt... if she could win. But she can't, and today marks the highest level of statewide support she'll have.

Just wait until the media and Dems GET WHAT THEY WANT and get her on the ballot.

Suckers.

Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 01:10 PM (KUUXH)

418
Voted AGAINST the 05 Republican budget.

Voted AGAINST an amendment to cut spending by 2%.

Voting AGAINST a bill to protect gun-makers from lawsuits.

Voted FOR a bill sponsored by notoriously anti-gun Representative James Moran, outlawed exports of .50-caliber rifles, and it marked the first congressional vote on any kind of .50-caliber ban.

Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 01:11 PM (h8R9p)

419 >>> I don't believe for a minute that there is either a conspiracy or a right wing version of Journolist.

I didn't say you... why would you think I meant you? I directed this at tosj and whoever claimed "Paid for by the RNC" in the first or second comment.

I do not believe that ALL of Castle's detractors are doing this, nor all of O'Donnell's supporters. Many people come in here and offer their good-faith reasons for their support. I have no problem with that (except for thinking they're wrong).

It's the insults and the fucking idiotic conspiracy-theorizing that bothers me.

Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 01:12 PM (KUUXH)

420 Seriously?You simply don't accept the fact that Delaware is A FUCKING LIBERAL STATE! Win all the conservative votes in the state and you'll get about 20-30% of the vote. And that's it.Congratulations. That's a brilliant plan.

Losing the primary to a "f*cking nutjob" doesn't appear to be a brilliant plan either, Drew.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at September 13, 2010 01:12 PM (FkKjr)

421 Okay, let's go over that other assumption.
Seems to me she was all of 6 points behind Coons. With 14% undecided. In August. And since then she's gained a shitload of points on Castle, which indicates growing popularity.
She might have less of a chance than Castle would, but "SHE CANNOT WIN" is in no way supported by the numbers. Hell, by that measure, Miller could not possibly have won against Murkowski. Hell, I think his numbers were worse around the same time.

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 01:14 PM (9zHDv)

422

This is a good time to remind everyone...

nobody expects the inquisition.

Posted by: AoS Pirate...now with extra-absorbent wings at September 13, 2010 01:14 PM (uFokq)

423 For one second, could a O'Donnell supporter stop insulting Ace and others and come up with a pro-O'Donnell reason to vote for her, rather than an anti-Castle one? A reason that can not be easily refuted. Because I've been asking for that for a number of hours, and have yet to get it.
Posted by: Tom In Korea

1.I am NOT voting for Christine O'Donnell tomorrow. I am voting for Castle.
2. I have not been insulting anyone. There's been a crap load of people insulting everyone within the state of Delaware in these threads.
Having said that:
A. She's pro-life, he's pro-abortion.
B. She wants to repeal Obamacare. (yes, I know that he does too)
C. She wants to eliminate earmarks.
D. She is also against much of the spending that Castle is against, and some that Castle supported.
E. She is against cap and trade. Castle voted for it.
F. She is against the Disclose act. He voted for it.
G. She got an 'A' rating from the NRA. Castle got an 'F'.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 01:15 PM (R2fpr)

424 Can you not post your things in giant letter and bolded. It makes you look more insipid than you already have clearly made yourself out to be.
Next post: letters individually cut out from magazines and joined together to form words.
I hate to break it to anyone who can't wait for this election to be over tomorrow nite...but the recount on this jawn is going to go on for days.

Posted by: kallisto at September 13, 2010 01:15 PM (+FkcS)

425 "I didn't say you... why would you think I meant you? I directed this at tosj and whoever claimed "Paid for by the RNC" in the first or second comment. "
And me. You directed this explicitly at me. Even though I didn't say a damn thing about conspiracies or coordination or anything remotely like it.

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 01:15 PM (9zHDv)

426 425 For one second, could a O'Donnell supporter stop insulting Ace and others and come up with a pro-O'Donnell reason to vote for her, rather than an anti-Castle one?...
She only gives generics ("I'm for...) on her website. (I've been asking the same thing, though I don't have a horse in this race.)

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at September 13, 2010 01:16 PM (yfJ6g)

427 With a GOP-controlled Senate, the Dems would not get their clusterfuck legislation onto the floor in the first place.I really don't see what's so difficult about this. It's distressing to see how many of O'Donnell's people would flunk remedial civics.
Ahem.

Posted by: GOP House at September 13, 2010 01:16 PM (ujg0T)

428 I figured something like this clusterfuck would happen when the tea parties morphed into the Tea Party™.

I'm just glad it's all over tomorrow and we can get back to attacking the real enemy.

(We are going to do that, aren't we?)

Posted by: Andy at September 13, 2010 01:16 PM (5Rurq)

429 With a GOP-controlled Senate, the Dems would not get their clusterfuck legislation onto the floor in the first place.

There was a GOP Controlled Senate and Bush couldn't get Social Security reform.. Snarlin' Arlen was one of the Senators to help block/oppose it.

(I'm not sure if it ever made it to the floor or if it died in committee)

Posted by: Dave C at September 13, 2010 01:17 PM (4uhuW)

430 "With a GOP-controlled Senate, the Dems would not get their clusterfuck legislation onto the floor in the first place."
Yes, it's a great thing that no left-supported legislation ever made it to the floor of the Senate in 2000-2006. Nor were any leftist judges ever confirmed out of Republican controlled Senates. You're absolutely right.

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 01:17 PM (9zHDv)

431 @Qwinn

That's the thing - I'm taking your worst case scenario - which I don't even believe in. I also don't believe the ownership bit. The optics of big things like health care and banking reform are they are obama's. Few people but partisans remember the random defections. And at this point after the clusterfuck dems have gotten us in do you think that people won't already hold him accountable? Having a dedicated minority might even be able to exacerbate that frustation because it shows what even a small effective minority can do.

@Guy Fawkes

I've repeatedly put down facts and logical arguments. O'Donnell supporters don't address them. You kept on repeating the bullshit about neither being able to win in the face of polls which say the opposites. Pam posts shit like a mindless drone without addressing the fact that there are things that Castle has done that are good from a conservative perspective, and without addressing the main argument from Castle supporters - that it is incredibly worthwhile to have marginal support for an agenda from a deep blue state. The truth is we could posts insipid lists like Pam for just about EVERY senator.

Posted by: inyourheadZOMBIE at September 13, 2010 01:17 PM (OKbxw)

432 RE: Sean Hannity, Malkin, Levin, et. al. endorsing O’Donnell.

Please. Friggin please. Nothing, and I mean nothing, makes me want to vote for Castle more than hearing these windbags telling me that a RINO is bad and that it time for some good old fashion conservative purity to be regained in the Republican party.

Why? Well, lets hope in the way back machine. Relax, it will be a short trip….just to February 2008.

Remember February 2008. Talk radio and the conservative blogs were up in arms because John McCain had just won Florida. It looked like he was going to be the Republican nominee for President. So talk radio, that last bastion of conservative purity, collectively got together and decided that the last true conservative standing was…….Mitt Romney.

What? Romneycare Mitt? Mr. I was pro-choice until I decided to run for President Mitt?

Oh, o.k., fellas. I buy it. I’m sure your endorsement had nothing to do with the political reality that Mitt was 2nd (or 3rd – I’ll let Huck and Mitt fight it out to decide who was the first loser and who was the second loser) or that Mitt had a ton of his own money to run his campaign. No, it had to do with Mitt’s conservative purity. Which is why each and everyone of them waited till literally the last second to start dropping their endorsements.

Now these same principled talkers tell us we can’t vote someone whose main argument is political expediency when, just a few years ago, expediency seemed to be about the only rational for their very late endorsements.

Again, I am tired of Delaware, do what you want. But stop trying to convince everyone that because Malkin, Hannity, Levin, whoever says its time to be pure, its time to be pure. Not unless they have a better track record then the aforementioned conservative mouthpieces.

And for the record, I give Anne Coulter credit here. She went with Duncan Hunter and stuck with him. Not my choice, but at least it appears she went with some convictions as opposed to expediency.

Posted by: Mallamutt, back to normal fonts.....for now. at September 13, 2010 01:18 PM (OWjjx)

433 >>> You directed this explicitly at me. Even though I didn't say a damn thing about conspiracies or coordination or anything remotely like it.

No, what you did was "giggle" (your word, right?) at the idea I thought I shouldn't be insulted by tosj... because you think that by noting that SOMEONE ELSE is an imbecile, that means it's now fair to insult me.

You didn't insult me; you just "giggled" at the idea that I should take offense at an insult.

I didn't insult tsoj. It's fucking stupid to claim that because I insulted some people's new Favorite Person in the World it's now fair to insult me to my face.

You think it is.

Well, Qwinn, you say a lot I don't agree with... so are the gloves off with you too? Or would you expect me to not insult you unless you had insulted me?

Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 01:18 PM (KUUXH)

434 I didn't say you... why would you think I meant you? I directed this at tosj and whoever claimed "Paid for by the RNC" in the first or second comment. I do not believe that ALL of Castle's detractors are doing this, nor all of O'Donnell's supporters. Many people come in here and offer their good-faith reasons for their support. I have no problem with that (except for thinking they're wrong). It's the insults and the fucking idiotic conspiracy-theorizing that bothers me.
Posted by: ace

I know that you did not mean me. I am concurring, as someone up to his neck in this race, that you have NOT been doing what was alledged.

Yes, the insults are getting out of hand. I hope and believe that Castle will win, and that we'll be treated to another round of the "nut and slut' show, with an added loser variation on the theme. Then people can move on to some other bone of contention.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 01:19 PM (R2fpr)

435 Hey, I'm not even telling you what I know of
O'Donnell. I know from people that have attempted to have her at events
that she is an inappropriate-anger sort-of-insane nasty diva.

And i know she's a goddamned imbecile.

Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 01:09 PM (KUUXH)

So you know I haven't been giving it to her with both barrels. Just the one.

I don't even care if she's an emotionally-sketchy dolt... if she could
win. But she can't, and today marks the highest level of statewide
support she'll have.

Just wait until the media and Dems GET WHAT THEY WANT and get her on the ballot.

Suckers.

Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 01:10 PM (KUUXH)

Wow. Don't hedge your bets there Ace.

Posted by: Rocks at September 13, 2010 01:19 PM (ivAmM)

436 Verified on the Hill: Bachmann endorses O'Donnell.

Posted by: texette at September 13, 2010 01:20 PM (E34wc)

437 "B. She wants to repeal Obamacare. (yes, I know that he does too)"
But does he? The only statement I've seen from him is that it can't be repealed while Obama is president. Now that's true, but it's not the answer to the question of whether he wants to repeal ObamaCare.

It sounds more like a weasel answer to me.

Posted by: Kensington at September 13, 2010 01:20 PM (mEyVv)

438 http://tinyurl.com/2u4l8fu

Rasmussen had it
Castle 48%
Coons 37%

Coons 47%
O'Donnell 36%

That was on September 2. The last poll since then, which only seems to have polled the primary electorate, had her ahead by 3 points with a +/- 3.8% MoE.

Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 01:20 PM (+gX1+)

439
I know she can get the nomination -- I'd say that's pretty much the most likely outcome now. But can she actually do the job of getting elected?

Raaaaaaacist!

Posted by: Comrade Brutus at September 13, 2010 01:20 PM (sQLlT)

440 I hate to break it to anyone who can't wait for this election to be over tomorrow nite...but the recount on this jawn is going to go on for days.
arrrrggggghhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 01:20 PM (OWjjx)

441 "So talk radio, that last bastion of conservative purity, collectively got together and decided that the last true conservative standing was…….Mitt Romney."
Erm, what? I don't remember this at all. He was considered -better- than McCain, which is arguably true. And the only other person who had a chance at the time was Huckabee, who was worse than either of them.
I remember all of the "conservative purists" backing Thompson, until all the RINOs got together and told us that he couldn't possibly win, which became, as usual, a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 01:21 PM (9zHDv)

442 And I gotta tell ya... I'd be with you guys in supporting an unlikely, maybe-too-conservative True Conservative candidate against Castle if that person had a chance, had a biography, had something to tell me they could win.

Christine O'Donnell is as weak a candidate as I can conceive of.

Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 01:21 PM (KUUXH)

443 All's I know is that I will have lost a lot of faith in the intelligence of the Tea Party Movement if O'Donnell wins the nomination. It's like Paul Atreides realizing he has an army of uncontrollable, unreasonable jihadi monsters on his hands.

Posted by: Jeff B. at September 13, 2010 01:21 PM (NjYDy)

444 @Qwinn in 431

Wrong. She's gained points in teh republican primary. That is completely different from the general election voting populace in Delaware. Delaware is democrats and independents. If anything she's lost more face with them because of her ridiculous comments and the fact that she has even less in common with them than Castle and that will slowly come out.

And we're not talking a slightly less chance of winning. In general she has been about 10 points down in Delaware while Castle has been 20 points up. Again, the republican primary there is not at all representative of the election there.

Posted by: inyourheadZOMBIE at September 13, 2010 01:22 PM (OKbxw)

445 I hate to break it to anyone who can't wait for this election to be over tomorrow nite...but the recount on this jawn is going to go on for days.
arrrrggggghhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Mallamutt

needs a bigger font.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 01:22 PM (R2fpr)

446 This democracy shit is pretty cool.

Posted by: Radiant at September 13, 2010 01:22 PM (dQdrY)

447 (I wish I had a newsletter...since most citizens need info they can't get from the MSM)

Voted AGAINST banning tax-payer dollars from going to the UN.

Voted FOR raising min wage.

Voted AGAINST displays of the evil Ten Commandments in Courts.

Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 01:22 PM (h8R9p)

448
They do this shit all the time at corporations. They definately play favoritism. She had to play the victim card. Good for her.

Posted by: politicalmuse at September 13, 2010 01:22 PM (kLKnf)

449 439 There was a GOP Controlled Senate and Bush couldn't get Social Security reform.. Snarlin' Arlen was one of the Senators to help block/oppose it. (I'm not sure if it ever made it to the floor or if it died in committee)
That's because no one wanted to touch that sacred cow with a 10-ft pool.Another related recollection of the GOP Congress through those 4yrs is that theycontinuously bowed to pressure from the minority Dems. It's as though the Republican leadership thought theDems were still running the place.

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at September 13, 2010 01:23 PM (yfJ6g)

450 Seriously: I do not understand this logic that says "hey, control over the Senate Judiciary Committee? WE DON' NEED NO STINKIN' JUDICIARY COMMITTEE!!"

Yes, yes you do. And you won't get it without Castle in that Senate seat. Nothing else is as remotely important as being able to stop Obama's next SCOTUS nominee.

Posted by: Jeff B. at September 13, 2010 01:23 PM (NjYDy)

451 By the way, there is no RINO purity test. I just want someone with an R next to their name who isn't a flaming fucking leftist commie piece of shit asshole fuckface scumbag.

Posted by: The Mega Independent at September 13, 2010 01:23 PM (sCyeq)

452 "No, what you did was "giggle" (your word, right?)"
Um, no, not my word. Haven't used that word in years.
Get back to me when you actually decide to respond to the things I say, and not that you've imagined I say, mkay?

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 01:23 PM (9zHDv)

453
Well, the nice thing is that if Castle wins the primary, we'll all join together and support him.

And if O'Donnell wins the nomination, we'll support her, too.

Right?

Right?

Posted by: AoS Pirate...now with extra-absorbent wings at September 13, 2010 01:24 PM (uFokq)

454 Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 01:22 PM (h8R9p)

Can't you just link us to the site you're copying from and save the bandwidth?

Posted by: toby928 at September 13, 2010 01:24 PM (S5YRY)

455 Rocks,

My point is that I haven't been fully explaining my real reasons for doubting she could win, because of the 11th commandment. I've been being... well, soft about it.

But... if someone wants to say it's a conspiracy.... well, less that than reports of inappropriate bursts of anger when Little Miss Thing wasn't being properly tended to.

After all, she's been on the NATIONAL MEDIA circuit, as her lawsuit will tell you.

Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 01:24 PM (KUUXH)

456 No you dumbass. For the millionth time Delaware is a FUCKING BLUE STATE.If
you don't start courting the general voting population early you will
suffer for it. Castle assumed the easy path and swerved left because he
wanted to ensure he would win the race.

O'Donnell is too fucking stupid to engage in such thought, much like a good chunk of her supporters.
No you dumb cock. Castle has to survive the fucking primary. Right now he isn't surviving it. He's struggling to win against what you describe as a lunatic.

He obviously can't just count on the support of conservatives right now. He needs to shore up his support or he's fucking cooked. Yet instead of pivoting, he seems to have your attitude of just giving everybody the middle finger and ignoring the primary.

Lastly, to you and Drew: I live in Massachusetts, I am not impressed by claims that Delaware is a FUCKING BLUE STATE.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at September 13, 2010 01:25 PM (FkKjr)

457 @ Zombie
You kept on repeating the bullshit about neither being able to win in the face of polls which say the opposites.
Wrong Pal. I said no such thing. My point is there is not a conservative choice in the DE senate race. None. Zip. Zero. I have indicated prior that I would vote Castle if I was in DE, only for a slim hope of a majority, but I know he can not otherwise be trusted. Secondly, it does no good to present facts or logic if you insist upon calling the other side stupid, ignorant, insipid and dumb.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at September 13, 2010 01:25 PM (L8kaT)

458 You know what? Everyone seems to want to win the Senate for some god-damn reason.

You know what? I don't. Why? Because then Obama will not get the Bi-partisan cred that he needs to pull out a win in 2012.

Another guy was right. Obama is the Herbert Hoover of the 21st century. Why should we give him what he wants?

Let's focus on WV or MD instead and get a REAL seat that we can keep.

Posted by: Pipe Barackage at September 13, 2010 01:25 PM (Gwfoy)

459 Hey, BlueHen, I was only kidding around. I didn't realize things were so hot this morning. I love Delaware! No really! I seriously do! I didn't even really say anything, was just teasing a little out of love. My friends and I used to ponder the mysteries of Delaware Chicks growing up here in the dub-c, that's all. (most of my boyfriends were at Archmere)

Now, Delaware Guys on the other hand . . . you don't mess with them! lol

again, sorry, was trying to lighten things up. my position is simply let you guys (Delawarians) go ahead and decide tomorrow. It reminds me of the Toomey/Specter thing. I followed "directions" and voted Specter "strategically" but it was no fun. it didn't much matter and I didn't get to relish voting against that old jerk.

I hope everybody can be friends again tomorrow?

Posted by: BlackOrchid at September 13, 2010 01:25 PM (SB0V2)

460 @Blue Hen, et. al.

I don't care what generic platitudes that O'Donnell has put up on her site. Talk is cheap. I want to see some concrete actions.

Where has she been? Obviously she doesn't have a voting record, not being an elected official, but that doesn't mean she can't have an actual track record of advancing conservative positions? What has she done to advance the cause of conservatism? It seems, just from what I've been able to gather, is that she wanted to sue a forthright conservative non-profit for millions and jumped on some sort of anti-masturbation bandwagon in the mid-90s. And subbed for Hannity a few times. Not exactly the sterling record of a movement conservative.

Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 01:25 PM (+gX1+)

461 If I still lived in DE (and had residency there) I'd probably feel the same way as Blue Hen. If she were a great but too-conservative-for-Delaware candidate, I'd feel differently, but she's a terrible candidate on every score.

But Castle dropped the ball. You don't stick out with your votes when it comes to election time. Don't be the only Republican to...

Do the moderate thing when you have support.

And, yes, if we have the majority, then Castle won't have a chance to vote for Democrat crap. Right now, that's all that gets to the floor and that's what he votes for.

Posted by: AmishDude at September 13, 2010 01:26 PM (T0NGe)

462 arrrrggggghhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Mallamutt

needs a bigger font.
arrrrggggghhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Mallamutt, I am a giver..... at September 13, 2010 01:26 PM (OWjjx)

463 "You didn't insult me; you just "giggled" at the idea that I should take offense at an insult."Oh, I'll respond to this too.
I laughed that you got all-caps hyperventilatingly hysterical at the idea that someone would "insult someone they don't even know", after a thread in which you (admittely later) called O'Donnell, someone you don't know at all, a "goddamned imbecile".
It had nothing to do with tosj or however he might have insulted you. It had to do with the hypocrisy that was completely self-contained within your defense.

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 01:27 PM (9zHDv)

464 I'd be with you guys in supporting an unlikely, maybe-too-conservative
True Conservative candidate against Castle if that person had a chance,
had a biography, had something to tell me they could win.

If O'Donnell wins the primary, what's the official AoSHQ position, Ace?

Posted by: mrp at September 13, 2010 01:28 PM (HjPtV)

465 That's because no one wanted to touch that
sacred cow with a 10-ft pool.Another related recollection of the GOP
Congress through those 4yrs is that theycontinuously bowed to pressure
from the minority Dems. It's as though the Republican leadership
thought theDems were still running the place.

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at September 13, 2010 01:23 PM (yfJ6g)

(recalling more) Miguel Estrada comes to mind now. Should have been an easy nomination but was held up.. Because of Reid and Specter I believe.

Posted by: Dave C at September 13, 2010 01:28 PM (4uhuW)

466 O'Donnell does have those crazy eyes. Note to self: get better candidates to primary establishment Republicans.

Posted by: The Mega Independent at September 13, 2010 01:28 PM (sCyeq)

467 I love how the Rethuglicans, especially the Delawarans(or whatever you call yourselves) make like Castle is a shoo-in in the general election..well, even if he isn't, since all you Tea Partiers are honor bound, it'll be close.. well, no one conservative would've won anyway.
And continuing, <b>"We gotta have him for a majority"</b>. Oh, its that tight, 50 are certain and just one more, Castle being our last hope, will be orgasmic.
So the absolute worst rated House Republican will behave when he has real power in a gridlocked Senate, with misbehaving Blue Dogs. On the contrary, we will certainly see a "gang of 14" controlling media attention.
The Senate is always easy on Justice confirmations, remember Kagan, Sotomayor? Cornyn and ex-Tex-Supreme couldn't read an intelligent question if his staff prepared one.
The Senate is always tough on treaties. Start Start II debate, this century?
No, needing Castle is a totally bogus thread, which is why we see all the attacks on O'D, like together they're too trivial to make a serious Senator. Suprised you haven't slept with her yet, or had an salacious relationship in separate cities together.
Well Tea Partiers promised from the start they were out to decapitate the GOP. We don't care that you need to eat put braces on your chilluns and some Congresscritter has you in their rolodex. Have a duodenal blockage for all we care.

Posted by: gary gulrud at September 13, 2010 01:29 PM (/g2vP)

468 If O'Donnell wins the primary, what's the official AoSHQ position, Ace?

I'll send money. She'll need it. Castle, not so much.

Posted by: toby928 at September 13, 2010 01:30 PM (S5YRY)

469 @Blue Hen, et. al.I don't care what generic platitudes that O'Donnell has put up on her site. Talk is cheap. I want to see some concrete actions. Where has she been? Obviously she doesn't have a voting record, not being an elected official, but that doesn't mean she can't have an actual track record of advancing conservative positions? What has she done to advance the cause of conservatism? It seems, just from what I've been able to gather, is that she wanted to sue a forthright conservative non-profit for millions and jumped on some sort of anti-masturbation bandwagon in the mid-90s. And subbed for Hannity a few times. Not exactly the sterling record of a movement conservative.
Posted by: Tom In Korea

You asked for reasons, and I provided some. Yes, these are the statements of someone who is making campaign promises, and outlining their beliefs. Yes, these are not the positions of a current office holder with a track record. I also included a rating from a thid party (NRA). Do with these as you will.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 01:30 PM (R2fpr)

470 More votes from the "sane, non-imbecile, smart" Castle.

Voted AGAINST a 2008 motion to encourage drilling in ANWR, the outer-continental shelf, and other territories in the West.

Voted FOR penalizing energy producers.

Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 01:30 PM (h8R9p)

471 Isn't supporting a lib like Castle kind of like the Fed trying to re-inflate the housing bubble?

Posted by: Radiant at September 13, 2010 01:31 PM (dQdrY)

472 I hope everybody can be friends again tomorrow?
Posted by: BlackOrchid

Okay; let's drop this.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 01:32 PM (R2fpr)

473 As I've said before: I'm willing to sacrifice DE on the altar in order to provide blood for a West Virginia or Oregon win. Oregon is prime for a win, but no damn one is paying attention.

Posted by: Pipe Barackage at September 13, 2010 01:32 PM (Gwfoy)

474 Posted by: toby928 at September 13, 2010 01:30 PM (S5YRY)

I don't know what the Official Ace of Spades HQ position will be but my personal one is going to be..."Hey look, Ron Johnson seems pretty awesome and we can kick Russ Feingold out of the Senate. Go Wisconsin!"

Posted by: DrewM. at September 13, 2010 01:32 PM (ycZcD)

475 All these threads miss a very important point: delawareans don't give a flying fuck who y'all want us to vote for..

Posted by: Born and Raised Below the Canal at September 13, 2010 01:32 PM (f9czX)

476 And I gotta tell ya... I'd be with you guys in
supporting an unlikely, maybe-too-conservative True Conservative
candidate against Castle if that person had a chance, had a biography,
had something to tell me they could win.

Christine O'Donnell is as weak a candidate as I can conceive of.

Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 01:21 PM (KUUXH)

And I would tell you that I would support a liberal like Castle if he hadn't gone scorched earth, along with the entire party leadership, on a no name candidate while at the same time announcing he is the only republican to support on fix for the Citizen's United ruling. Filing a complaint with the FEC against a member of your own party in the midst of a primary knowing it won't be resolved before the vote anyway? Come on.

Posted by: Rocks at September 13, 2010 01:33 PM (ivAmM)

477 Pretty fucking amazing how the True Conservatives, the anti-RINO warriors, are really modern-day incarnations of Bob Michel.

Ouch. I'm among the 20% of Ace's audience that gets that allusion, Grampa.

Posted by: toby928 at September 13, 2010 01:33 PM (S5YRY)

478 All these threads miss a very important point: delawareans don't give a flying fuck who y'all want us to vote for..
Posted by: Born and Raised Below the Canal

Well said. Release the muskrat of fury upon these people! We shall then redirect the punkin cannons.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 01:34 PM (R2fpr)

479 471 She founded a policy group, worked for the RNC ISI, has been a policy advocate. Seems she also has trouble with taxes debt.

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at September 13, 2010 01:34 PM (yfJ6g)

480 After all, she's been on the NATIONAL MEDIA circuit, as her lawsuit will tell you.

So are we all agreed now that the frivolous lawsuit industry is a major problem?

Castle is a lawyer, but O'Donnell seems to have her hooks even more into the corrupt legal profession than he.

Posted by: AmishDude at September 13, 2010 01:36 PM (T0NGe)

481 @482

Hey, asshole, I'm not an O'Donnell supporter. I think she's a complete and utter nutball who deserves to be locked up in a mental institution. I have no say, really, in the election in DE. And I don't care. I think both of them suck rotten, hard-boiled eggs.

I'm just tired of everyone bickering and fighting over this stupid thing and thinking that one idiot from Delaware is gonna be the key to win, when we have 3-4 other possibilities that can save us the grief of having groups being torn apart.

So my solution is simple: Go for the other 3-4 that we have a chance of winning without the constant crying and whimpering of assholes: West Virginia, where Raeve (sp?) is closing in on Man-Child; Oregon, where Ron Wyden is vulnerable against Jim Huffman; and Maryland, where people are getting a little tired of Mikulski.

Next time, do not presume that I am a supporter of someone just because I come out against someone else.

Posted by: Pipe Barackage at September 13, 2010 01:36 PM (Gwfoy)

482 What about Castle's (or DE RNC) FEC complaint against O'Donnell?
I done reading this site (until after Tuesday). In the meantime, I'm making calls for O'Donnell.

Posted by: Scoob at September 13, 2010 01:36 PM (T7+JL)

483 Filing a complaint with the FEC against a member of your own party in the midst of a primary knowing it won't be resolved before the vote anyway? Come on.
Filing complaints is standard campaign operating procedure. Primary, general, etc.

I think last week a lot of people were applauding when Joe Miller filed a complaint against Lisa M.

Sorry, politics is a rough sport.

Posted by: Mallamutt, I am a giver..... at September 13, 2010 01:36 PM (OWjjx)

484
Delaweenians, Castle, and O'Donnell call all go horse fuck.

The thing that's most annoying is reading all thise crap about about the Tea Party is fucking up or how the Tea Party has worn out its usefullness.

The Republican party would still be dead if it wasn't for the Tea Party. And no one would have the balls to break their silence and criticize Obama if it wasn't for Rush breaking the ice and saying he hoped Obama fails.

Posted by: AoS Pirate...now with extra-absorbent wings at September 13, 2010 01:36 PM (uFokq)

485 As I've said before: I'm willing to sacrifice DE on the altar in order to provide blood for a West Virginia or Oregon win. Oregon is prime for a win, but no damn one is paying attention.
Posted by: Pipe Barackage

I can tell you right now, that it won't be a virgin sacrifice; is that still okay?

I am TRYING to get some humor back into this.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 01:36 PM (R2fpr)

486 I won't be sending the crazed feminist a nickel. I'd sooner invest in a pyramid scheme I saw on a late night infomercial. About the same chance of getting anything for my money.
Angle, Johnson, Rubio, Rossi for sure though.

Posted by: Delta Smelt at September 13, 2010 01:37 PM (A0VTZ)

487 At this point, I want to see O'Donell win just so we don't have to hear "conservatives can never, ever ever ever win in a blue state" again. Cause that's yet another continuous self-fulfilling prophecy - and it should be obvious how it is so.
Guys, if you seriously think that all leftist advances are utterly irrevocable, and we can only fight a retreating rear-guard action, then just give the bloody hell up, will you, but at least have the courtesy to stop trying to sandbag those who, especially in this year of a "conservative tidal wave", haven't decided to just surrender en masse?

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 01:38 PM (9zHDv)

488 where Ron Wyden is vulnerable against Jim Huffman
Wyden is up double digits. I think that is a stretch, as is Maryland.

Now, if you live in Oregon, please, by all means, keep fighting the good fight. But, if you were to ask most people, I think the fair answer would be that Delaware, with Castle, is more winnable than Oregon.

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 01:39 PM (OWjjx)

489 Oregon is about as likely a win as Delaware with Chrissy O. That is, not very.
Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at September 13, 2010 01:34 PM (Rf19t)
I wish Chris Dudley was running for Senate.

Posted by: Delta Smelt at September 13, 2010 01:39 PM (A0VTZ)

490 I vote good for Christine Castle, too! Like site very much! Buy handbag now!

Posted by: Broken English Spammer at September 13, 2010 01:39 PM (sCyeq)

491 Filing a complaint with the FEC against a member of your own party in the midst of a primary knowing it won't be resolved before the vote anyway? Come on.
Filing complaints is standard campaign operating procedure. Primary, general, etc.

I think last week a lot of people were applauding when Joe Miller filed a complaint against Lisa M.

Sorry, politics is a rough sport.

Posted by: Mallamutt, I am a giver

I believe that he filed it after the voting, and because of some of the crap that was going on. This one is before the primary, aimed at O'Donnell and the tea Party, and was filed by the state GOP, which I've noted doesn't like primaries, but continues to hold mock ones.
And if she wins, will this be caried out? Should it be yanked even if it has merit? This is my concern where the suit is concerned.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 01:39 PM (R2fpr)

492 @501,

I win. Thank you. Now get back to your bunk.

Posted by: Pipe Barackage at September 13, 2010 01:39 PM (Gwfoy)

493 (just look up his voting record in the Congress, I did, I wanted to see how SMART and non-kooky-crazy he is)

Voted AGAINST a 06 Conservative budget alternative.

Voted AGAINST an amendment to prevent a Federal court from banning prayer in the Indiana House.

Voted to OVERRIDE Bush's veto of SCHIP.

Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 01:40 PM (h8R9p)

494
Anyone who doesn't support the primary winner is a cocksucker. I think we can all agree on that.

Because, after all, it's all about winning the seat, right?

Posted by: AoS Pirate...now with extra-absorbent wings at September 13, 2010 01:40 PM (uFokq)

495 Just curious, but how many folks actually had heard of Christine O'Donnell a month ago? Hell, two weeks ago? Now she's the dividing line between real and fake conservatives?

Who the hell thought that was a good idea?

Posted by: DrewM. at September 13, 2010 01:40 PM (ycZcD)

496 am TRYING to get some humor back into this.
You need bigger fonts.

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 01:40 PM (OWjjx)

497 Lastly, to you and Drew: I live in Massachusetts, I am not impressed by claims that Delaware is a FUCKING BLUE STATE.

If you look up who won Delaware for Governor, Senate, and electoral votes for President since 1984 and compare them to Massachusetts, based only on their numbers, we're either dead even or even worse off, though our blueness is due more to union monkeys (and I say that as one, unfortunately) and proximity to Philly rather than Massachusetts-style moonbattiness.

Posted by: Hoss Fuentes at September 13, 2010 01:40 PM (tOCL6)

498 Incidentally, I'm pretty sure Rhode Island, which is at least as blue as Delaware, has a pretty damn good and "pure" conservative governor, and he's been reelected as well.
If your starting assumptions are that conservatives can't win where there's any opposition, you're of more help to the other side than you are to us.

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 01:41 PM (9zHDv)

499 I just want to chime in to say kudos on the Joe Versus the Volcano reference. A woefully underappreciated film.

Posted by: SteveN at September 13, 2010 01:41 PM (7EV/g)

500 @Bevel Lemelisk

Cause clearly Scott Brown and the repubs from your state are Galatian Warriors of Conservatism

Posted by: inyourheadZOMBIE at September 13, 2010 01:41 PM (OKbxw)

501 am TRYING to get some humor back into this.
You need bigger fonts.
Posted by: Mallamutt
Won't fit in a state this small.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 01:42 PM (R2fpr)

502 Also, I love that people who know fuck-all about Delaware are so sure about
the electoral habits here and how they've evolved over the years, as well as the likelihood that an actual conservative (not a RINO) can do well on the state level here.

Posted by: Hoss Fuentes at September 13, 2010 01:43 PM (tOCL6)

503 @515

"You can't always get what you want, but you get what you need".

Posted by: Pipe Barackage at September 13, 2010 01:44 PM (Gwfoy)

504 Lastly, to you and Drew: I live in Massachusetts, I am not impressed by claims that Delaware is a FUCKING BLUE STATE.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at September 13, 2010 01:25 PM (FkKjr)

Well, what you are and are not impressed by isn't really at issue. The facts however are a bit stubborn.

BTW- Do you think O'Donnell or an O'Donnell type candidate would have won in MA like Brown did?

Brown rode the perfect combination of timing, awful opponent and an uncanny ability to span the gap between moderates and tea party folks. He also had a picture perfect resume and family.

Do you honestly think O'Donnell is in Brown's league when it comes to being a candidate?

Posted by: DrewM. at September 13, 2010 01:45 PM (ycZcD)

505 We seem to be oblivious of the now, not-so-quite revolution, the will of the grassroot American, conservative, independent;sad, even amongst the conservative republican, the so-called wise-and-prudent pundits bloggers, focusing on petty righter-than-thou turf war than the big picture the great cause.

Posted by: Edgar at September 13, 2010 01:45 PM (D7lud)

506 Hey, I'm not even telling you what I know of O'Donnell. I know from people that have attempted to have her at events that she is an inappropriate-anger sort-of-insane nasty diva......................................Did you ask those people why they were silent about this dangerous, insane person when she ran against Biden two years ago?

Posted by: martha stewarts left nipple at September 13, 2010 01:45 PM (nOvIQ)

507 Just wait until the media and Dems GET WHAT THEY WANT and get her on the ballot. Suckers.
I've been wonderingwhether some of these new nics pushing O'Donnell asa satisfyingemotional alternative andterritorial statement might in fact be lefty concern trolls. If so, they're a better class that what we've seen to-date.

Posted by: rdbrewer at September 13, 2010 01:45 PM (+wdm+)

508 Whatever, I"m off this topic till the primary tomorrow. I"ll support whoever wins. I hope it'll be Castle, but if it's O'Donnell I hope she beats Coons.

I will say this though, the tea party folks tendency to go scorched earth on their own allies in their party the same way they do against libs will eventually come back to bite them in the butts. They need to start acting like adults at some point.

Posted by: inyourheadZOMBIE at September 13, 2010 01:46 PM (OKbxw)

509 You know what I've -never- heard a leftist say?
"Don't vote for the more liberal candidate, he can't possibly win here!"
Not once. Ever. They vote the farthest left they can, every time. And what has it accomplished?It's pushedthe entiregovernment to the left, slowly, inexorably, over time, at least until this year.
But let's keep being pragmatists and voting for the leftier candidate in our own primaries, it's done so well for us so far.

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 01:46 PM (9zHDv)

510 Also, I love that people who know fuck-all about Delaware are so sure
about
the electoral habits here and how they've evolved over the years, as
well as the likelihood that an actual conservative (not a RINO) can do
well on the state level here.

And I say this as someone who will want to eat a bullet regardless of who wins tomorrow. Delaware stinks.

Posted by: Hoss Fuentes at September 13, 2010 01:46 PM (tOCL6)

511 Yup, cause we all know Mike Castle is as pure as piss driven snow, right?

Posted by: mpfs at September 13, 2010 01:47 PM (iYbLN)

512 Who the hell thought that was a good idea?
Posted by: DrewM. at September 13, 2010 01:40 PM (ycZcD)
Never heard of that Miller guy in Alaska either.

Posted by: Radiant at September 13, 2010 01:48 PM (dQdrY)

513 I do happen to know fuck-all about Delaware. And I know that:

a.) its demographics have shifted significantly since 1984, with a massive influx of African-Americans and liberals from the Philly suburbs who end up outside Wilmington in New Castle County;
b.) it is impossible to win statewide as a conservative now;
c.) it is impossible to win statewide regardless without a strong retail-level person-to-person touch, a lifetime's worth of DE relationships;
d.) it is impossible to win as a crazy person.

Posted by: Jeff B. at September 13, 2010 01:48 PM (NjYDy)

514 I've said before that DE is a funny state electorally.

The major part of the population is either a Philly suburb or a hell-hole small city (Dover).

They don't put 2 and 2 together as to why they aren't living in Philly.

On the other hand, DE has traditionally been fiscally sane and even savvy.

No state sales tax. Really. No state sales tax.

Posted by: AmishDude at September 13, 2010 01:49 PM (T0NGe)

515 @526

That's the whole thing. I don't know fuck-all about Delaware. I don't want to. I only know that it's the land of MBNA, and that they've fucked around with my credit cards long enough.

That's why I chose neither side. Not to mention because of the passions that have erupted into near-violence on this site and "rhymes with BotFair". The fact that people are so passioned about it that they're about to tear each other apart pisses me off to no end.

Which is one reason why my alternative idea is probably the best to get back the true unity that we SHOULD have. We focus on WV and win that, and boom...DE is a distant memory.

Posted by: Pipe Barackage at September 13, 2010 01:49 PM (Gwfoy)

516 And can we -please- dispense with the "oh, those "pure" tea partiers are going all scorched earth!" bullshit? The anti-O'Donnells here have been -way- worse, objectively, by every measure, when it comes to "scorched earth" rhetoric. At least 95% of the name calling and abuse has beenby the"If you don't vote for Castle you're afucking moron who would fail at remedial civics"side. So quit the fucking hypocritical whining.

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 01:49 PM (9zHDv)

517 37 She is a sub for Hannity people. That means she is dumber than Hannity.
do we really need that in the senate?
Posted by: Ben at September 13, 2010 11:18 AM (wuv1c)
Sure, the current bunch in DC are supersmart, see where that get us.

Posted by: always right at September 13, 2010 01:49 PM (Wqfrr)

518 Posted by: inyourheadZOMBIE

The reality is that Scott Brown is Strom Thurmond compared to whoever the Dems will put up against him in 2012. If you prefer Senator Barney Frank, by all means get rid of Brown.
Massachusetts Democrats/Liberals in the Senate are an extra menace. They don't just vote for the monstrous Lib proposals, they hand deliver them from the Cambridge-based think tanks that write them.

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 13, 2010 01:50 PM (EHI/u)

519
I do happen to know fuck-all about Delaware. And I know that:a.) its demographics have shifted significantly since 1984, with a
massive influx of African-Americans and liberals from the Philly suburbs
who end up outside Wilmington in New Castle County and drifting south into Sussex; b.) it is impossible to win statewide as a conservative now; c.)
it is impossible to win statewide regardless without a strong
retail-level person-to-person touch, a lifetime's worth of DE
relationships; d.) it is impossible to win as a crazy person.

FIFY

Posted by: Hoss Fuentes at September 13, 2010 01:50 PM (tOCL6)

520 it is impossible to win as a crazy person.
How did Biden stay a Senator then?

That's some fucking crazee right there.

Posted by: mpfs at September 13, 2010 01:50 PM (iYbLN)

521 Any objective observer can see that tea parties go after any commie-lib and any Rs who votes with them. Very reasonable.

But Rinos ONLY go after Conservatives...no liberals.

Simple really.

Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 01:50 PM (h8R9p)

522 And can we -please- dispense with the "oh, those "pure" tea partiers are
going all scorched earth!" bullshit? The anti-O'Donnells here have
been -way- worse, objectively, by every measure, when it comes to
"scorched earth" rhetoric. At least 95% of the name calling and abuse
has beenby the"If you don't vote for Castle you're afucking moron who
would fail at remedial civics"side. So quit the fucking hypocritical
whining.

Demonstrably false (at least in the use of crazy maximalist rhetoric) but whatever.

Posted by: Jeff B. at September 13, 2010 01:50 PM (NjYDy)

523 521 We seem to be oblivious of the now, not-so-quite revolution, the will of the grassroot American, conservative, independent;sad, even amongst the conservative republican, the so-called wise-and-prudent pundits bloggers, focusing on petty righter-than-thou turf war than the big picture the great cause.
That seems to have been the case for the last 4+yrs. I thought not voting was supposed to produce miniature Reagans in every state? Well, it didn't work that way, it never will.

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at September 13, 2010 01:51 PM (yfJ6g)

524 My point is that I haven't been fully explaining my
real reasons for doubting she could win, because of the 11th
commandment. I've been being... well, soft about it.

Posted by: ace at September 13, 2010 01:24 PM (KUUXH)

She's an imbecile and a diva? These are real reasons? About a member of your own party? Seems pretty subjective to me. And foolish consdiering you just stated she's likely to win the nomination.

I really don't believe there is any conspiracy going on here but if I did I would think it was the opposite, that you really support her and trying to garner sympathy for her. Because I don't see what these personal attacks are supposed to do other than that when this race is clearly not about the candidates personally despite great efforts to make it so. If Castle loses this race and looks back a year from now I think he will realize his biggest mistake was listening to his people when they pointed at Alaska and said "Look, Look!" and took their advice. De ain't Alaska or Arizona. McCain and Murky needed to go nuclear, Castle didn't. If he had triangulated a bit on certain issues; debated her once and let the press handle the rest I think he would be cruising right now. Not an easy win, but a sure one.

I think they main reason Castle has been reelected for so many years is because he has been statesmanlike. He's totally chucked that out the window and his drop in the general election polls show that. At this point I seriously doubt he can win the general either.

Posted by: Rocks at September 13, 2010 01:52 PM (ivAmM)

525 "Demonstrably false (at least in the use of crazy maximalist rhetoric) but whatever."
Translation: I agree with the crazy hyperventilating insults and namecalling of my own guys, so that can't possible be considered "crazy" or"maximalist". I can't imagine that the people I disagree with could be more wrong, therefore, their rhetoric is "maximalist" and "crazy". Therefore, we win.

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 01:53 PM (9zHDv)

526 Posted by: Radiant at September 13, 2010 01:48 PM (dQdrY)

True and I wondered at the time how Lisa Murkowski (who most folks couldn't have picked out of a line up before primary day) suddenly became a danger to the existence of the Republic.

Still, it was a pleasant surprise to see her go. It was doubly so since tossing her was a cost free upgrade. Also, Miller (like Brown) is a fantastic candidate and life story. O'Donnell? Er, not so much. Yet here we're making a martyr out of a sure loser.

Posted by: DrewM. at September 13, 2010 01:55 PM (ycZcD)

527 "You think that one True Believer in one state is going to save the country by the sheer force of her awesomeness."
Really? Please indicate exactly where I said anything remotely like this. Hell, please point out where I've said anything positive about O'Donnell other than "she's not Mike Castle".

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 01:55 PM (9zHDv)

528 435

"I didn't say you... why would you think I meant you? I directed
this at tosj and whoever claimed "Paid for by the RNC" in the first or
second comment. "

And me. You directed this explicitly at me. Even though I didn't
say a damn thing about conspiracies or coordination or anything
remotely like it.

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 01:15 PM (9zHDv)
Nor did I say "ace is on the take" or "ace is part of a coordinated conspiracy". But he seems to have found it in there.

Posted by: tsj017 at September 13, 2010 01:55 PM (4YUWF)

529 Still waiting for proof-positive O'Donnell is a conservative besides a few generic lines on her website. Working for the RNC (aren't they all RINOs?) and suing the ISI isn't exactly compelling evidence.

Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 01:56 PM (+gX1+)

530 Zombeh wrote this last night. I thought it was good:
If Mike Castle is another Arlen Specter than we might have the ability to stop the next Wardlaw or Reinhardt and you can sure as hell bet that Obama will be sending those folks up. If Mike Castle is the next Senator versus a Chris Coons (because O'Donnell is far far more likely to lose) we'll have somebody who is much more likely to oppose partial birth abortion procedures and other pro choice positions. If Castle wins, even though he might not check all government excesses in spending, at least he'll believe that there are limits like when he opposed the additional '09 800+ billion additional 'stimulus'.If Castle wins and becomes a senator over Coons we'll have another person willing to go after GSE's, the ACORN's and Kevin Johnson's of the world.If Castle wins you'll have another senator who supports a border fence and enforcement as a stand alone where Coons will want the whole 9 yards on amnesty otherwise.If Castle wins you'll be guaranteed a friend on nuclear energy.If Castle wins you'll have a guy who supports free trade and isn't automatically beholden to unions.If Castle wins you'll have a senator who will vote for trial lawyer fee caps.If Castle win you'll be guaranteed another friend of the military.If Castle wins you'll have another vote for making the Bush tax cuts permanent and you'll have another member of the Congressional Flat Tax Caucus in the senate.

Posted by: rdbrewer at September 13, 2010 01:57 PM (+wdm+)

531 Did you ask those people why they were silent about this dangerous, insane person when she ran against Biden two years ago?Two years ago she was the uncontested GOP nominee; she had no primary opposition, so to whatever extent her ethical issues were known, they didn't matter; she was it. (Which makes one wonder why Mike Castle was hiding in her bushes that year, as she claims, but oh well...)
Posted by: The War Between the Undead States
He was hiding, but in the House. he had several chances to take on Biden or Carper, and turned them down. Office swapping between the old timers and even between parties is the way here.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 01:57 PM (R2fpr)

532 For that matter, please point even -one- person on this entire thread who has gone all gaga-crazy over O'Donnell. Just one. I haven't heard any of that. I've heard "Castle sucks, royally, at least O'Donnell advocates the right policies" on one side, and "Will you guys stop WORSHIPPING her?!?" on the other. -That- is the most ridiculous maximalist rhetoric I see going on here.

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 01:57 PM (9zHDv)

533 Cause clearly Scott Brown and the repubs from your state are Galatian Warriors of Conservatism

Do you know Scott Brown is the MOST conservative candidate I've voted for in a long time? He even admitted to being a Republican while running!

We field squishes in MA, and they get fucking demolished. You act like you hit on some new strategy by running Democrats and calling them Republicans. No, it doesn't work well.

The alternative? I've never even seen conservatives run in MA until this year. And we have some great guys running: Bielat, Meas, Gunn. They maybe, just possibly, could win.

Meanwhile, squish Baker is most likely going to lose the governorship.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at September 13, 2010 01:58 PM (FkKjr)

534 "If Castle wins you'll have a guy who supports free trade and isn't automatically beholden to unions."
Er, didn't this guy vote for secret union ballots, e.g., Card Check?

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 01:58 PM (9zHDv)

535 Coons would have to get caught hosting a dogfight while dealing child porn for Christine O'Donnell to have a shot at winning in the general.

Republicans/the Big Tea Party are about to make their first big blunder of the year.

Posted by: John S at September 13, 2010 02:00 PM (+q/hN)

536 Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 01:56 PM (+gX1+)

Evidence? Evidence is for suckers and Candy Ass RINOs.

Which one are you?

Posted by: DrewM. at September 13, 2010 02:00 PM (ycZcD)

537 Futile attempt to stop thetsunami wave of American awakening. This is the "jump-the-shark" moment for the RINO establishment. Even the rodens are smart enough to jump ship impending doom.

Posted by: Edgar at September 13, 2010 02:01 PM (D7lud)

538 555
Futile attempt to stop thetsunami wave of American awakening. This is
the "jump-the-shark" moment for the RINO establishment. Even the rodens
are smart enough to jump ship impending doom

Now you've gone and called ace a rodent.

Posted by: tsj017 at September 13, 2010 02:02 PM (4YUWF)

539 @ 514 I just want to chime in to say kudos on the Joe Versus the Volcano reference. A woefully underappreciated film.

No it's not.

Posted by: Groaty Dick at September 13, 2010 02:02 PM (gzjhZ)

540 Well Tea Partiers promised from the start they were out to decapitate the GOP. We don't care that you need to eat put braces on your chilluns and some Congresscritter has you in their rolodex. Have a duodenal blockage for all we care.
I like the cut of this guys jib.
I don't really care who wins. So long as however it plays outdamages the existing established structure ofthe republican party,it's gravy.
They've proven they're useless. If you want to beat back the socialists, step one is acquiring a political vehicle to fight them. The unreconstructed GOP is not that vehicle. Take the party, and maybe you have a shot at taking the pinkos with it.
The chick's crazy? All's the better.
No, really crazy? Not like sanity is a requirement for senate. Job's not as tough as they make it look. It's a phoney-baloney job.
Hell, maybe she'll call attention to the fact that like 1/4 of the people we have serving in there now are suffering from diagnosable dementia.
Even had a couple of comatose vegetables voting there for a bit.
At least she can feed herself. How you like her apples now?

Posted by: Entropy at September 13, 2010 02:03 PM (IsLT6)

541 @ 514 I just want to chime in to say kudos on the Joe Versus the Volcano reference. A woefully underappreciated film.

No it's not. It's deservedly under-appreciated.

Posted by: Groaty Dick at September 13, 2010 02:03 PM (gzjhZ)

542 554
Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 01:56 PM (+gX1+)Evidence? Evidence is for suckers and Candy Ass RINOs.Which one are you?

I'm the one looking to join the DC cocktail-party circuit. In Korea.

Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 02:03 PM (+gX1+)

543 232 It's funny how the same crowd who's supporting Castle is the same crowd who were excited about Michael Steele becoming RNC chair and the same crowd who were wetting their pants when Rush said he hoped Obama fails.You'll come around on Castle, too, and realize we're right. But these arguments are getting tiresome. You'd think you'd start listening to your betters, by now.
Posted by: AoS Pirate...now with extra-absorbent wings at September 13, 2010 12:01 PM (uFokq)

I don't vote in Delaware, but if you held a gun to my head forced me to take a side, I'd reluctantly go for Castle here.

Contrary to what you just said, I had a BIG public disagreement with Ace several other posters when the big "I hope he fails" shitstorm hit the beach, but we're on the same side on this one. I also remember the consensus view of Steele's ascendancy to the RNC Chairmanship was mostly "Meh, I guess he might be OK", rather than the blind cheerleading that you're alluding to in this post.

But hey, don't let something as simple as the FUCKING FACTS get in the way of your little jihad. Knock yourself out here, sparky.

Posted by: Russ from Winterset at September 13, 2010 02:04 PM (/MEFr)

544 Coons would have to get caught hosting a dogfight while dealing child porn for Christine O'Donnell to have a shot at winning in the general.
Getting caught in a 5-way with Eliot Spitzer, Kathleen Parker, and athree midgetsmight do it.

Posted by: rdbrewer at September 13, 2010 02:04 PM (+wdm+)

545 Chris Coons (D): 44
Christine O'Donnell (R): 37
Undecided: 19
(MoE: ±4%)

From the way the ODonnell bashers talked I thought Coons was well over 50% and ODonnell was behind by at least 20%.

Posted by: polynikes at September 13, 2010 12:18 PM (m2CN7)

She's a sure loser? My ass. Coons can only garner 44% against a person who is being reviled daily in just about every paper in the State and he's a guaranteed winner?

Posted by: Rocks at September 13, 2010 02:05 PM (ivAmM)

546 Qwinn, you seem like a reasonable guy, but this is the continuation of a thread that has been going on for days, and from the beginning, O'Donnell supporters have been overtly accusing Ace of taking bribes or acting collusion with some vague and unnamed cabal of establishment Republicans to "protect their guy." And the term RINO has been thrown out to almost anyone who holds the opinion that Realpolitik trumps our fantasies about purity and perfection. Can you think of a worse insult than to attack the very integrity of the man who runs this site, or questioning the commitment of people who have been Conservatives for decades? Because I can't. And I find it unforgivable.

Posted by: MikeinAmman at September 13, 2010 02:05 PM (elcpe)

547 6-way. A 5-way woudln't be enough.

Posted by: rdbrewer at September 13, 2010 02:05 PM (+wdm+)

548 That's like singling out a lone player in a football game and cheering him on to play against both teams to win the game all by himself.

Well, there is that QB from Michigan.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at September 13, 2010 02:06 PM (L8kaT)

549
"Meanwhile, squish Baker is most likely going to lose the governorship."

Talk about the ability to fuck up a wet dream. Deval is the biggest clown in any Governor's Office in the country right now. (I will take nominations from other States, if there are any.)
Of course we have the douchebag spoiler Cahill making it nearly impossible for a Repub. to win, but keeping Deval "It's a free country, I wish it weren't" Patrick in office is absurd.

P.S. Does it feel like Baker has any momentum at all? The coverage in the (online) papers has been kind of scarce.

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 13, 2010 02:06 PM (EHI/u)

550 @560 - Tom in Korea

You're looking to join the DC-party circuit as much as I am looking to join up with Japanese-based Republicans: Not happening.

Posted by: Pipe Barackage at September 13, 2010 02:06 PM (Gwfoy)

551 "Guys, if you seriously think that all leftist advances are utterly irrevocable, and we can only fight a retreating rear-guard action, then just give the bloody hell up, will you, but at least have the courtesy to stop trying to sandbag those who, especially in this year of a "conservative tidal wave", haven't decided to just surrender en masse?"
And I respectfully add, that ending the career of the worst-rated Republican in the currentHouse is an unqualified plus. If, after all the slurs, dirty tricksand posturing with which a deservedly spooked GOP establishmenthastarred her, anominated O'D did not bring home the prize, I'd count this decapitation a trophy worth mounting.

Posted by: gary gulrud at September 13, 2010 02:09 PM (/g2vP)

552
Based on what I read in this thread, the comments directed towards tsoj by someone I'm afraid to name, were way over the top. If you feel like you have to let it all out, why not direct it at "you morons"?

Posted by: Moi at September 13, 2010 02:10 PM (Ez4Ql)

553 I hate to say it, but anyone willing to file and pursue such an employment discrimination claim is not conservative at heart. Having defended management in employment discrimination litigation for over 10 years, this complaint reads like the typical nut-job employee who believes he/she is a victim of conspiracy when in reality the person was just a crappy employee.
And claiming a non-profit conservative think tank "believes women should be subordinate" is the worst kind of cliche liberal argument against conservatives.
I'm all for turning out rhinos. But this chick is a nut job.

Posted by: Monkeytoe at September 13, 2010 02:10 PM (sOx93)

554 What Bevel Lemelisk said @551.

Bevel, you planning on attending the Boston(-area) meetup?

Posted by: Andy at September 13, 2010 02:10 PM (5Rurq)

555 No pun intended. I have much noble sincere esteemed for Ace, the beloved of blogcon.

Posted by: Edgar at September 13, 2010 02:12 PM (D7lud)

556 P.S. Does it feel like Baker has any momentum at all?

Zero. Wonder what position Cahill will get in Deval Administration 2.0.

Posted by: Andy at September 13, 2010 02:12 PM (5Rurq)

557
P.S. Does it feel like Baker has any momentum at all? The coverage in the (online) papers has been kind of scarce.

He doesn't excite anybody. Nobody would go to the polls in a cold January for Baker. They'd go against Deval.

The big problem is what you mentioned: Cahill. He can divide the anti-Patrick vote. Will people come to their senses and realize he is an obvious straw-man? I hope so. If conservatives down-ticket are compelling enough they might give Baker the benefit of the doubt.
keeping Deval "It's a free country, I wish it weren't" Patrick in office is absurd.

I take comfort in the fact that although he screws up everything, he has no real power here. The state legislature controls everything. Unfortunately that is unlikely to change this year.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at September 13, 2010 02:13 PM (FkKjr)

558 All right,I have missed thelast few threads,this is the only thread on the topic that I really sat down and read every comment. Perhaps the other threads were entirely different from this one, and if someone wants to quote other threads or at least point me to posts to explain what I've been seeing here, please, feel free.
But I have read this thread. And here's what I've seen:
1. At least 20 posts claiming that the O'Donnell camp "worships" her, and thinks she is "pure awesomeness that will fix the Senate single handedly", despite not having seen even one post that speaks that highly of her. That pissed me off.
2. Ace explicitly attacking -me- for making the "conspiracy/collusion" argument, which I never made. and I don't believe. He eventually pointed to the two (2)posts that pissed him off, and I can see why they pissed him off, but it doesn't justify his shooting at everyone else in sight that expresses any level of disagreement with him at all.
3. I don't think Ace or many others here are RINO's. Not at all. But they are explicitly, loudly, vehementlysupporting a major RINO in the DE election, with massive insults aimed at any who disagree. Considering the damage that RINO's have done in the past, how can any of you seriously not expect to get some derision for it, including being lumped in with them? Get real.

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 02:14 PM (9zHDv)

559 Bevel, you planning on attending the Boston(-area) meetup?

I think I have a wedding that weekend. I've had like five weddings I've had to go to this year.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at September 13, 2010 02:15 PM (FkKjr)

560 572

Based on what I read in this thread, the comments directed towards tsoj
by someone I'm afraid to name, were way over the top. If you feel like
you have to let it all out, why not direct it at "you morons"?

Posted by: Moi at September 13, 2010 02:10 PM (Ez4Ql)
Thank you.

Posted by: tsj017 at September 13, 2010 02:16 PM (4YUWF)

561 "And I find it unforgivable. "
Flaccid, PC worm,is no way to live in Amman or Queens or Peoria or anywhere else, son. We're morons, except for the cretins who aspire to be morons.

Posted by: gary gulrud at September 13, 2010 02:16 PM (/g2vP)

562 "O'Donnell is polling in the mid-30s, the same level of support she got when she was crushed in '08, and SHE has a chance?"
Um, do you seriously think 2010 isshaping up to be anything like 2008?

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 02:16 PM (9zHDv)

563 O'Donnell is polling in the mid-30s, the same level of support she got when she was crushed in '08, and SHE has a chance?

Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at September 13, 2010 02:08 PM (Rf19t)

Yes, because a significant number of those people who are undecided, and even stating for Castle, are doing so because of this primary and they are republicans. That changes when it's over. She got 35% against Biden in a landslide year for Dems. She received more votes against Biden then any other candidate who ran against him before. If she wins the nomination and gets less than 45% in the general I'll eat my hat. You could run a an old chair against a Dem this year a get 40% of the vote.

Posted by: Rocks at September 13, 2010 02:16 PM (ivAmM)

564 I want to know where this "Castle is the most liberal Republican" meme is coming from, because I haven't seen any actual linking proof? You know what I get when I google search "most liberal republican congressman"? A wikipedia site for RINO, a link to Chris Shays, and a FR post blasting Mark Kirk. Nothing about Castle.

Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 02:18 PM (+gX1+)

565 If my chunker could reach those bridges I'd be living on an island and you'd all be arguing about a county election

Posted by: Born and Raised Below the Canal at September 13, 2010 02:19 PM (f9czX)

566 Has anyone noticed how every female Republican candidate has been accused of being crazy, or slutty -- or both? I don't think this is a coincidence. I think it is a standard line of attack for conservative women in politics.

Posted by: Nancy at September 13, 2010 02:21 PM (3TdgB)

567 "The state legislature controls everything."

Ahh, yes the power of the Speakah and the Senate Prez. I've tried to explain that (in the context of how MA health care came about) to a few people. Don't think it really sunk in.

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 13, 2010 02:21 PM (EHI/u)

568 Even the WP today says in Castle's 44 years in politics..he has drawn the most support from Democrats. And that he was anguished about the Obamacare vote, and did not make up his mind until 4 days before the vote.

He will NOT vote to repeal it under any President.

His constituents are moochers and looters.

Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 02:21 PM (h8R9p)

569 Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 02:18 PM (+gX1+)

Most liberal republican in the House. His voting record and ratings have been pointed out endlessly. They are easy to look up. Have a ball.

His vote for Cap and Trade makes him among the top 8. His F rating from the NRA adds to it. He's also the only republican to back Obama's fix for the Citizen's United ruling which struck down parts of McCain-Feingold and he did that just this week.

Posted by: Rocks at September 13, 2010 02:23 PM (ivAmM)

570 At least Coons will stab you in the front.

Posted by: Radiant at September 13, 2010 02:25 PM (dQdrY)

571 "I ask again, how likely is it that, in two statewide elections, Delware voters are going to put a liberal Democrat into the House and a conservative crusader into the Senate at the same time?"
I dunno, is it less likely than Rhode Island electing two Democrat Senators and yet electing a pretty much "pure" conservative governor not just once, but running out his term limits?

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 02:25 PM (9zHDv)

572 Odd thing: In 2006, O'Donnell ran for the Republican Senate nomination and lost. Came in third, actually. She then proceeded to conduct a write-in campaign. So what's that say about her likelihood of supporting Castle if she loses the primary?

Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 02:25 PM (+gX1+)

573 He will NOT vote to repeal it under any President.
So? He'll vote with us on other things. Combs won't. Comprende?

Posted by: rdbrewer at September 13, 2010 02:27 PM (+wdm+)

574 "So what's that say about her likelihood of supporting Castle if she loses the primary?"
Clearly you believe this speaks ill of her. Do you have any reason to believe Castle would support her if she wins?I think it's pretty damn obvious he will not. Is there a reason you hold that possibility against her, but not against him?

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 02:27 PM (9zHDv)

575 "So? He'll vote with us on other things."
Sure, when we're already either going to win easily or lose badly. In close votes, the only ones that'll matter, do you seriously think he'll ever cast a deciding vote in our favor? -Really-?

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 02:29 PM (9zHDv)

576 O'Donnell ran for the Republican Senate nomination and lost. Came in third, actually. She then proceeded to conduct a write-in campaign.
O'Donnell is a professional candidate. She'll run as a spoiler if she loses to Castle. Because that's her job.

Posted by: rdbrewer at September 13, 2010 02:30 PM (+wdm+)

577 I ask again, how likely is it that, in two statewide
elections, Delware voters are going to put a liberal Democrat into the
House and a conservative crusader into the Senate at the same time?

Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at September 13, 2010 02:19 PM (Rf19t)

Not likely. The polls cited for the House race are over a month old. I think many put the House down as automatic for the Dem because they though there would be no real campaign in any race in DE this year. Both He and Castle would cruise. That's over with. I would say the R candidate for the House will actually have a better shot at winning then whoever is the R candidate for Senate at this point. The non party endorsed R candidate is actually leading in the polls for the House primary. The Rs in the state are now very energized. It's going to help whoever wins the primaries.

Posted by: Rocks at September 13, 2010 02:31 PM (ivAmM)

578 I think they main reason Castle has been reelected for so many years is because he has been statesmanlike. He's totally chucked that out the window and his drop in the general election polls show that. At this point I seriously doubt he can win the general either.
Rassmussen hasCastle winning48% / 37% over Coons, with 9% undecided. While not necessarily a "sure thing", it's pretty damned close.
O'Donnell polls 36% / 47% against Coons, with 9% undecided. That'ssolidly in "longshot" territory, andapproachingthe "snowballs chance in hell" region.
Polls shouldn't be taken as gospel, but a 12 point difference can't be ignored when the election is only 2 months away.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at September 13, 2010 02:31 PM (plsiE)

579 I agree with Ace.

Posted by: Serious Cat at September 13, 2010 02:31 PM (bAySe)

580 (the "meme" comes from the Club for Growth, and the American Conservative Union, very kooky, crazy, and dumb orgs)

Castle scores 43% from CFG for 2009, (since his announced Senate bid)

In 07 and 08 he earned a 35% and 26% respectively.

So in 2008, when Arlen Specter scored a 44%, Mike Castle scored a 26%.

Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 02:31 PM (h8R9p)

581 Clearly you believe this speaks ill of her him. Do you have any reason to
believe Castle O'Donnell would support her him if she he wins?I think it's pretty damn
obvious he she will not. Is there a reason you hold that possibility
against her him, but not against him her?

Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 02:32 PM (+gX1+)

582 In close votes, the only ones that'll matter, do you seriously think he'll ever cast a deciding vote in our favor?
Coons never will. That's the point. Don't be obtuse.

Posted by: rdbrewer at September 13, 2010 02:33 PM (+wdm+)

583 The perfect result is a very close election that scares the bejesus out of Castle and makes him "scared straight." The local Tea Party comes out and endorses him, with the caveat that they will be watching his actions closely.

Posted by: sexypig at September 13, 2010 02:33 PM (0t7L8)

584 602
(the "meme" comes from the Club for Growth, and the American Conservative Union, very kooky, crazy, and dumb orgs)
Castle scores 43% from CFG for 2009, (since his announced Senate bid)In 07 and 08 he earned a 35% and 26% respectively.

So in 2008, when Arlen Specter scored a 44%, Mike Castle scored a 26%.

What'd O'Donnell score?

Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 02:33 PM (+gX1+)

585 "The same New England states that are so receptive to GOP governors don't have a single House Republican among them."
You're absolutely right!
Do you think this is because they keep running "pure" conservatives in those states?
Those states keep running RINO's, over and over and over again. The RINO's keep losing, over and over and over again. Do you think that's going to change this year? Can you picture any candidates other than those with the support of the tea parties changing this dynamic?

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 02:33 PM (9zHDv)

586 Also, in "wave" election, I think RINOs will actually drift rightwards. Think about the Blue Dogs and how they were convinced to vote for all manner of lefty bullshit.

Posted by: sexypig at September 13, 2010 02:34 PM (0t7L8)

587 Clearly you believe this speaks ill of her. Do you have any reason to believe Castle would support her if she wins?I think it's pretty damn obvious he will not.
Qwinn, you're not typically shrill. What evidence do you have Castle would run as a spoiler write-in?

Posted by: rdbrewer at September 13, 2010 02:34 PM (+wdm+)

588 At least 95% of the name calling and abuse has been by the "If you don't vote for Castle you're a fucking moron who would fail at remedial civics" side. So quit the fucking hypocritical whining. Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 01:49 PM (9zHDv)
As someone who things this stupid grenade party is just an excuse for people to get their rage on, it sure as Hell looks a lot closer to 50-50.And it sure looks like you pulled that number out of nowhere, 'cause it ain't even close.

Posted by: Merovign, Strong on His Mountain at September 13, 2010 02:34 PM (bxiXv)

589 The perfect result is a very close election that scares the bejesus out of Castle and makes him "scared straight."
Umyeahsure. That'll happen.
Those odds are longer than O'Donnell winning the general outright.

Posted by: Entropy at September 13, 2010 02:35 PM (IsLT6)

590 "Coons never will. That's the point. Don't be obtuse"
You stop being obtuse.You're pointing out "Castle will vote for us sometimes" as an advantage. I'm saying it's -not- an advantage, at all, if Castle votes with us for votes we were going to win, or lose, anyway. Telling me "Coons won't be worse" does not support your argument that "Castle will be better".

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 02:36 PM (9zHDv)

591 "Qwinn, you're not typically shrill. What evidence do you have Castle would run as a spoiler write-in?"
I didn't say he would. And if I'm being shrill - which I don't think I have been, at all -maybe it's because this is the 20th time I've had words put in my mouth?

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 02:37 PM (9zHDv)

592 I'm saying it's -not- an advantage, at all, if Castle votes with us for votes we were going to win, or lose, anyway.
Who says it's going to only the votes we'll win anyway. That's a rather dull statement of faith, not a statement of fact. At any rate, check out what Zombie compiled at #548.
Telling me "Coons won't be worse" does not support your argument that "Castle will be better".
Yes, it does, and if you're goint to be thick-witted, I'm not interested.

Posted by: rdbrewer at September 13, 2010 02:39 PM (+wdm+)

593 Filing a complaint with the FEC against a member of your own party in the midst of a primary knowing it won't be resolved before the vote anyway? Come on.
According to the radio host I heard on WDEL, all the TEA Party ads endorsing O'Donnell have been pulled. Now the ads are paid for by Friends of Christine O'Donnell. Perhaps there is merit to the complaint that the DE GOP has filed against Christine O'Pportunista.

Posted by: kallisto at September 13, 2010 02:40 PM (+FkcS)

594 Rassmussen hasCastle winning48% / 37% over
Coons, with 9% undecided. While not necessarily a "sure thing", it's
pretty damned close.
O'Donnell polls 36% / 47% against Coons, with 9% undecided.
That'ssolidly in "longshot" territory, andapproachingthe "snowballs
chance in hell" region.
Polls shouldn't be taken as gospel, but a 12 point difference can't be ignored when the election is only 2 months away.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at September 13, 2010 02:31 PM (plsiE)

That is true. But Castle has dropped into the 40s in the 2 latest polls. He is dropping while O'Donnell is rising. If I was betting I would put my money on the longshot who's gaining over the favorite who's fading any day. Everyone is counting on Castle's ability to limp to the finish but I don't think he will make it. If O'Donnell doesn't get him Coons might. Coons will be fresh out of the gate.

Posted by: Rocks at September 13, 2010 02:40 PM (ivAmM)

595 Um, do you seriously think 2010 isshaping up to be anything like 2008?In Delaware, things are going to be better for the Democrats than in '08, because it's there that they already have their likeliest House pickup in the country. I ask again, how likely is it that, in two statewide elections, Delware voters are going to put a liberal Democrat into the House and a conservative crusader into the Senate at the same time?
Posted by: The War Between the Undead States
I neglected to note this; The local GOP. did something cagey, by declining tooppose the curent AG, Beau Biden. it was hoped that by doing that, the name recognition factor of a Biden would be avoided. Currently, the top Dems on their ticket are Coons, who has never run for a state office, and Carney, who has (Lt. Governor).

Will this help? I dunno.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 02:40 PM (R2fpr)

596 Byng's execution was satirized by Voltaire in his novel Candide. In Portsmouth, Candide witnesses the execution of an officer by firing squad; and is told that "in this country, it is wise to kill an admiral from time to time to encourage the others" (Dans ce pays-ci, il est bon de tuer de temps en temps un amiral pour encourager les autres).

Posted by: Radiant at September 13, 2010 02:42 PM (dQdrY)

597 So, by this "Castle would support her if she wins?I think it's pretty damn obvious he will not," you meant running around doing campaign stops with her? That is, if simply saying "I lost and I support O'Donnell" isnt enough?

Posted by: rdbrewer at September 13, 2010 02:42 PM (+wdm+)

598 Nor did I say "ace is on the take" or "ace is part of a coordinated conspiracy". But he seems to have found it in there.
Posted by: tsj017 at September 13, 2010 01:55 PM (4YUWF)
100 I see this campaign against O'Donnell (the same accusations, by everyone at once) as analogous to the campaign against Boehner (the same accusations, by everyone at once).

The word went out from on high: PROTECT OUR GUY.

Posted by: tsj017 at September 13, 2010 11:31 AM (4YUWF)

And they all happen to be saying the same things. Pure coincidence, I'm sure.

Posted by: tsj017 at September 13, 2010 12:16 PM (4YUWF)

Yeah, you forgot to mention that you thought that the entire Republican blogosphere was taking orders from on high and coordinating their message, EXCEPT ACE.

It's helpful to include those little exceptions if you don't want to be misunderstood.

Posted by: Merovign, Strong on His Mountain at September 13, 2010 02:42 PM (bxiXv)

599 According to the radio host I heard on WDEL, all
the TEA Party ads endorsing O'Donnell have been pulled. Now the ads are
paid for by Friends of Christine O'Donnell. Perhaps there is merit to
the complaint that the DE GOP has filed against Christine O'Pportunista.

Posted by: kallisto at September 13, 2010 02:40 PM (+FkcS)
Who cares if there is merit? You could find merit for 100 of these complaints in any race. It won't be even taken up before Tuesday. If Castle wins they will drop the complaint. If he loses they will drop it anyway. I don't they will pursue a complaint against their own nominee. The DE GOP leadership can't be THAT suicidal. The filing is just to create bad pr.

Posted by: Rocks at September 13, 2010 02:43 PM (ivAmM)

600 You know what, I'm just gonna throw a huge disclaimer like "THIS IS A QUOTE" and "THIS IS NOT A QUOTE" on things, because that mini-editor has pretty much permanently pissed me off. How do you try to use both HTML and CSS and screw the implementation of BOTH?

Posted by: Merovign, Strong on His Mountain at September 13, 2010 02:44 PM (bxiXv)

601 As I said last night...on balance, his "bi-partisan" votes for commie legislation is much more dangerous to the Republican party, than a partisan vote by a Dem that will have ZERO impact on the debate about what party will roll back the nannie state.

Republicans/Conservative will be stronger.

When Rinos rule...they insist to the public that Conservatives are extreme, and they seek to marginalize us with the public. And they use the MSM to help them. They are much more dangerous than a Dim, because Dims don't join Rinos, Rinos only join Dims to make them stronger.

Rinos must be defeated at all costs.

Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 02:44 PM (h8R9p)

602 What'd O'Donnell score?

Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 02:33 PM (+gX1+)
She doesn't have a voting record. She's an open book which is an advantage this year. It will be for Coons too if he faces Castle in the general.

Posted by: Rocks at September 13, 2010 02:46 PM (ivAmM)

603 Merovign, tsj is the 11,000th person to immediately impugn motive and conservative street cred when Ace doesn't agree with him/her. I can see where that brand of "argument" would get frustrating.

Posted by: rdbrewer at September 13, 2010 02:46 PM (+wdm+)

604 A vote for Castle is a vote for serfdom. Why is that hard to understand?
He can win? Big fucking deal. I would rather the wolves wear wolf clothing.

Posted by: Radiant at September 13, 2010 02:47 PM (dQdrY)

605 That is true. But Castle has dropped into the 40s in the 2 latest polls. He is dropping while O'Donnell is rising. If I was betting I would put my money on the longshot who's gaining over the favorite who's fading any day. Everyone is counting on Castle's ability to limp to the finish but I don't think he will make it. If O'Donnell doesn't get him Coons might. Coons will be fresh out of the gate.
That poll was only taken 6 days ago. If there's a more recent one pitting Coons against Castle and O'Donnell, I've not seen it.
You can't really extrapolate primary polls to the general. O'Donnell could get 100% of the primary vote but still lose the general in ablue state such as Delaware.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at September 13, 2010 02:49 PM (plsiE)

606 As I said last night...on balance, his "bi-partisan" votes for commie legislation is much more dangerous to the Republican party
And as I replied last night, your idea that the propagandistic value of his occasional aisle crossing is more valuable to Democrats than Coons 24/7 support is silly. You didn't respond to that then, and I doubt you will now. You'll just contiue with the "Wopner on at 4:00" stuff indefinately.
That means you're not helping.

Posted by: rdbrewer at September 13, 2010 02:50 PM (+wdm+)

607 So, by this "Castle would support her if she
wins?I think it's pretty damn obvious he will not," you meant running
around doing campaign stops with her? That is, if simply saying "I lost
and I support O'Donnell" isnt enough?

Posted by: rdbrewer at September 13, 2010 02:42 PM (+wdm+)
If Castles loses I seriously doubt he will endorse her. I would not be surprised to see him endorse Coons as he is much closer to Castle on political issues. If Castle and the party endorsed candidate for the House both lose I think you will see pandemonium in the DE GOP leadership.

Posted by: Rocks at September 13, 2010 02:51 PM (ivAmM)

608 THIS IS A QUOTE (stupid editor):

Rinos must be defeated at all costs.
Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 02:44 PM (h8R9p)

THIS IS NOT A QUOTE (stupid editor):

Yes, because it's better to be in the minority than an imperfect majority. What is power without purity?

Man, I wish Democraps thought that way, they probably wouldn't have majorities now.

Posted by: Merovign, Strong on His Mountain at September 13, 2010 02:52 PM (bxiXv)

609 Pffft!

You call that a conspiracy?

December 17, fuckers.

We will own it all.....

Posted by: Vast Conspiracy of Frilled Lizards at September 13, 2010 02:52 PM (+kzvp)

610 Will this help? I dunno.
I'd assumed Carney would help Dem turnout.... didn't he barely lose the gubernatorial primary a couple of years ago? At any rate, letting B. Biden skate might indeed have been a smart move.
Posted by: The War Between the Undead States

He's no rock star, though what passes for media here is making him out to be such. he did nothing as lt. Governor. He's just been here. he did try a run against the then state treasurer, (Markell) but lost. It was more of an even match up in that context.

I think that Coons might be a bigger draw in new Castle County, but Carney would be better known in the southern two counties, since he held a state office.
i'm curious as to what (if any) traction O'Donnell might gain if she had money ad heavy hitters coming in. I think that she can improve those curent numbers, but I don't see her prevailing.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 02:53 PM (R2fpr)

611 My point, Rocks, is that O'Donnell is a sure write-in spoiler if she loses. Castle is not, and to put them in the same boat on that issue--absent anyevidence other than "Ifeels it"--is dumb.

Posted by: rdbrewer at September 13, 2010 02:53 PM (+wdm+)

612
THIS IS A QUOTE:

Merovign, tsj is the 11,000th person to
immediately impugn motive and conservative street cred when Ace doesn't
agree with him/her. I can see where that brand of "argument" would get
frustrating.

Posted by: rdbrewer at September 13, 2010 02:46 PM (+wdm+)THIS IS NOT A QUOTE (how long can I keep this up?):
It's kind of a hot-button issue, people who have been around a few moons know that already. It hasn't just come up before, it's come up before in a BIG way.

Posted by: Merovign, Strong on His Mountain at September 13, 2010 02:54 PM (bxiXv)

613 That poll was only taken 6 days ago. If there's a more recent one pitting Coons against Castle and O'Donnell, I've not seen it.
You can't really extrapolate primary polls to the
general. O'Donnell could get 100% of the primary vote but still lose
the general in ablue state such as Delaware.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at September 13, 2010 02:49 PM (plsiE)

There was another poll showing very similar results a day prior to that one I think. I made the same point about the primary polls myself earlier. In polls over the last few months Castle has been in the high 50's at least but over the last month he has dropped slowly till he is now below 50%. Not the direction you want to be moving.

Posted by: Rocks at September 13, 2010 02:54 PM (ivAmM)

614 She doesn't have a voting record.

No kidding. Her record is thin, what exists is not exactly conservative (suing ISI for "sexism", fighting against masturbation, lying about what she won, running write-in campaigns when she loses a primary and generic rhetoric). I'm pretty much convinced that she's not so much a true blue conservative as she is a person hoping to ride into the Senate on the backs of actual conservative discontent, and then will just vote RINOish when she has to get re-elected.

Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 02:54 PM (+gX1+)

615 Mero, I was agreeing with you and speaking more to the noobs.

Posted by: rdbrewer at September 13, 2010 02:55 PM (+wdm+)

616 "So, by this "Castle would support her if she wins?I think it's pretty damn obvious he will not," you meant running around doing campaign stops with her? That is, if simply saying "I lost and I support O'Donnell" isnt enough?"
I was just referring to an endorsement, yes. I don't think Castle will endorse O'Donnell at all, not in his concession speech, not for a minute. The argument seemed to me to be that O'Donnell would not endorse Castle if he won, and that makes her bad, and I'm wondering why that same standard doesn't apply to Castle. Unless you think he -will- endorse her. I can't imagine why anyone would think he would after the last few weeks of attack ads from his camp (which, incidentally, have hurt him worse than her).

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 02:55 PM (9zHDv)

617 I don't know what "Wopner on at 4" means, but I did explain this morning and last night my opinion on how damaging Rinos are to the Republican party, how leaving them in power marginalizes Conservatives.

But you know that already.

Again, we will have to agree to disagree on the strategy of getting rid of as many Rinos as possible.

I think it is a worthy goal, and worth a try, and you do not (in this case at least).

No need for insults, as I said last night...we are all on the same side.

Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 02:57 PM (h8R9p)

618 I have voted R in every election since I was 18.
Senator Cornyn has about conviced me that I have wasted my time and effort.
I want an army of Paul Ryans.

Posted by: Radiant at September 13, 2010 02:58 PM (dQdrY)

619 My point, Rocks, is that O'Donnell is a sure write-in spoiler if she loses. Castle is not, and to put them in the same boat on that issue--absent anyevidence other than "Ifeels it"--is dumb.
Posted by: rdbrewer

In either case, I think that bad things will happen. If O'Donnell loses, she may try for the write in gambit. It would be wrong. I wish that she would swear off of it now.
If Castle loses, I fear that he will simply concede, and no more. He will have to resign from the House, and his career will effectively be at an end, unless he wants to challenge Carper in 2012. Could he manage it? Yes. But he's already ducked that at least once before.
I do not see ANY evidence that he would endorse Coons or switch parties.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 02:59 PM (R2fpr)

620 rdbrewer, ah, I see, you're specifically saying she'll run as a write in after she loses?I see. She'd be pretty stupid to, but if she did it before, yeah, that's a point in your favor, and no, I have no reason to believe he'd run as a write in. Well, except that it generally seems to be something RINOs love to do (see Crist, Charlie), but no, that's not enough.
So, ok, I misunderstood your earlier post, I thought you were talking about endorsements only, not about running as a write in. My bad.

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 03:00 PM (9zHDv)

621 A vote for Castle is a vote for serfdom.
Posted by: Radiant at September 13, 2010 02:47 PM (dQdrY)

And a vote of O'Donnell is pretty much a vote for a Senator Coons.

Let's see, Castle is willing to look at repealing ObamaCare if the GOP wins the White House in '12 (which is the only way it will happen). Coons on the other hand is a doctrinaire Democrat who will oppose repeal.

Please explain how this is a good trade off and a way to avoid serfdom.

Posted by: DrewM. at September 13, 2010 03:01 PM (ycZcD)

622 My point, Rocks, is that O'Donnell is a sure
write-in spoiler if she loses. Castle is not, and to put them in the
same boat on that issue--absent anyevidence other than "Ifeels it"--is
dumb.

Posted by: rdbrewer at September 13, 2010 02:53 PM (+wdm+)
O'Donnell is done if she loses. None of her big name supporters will back her for a write in and nobody ever gets many write in votes anyway. She won't even attempt a write in campaign. I think she will every quickly fade from view is she loses tomorrow. I don't think she will endorse Castle, I doubt he would even want it.Someone will win tomorrow and someone will lose. Whoever loses is done with.Castle can't really endorse her now after his campaign and no one will care what O'Donnell does if she loses.

Posted by: Rocks at September 13, 2010 03:02 PM (ivAmM)

623 Please explain how this is a good trade off and a way to avoid serfdom.
Posted by: DrewM. at September 13, 2010 03:01 PM (ycZcD)
I don't trust him. Actions are better predictors of future actions than words.

Posted by: Radiant at September 13, 2010 03:02 PM (dQdrY)

624 I do not see ANY evidence that he would endorse Coons or switch parties.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 02:59 PM (R2fpr)

I doubt he will either. I would only see it if he gets really bitter if he loses tomorrow.

Posted by: Rocks at September 13, 2010 03:03 PM (ivAmM)

625 There was another poll showing very similar results a day prior to that one I think. I made the same point about the primary polls myself earlier. In polls over the last few months Castle has been in the high 50's at least but over the last month he has dropped slowly till he is now below 50%. Not the direction you want to be moving.
He still has an11 point lead. It's pretty unlikely that he'll drop 11 points with only 9% undecided. I suspect that the undecideds were a lot higher in the earlier polls.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at September 13, 2010 03:04 PM (plsiE)

626 Well, what you are and are not impressed by isn't really at issue. The facts however are a bit stubborn.

My point is I don't need to be explained by what blue states are like. I'm familiar with them.

It annoys me when people claim that conservatives can't win in blue
states. They can. I'm sick of hearing, 'it's a blue state' so we have
to run Charlie Baker types. Those guys are the kind of fodder Democrats
love to run against.

BTW- Do you think O'Donnell or an O'Donnell type candidate would have won in MA like Brown did?Brown
rode the perfect combination of timing, awful opponent and an uncanny
ability to span the gap between moderates and tea party folks. He also
had a picture perfect resume and family. Do you honestly think O'Donnell is in Brown's league when it comes to being a candidate?

No, O'Donnell isn't in Scott Brown's league. O'Donnell is most definitely not a good candidate. My point however is that Castle very well might lose to O'Donnell, which indicates that he has run a shitty primary campaign. It never should have gotten to this point.

Castle should have made nice with conservatives during the primary. Even in Massachusetts they do that. Scott Brown definitely did that. Give the base a reason to vote for you. Castle never did.

Is Delaware so blue you can't do that there, when in Massachusetts you can?

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at September 13, 2010 03:04 PM (FkKjr)

627 632

When was the last time a Democrat came out and lobbied against his party? Against his President? Against a piece of liberal legislation? Against Democrat candidates?

JL was the one and only who ever tried to do it, and he was creamed.

They don't go to the MSM like Rinos, they don't agitate against commie legislation like Rinos, they don't campaign, trash, and marginalize their liberals. When do they join Republicans to make a bill more conservative???? Hell, our tax cuts had to be TEMPORARY!

They vote with them, as evidenced

Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 03:04 PM (h8R9p)

628 Senator Cornyn has about conviced me that I have wasted my time and effort.
But Coryn has an ACU rating of 100 for 2009 and a lifetime rating over 93.

Oh, and Grahmnasty has a lifetime ACU rating of 89.

So, I think that is the last time I use an ACU rating for anything.

By ACU standards, Lindsey Graham is not a RINO.

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 03:04 PM (OWjjx)

629 Like the ad says:
Sometime you feel like a nut (O'Donnell), sometimes you don't (Castle.)

I'd go with the nut.

Posted by: mpfs at September 13, 2010 03:05 PM (iYbLN)

630 I just fell like raising a little hell . Why not?

Posted by: mpfs at September 13, 2010 03:06 PM (iYbLN)

631 rdbrewer, ah, I see, you're specifically saying she'll run as a write in after she loses?I see. She'd be pretty stupid to, but if she did it before, yeah, that's a point in your favor, and no, I have no reason to believe he'd run as a write in. Well, except that it generally seems to be something RINOs love to do (see Crist, Charlie), but no, that's not enough.
So, ok, I misunderstood your earlier post, I thought you were talking about endorsements only, not about running as a write in. My bad.
Posted by: Qwinn
She has done it before, in 2006. And she got a surprising response. If she tries this, and doesn't self destrust, she can be a source of pain. That's one reason why I want to see her swear against doing it. One reson this primary is so ugly is that for at least one of them, this is probably their last race.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 03:06 PM (R2fpr)

632 Please explain how this is a good trade off and a way to avoid serfdom.
Posted by: DrewM. at September 13, 2010 03:01 PM (ycZcD)
Also people will judge the Rs based on what they accomplish. If Rinos cause the Rs to fail to repeal, then the "truth" that there is no differnce between parties will only solidify. If the fix is in, why not vote for who tips better? Bad for the long term, I think.

Posted by: Radiant at September 13, 2010 03:06 PM (dQdrY)

633 Posted by: Tom In Korea at September 13, 2010 02:54 PM (+gX1+)

If she somehow gets elected Senator she will stick with conservatives as she would owe it all to them. At least till she's up for reelection in 4 years. I don't expect her to be a hard live conservative if she gets elected. But it's not very hard to be more conservative than Mike Castle anyway.

Posted by: Rocks at September 13, 2010 03:07 PM (ivAmM)

634
I just read this post, it's fabulous. It ties it all in. Says a lot. It took me two minutes to read and made my day. link

(Oh, I should warn you, the picture at the link will make you both jealous and hungry at the same
time.)

Posted by: curious at September 13, 2010 03:09 PM (p302b)

635 Who cares if there is merit? You could find merit for 100 of these complaints in any race.
I care if it has merit. Because that would indicate that the DE GOP did not file a frivolous complaint, unlike Ms. O'Donnell'sgender bias lawsuit that she filed. (Which is the very reason for this thread, and which most commentersseem to have forgotten.)

Posted by: kallisto at September 13, 2010 03:10 PM (+FkcS)

636 This is like listening to the neighbors -- the ones from Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York...

Posted by: Born and Raised Below the Canal at September 13, 2010 03:10 PM (f9czX)

637 tHis poSt merEly DemonstratEs thaT Ace is On the PaYroll of The RNC elitEs!!!!!
STOP hidinG in my Bushes and FolloWing meACE or I'll SUE!!!!
Now Will somEone please geT tHeseSPIDERS off of ME!!!!

Posted by: Christine O'Donnell at September 13, 2010 03:11 PM (plsiE)

638 (sorry)

As evidenced by the amount of serfdom they heaped upon us in two years.

And as evidenced by their complete takeover of the MSM/Hollywood/Academia/gov Bureaucrat/judiciary...and on and on.

There is no such thing as a conservative Dem when the chips are down, they are only conservative while lying during an election season, just like Rinos.

Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 03:11 PM (h8R9p)

639 He still has an11 point lead.
It's pretty unlikely that he'll drop 11 points with only 9% undecided. I
suspect that the undecideds were a lot higher in the earlier polls.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at September 13, 2010 03:04 PM (plsiE)

To lose an 11 point lead you only need to drop 5.51%. I can't remember if the undecided were higher in the earlier polls. But I know Castle was, a lot higher. He's aready dropped at least 10% , there is no reason he couldn't drop another 6%. If he does and only manages to split undecideds he loses.

Posted by: Rocks at September 13, 2010 03:11 PM (ivAmM)

640 This is like listening to the neighbors -- the ones from Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York...
Posted by: Born and Raised Below the Canal

And they wonder why we raised the toll on I-95 to $4. After tomorrow, we should raise the damn thing to $7, just to pay for the ant-acids.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 03:12 PM (R2fpr)

641 Also people will judge the Rs based on what they accomplish. If Rinos cause the Rs to fail to repeal, then the "truth" that there is no differnce between parties will only solidify
Repeal is not really a viable alternative till 2012. Obama can still veto any repeal bill and, no matter how big the upcoming wave is, it is not going to get you to 66 Republicans in the Senate.

You can continue to send up repeal legislation. But if the standard by which you are going to judge any subsequent Republican controlled Congress in 2010 is if they can repeal Obamacare, you are only setting yourself up for disappointment.

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 03:13 PM (OWjjx)

642 I admit I haven't real all the posts on all of the O'Donnell v Castle threads, but I've tried to skim them closely. It still seems to come down to folks deciding she's a lunatic, lying, terrible candidate, versus those who either aren't as easily convinced of that point of view, or don't care, given that her opponent has a track record that screams liberal.

I've read Levin's analysis of the lawsuit (which, BTW is not a new issue, and has been placed before the public before--there's several Frei Repubic threads full of the appropriate cites for those who want "proof" of that claim. Knock yourselves out). Attacking her for the suit is weak sauce, for all the reasons Levin cites.

What's left of the "crazy" meme seems to be boiled down to her claiming the GOP and or Castle have had folks following her around. The references there get into silly territory fast. I couldn't find a single link showing she actually said they were in her bushes, yet that's the most frequent claim. OTOH, her claims that folks have followed her has been corroborated (see same Fried Repoblik threads if you want links. Have fun.)

The "house/finances / sale/repo" issue has been both blown way out of proportion, and at the same time, swept under the rug, with counter-factual "evidence" supplied by both sides. It looks like the usual deep oppo research digging, and it's also been brought out before.

The college degree flap is similar. Not everyone gets to go to Harvard on the public's dime. Doesn't bother me. Did she LIE about it? Depends on your stomach for spin. Meeting degree requirements versus getting the paper puts a person in strange territory. You try answering that question in one second in an interview situation, and we'll see how clever you are at being totally truthful, while trying to convey useful information.

Which seems to leave us with "her public statements." Big surprise, she isn't gifted at public speaking. Like Jan Brewer and Sharon Angle and Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi.

Newsflash: Not everybody gets to be Allan West.

So the "she's crazier than a syphilitic bordello slave in Shanghai" kind of comments seem a bit hyperinflated, to me.

No, I did not know who she was before last week. But the used-car, sales job done by her detractors isn't convincing me she's less electable than some random candidate.

Which leaves me to ponder electability in Delaware. Since the same sort of shabby electioneering is going on there, it isn't very clear who is and isn't electable there, so only one test will work, as always.

If she wins, Castle is gone, and from looking at his record, that's a good accomplishment.

Winning the Senate is nowhere near as vital as the more viciously written posts claim. As many have pointed out, having it won means nothing (see term, Bush, George W.).

As for "purity," that's also a weak charge. It totally ignores what has been happening in this country for the last year and a half. It is analysis by way of time-machine back to the days of LBJ. This is not the same environment.

Calling everyone who wants to be a part of this restoration/tea-party movement names, and blaming them for defeat-yet-to-occur is to ignore everything that is going on around us.

You don't have to even be Conservative to see that O'Donnell has a chance NOW that will never be available again in our lifetime. If this election were six months ago, or probably one year from now, Castle would be the ONLY choice.

This is now, and this time is unique. To ignore that serves no intellectual purpose.

Posted by: K~Bob at September 13, 2010 03:15 PM (9b6FB)

643 I care if it has merit. Because that would
indicate that the DE GOP did not file a frivolous complaint, unlike Ms.
O'Donnell'sgender bias lawsuit that she filed. (Which is the very
reason for this thread, and which most commentersseem to have
forgotten.)

Posted by: kallisto at September 13, 2010 03:10 PM (+FkcS)

They have no intention of pursuing the complaint after Tuesday. Merit or not it's as frivolous as her lawsuit. It's simply meant to garner bad pr for O'Donnell.

Posted by: Rocks at September 13, 2010 03:15 PM (ivAmM)

644 I care if it has merit. Because that would indicate that the DE GOP did not file a frivolous complaint, unlike Ms. O'Donnell'sgender bias lawsuit that she filed. (Which is the very reason for this thread, and which most commentersseem to have forgotten.)
Posted by: kallisto
Bingo. This is important especially if she wins. Then she will be the rightful nominee of a party that:
A. Has the goods on her, and needs to see if she should be replaced
or
B. It was frivolous. if so, you would hope that it would be buried as quickly as possible, especially if more tea party money was possible. But that would give the state GOP credit that it may or may not deserve.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 03:16 PM (R2fpr)

645 You can continue to send up repeal legislation. But if the standard by which you are going to judge any subsequent Republican controlled Congress in 2010 is if they can repeal Obamacare, you are only setting yourself up for disappointment.

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 03:13 PM (OWjjx)
Forcing vetos would be good enough in the short term.

Posted by: Radiant at September 13, 2010 03:16 PM (dQdrY)

646 To lose an 11 point lead you only need to drop 5.51%. I can't remember if the undecided were higher in the earlier polls. But I know Castle was, a lot higher. He's aready dropped at least 10% , there is no reason he couldn't drop another 6%. If he does and only manages to split undecideds he loses.
Castle’s high water mark was 56 --- in January of 2010. For the most part, he has averaged around 50. So his drop off has been about 6 points. Which is not be unexpected considering the intense interest this race has generated, the fact that in January of 2010, Coons name recognition was generally low and Democrats did not have a real nominee to get behind --- remember, Beau Biden was supposed to make this race. When he dropped out (around January of 2010) the Dems. had to start looking for a candidate, and Coons was not the first choice.And it has taken 8 months to drop that 6 points. Plus, if Castle is the nominee, you have to wonder if the DNSC and DNC is going to invest a lot of money in this race when they have incumbents to protect

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 03:18 PM (OWjjx)

647 And multiple typed font is the new big, bold font.

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 03:19 PM (OWjjx)

648 A. Has the goods on her, and needs to see if she should be replaced
or
B. It was frivolous. if so, you would hope that it
would be buried as quickly as possible, especially if more tea party
money was possible. But that would give the state GOP credit that it may
or may not deserve.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 03:16 PM (R2fpr)
Even if she was guilty this would never be resolved before election day. Even if they could get a quick ruling from the FEC she can appeal and they can't replace her as nominee unless she steps down which is hardly likely.

Posted by: Rocks at September 13, 2010 03:25 PM (ivAmM)

649 Sadly I must clarify the statement "having it won means nothing."

What I meant is that owning both houses has proven to be sad spectacle when the owners refuse to act like they won.

Maybe with a few lefty R's a newer batch of R's can make a difference. But a year after the election, the quest for money trumps unity, and causes "gang of fourteen" bullshit to ooze out of every orifice.

So what I mean is, winning the Senate is nowhere near as important as some claim. Obama will get his judges. That's because Conservatives follow the constitution, and won't Bork anyone.

Posted by: K~Bob at September 13, 2010 03:26 PM (9b6FB)

650 A. Has the goods on her, and needs to see if she should be replaced
or
B. It was frivolous. if so, you would hope that it would be buried as quickly as possible, especially if more tea party money was possible. But that would give the state GOP credit that it may or may not deserve.
Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 03:16 PM (R2fpr)
Even if she was guilty this would never be resolved before election day. Even if they could get a quick ruling from the FEC she can appeal and they can't replace her as nominee unless she steps down which is hardly likely.
Posted by: Rocks
True. What they can do is show merit and try to force her out. I wouldn't rule that out, not here. And if they did have merit, the Dems at least would seize upon it. Think that Reid wouldn't use it to delay seating her, should she actually win in November (winner gets seated immediately)? He delayed seating Scott Brown.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 03:32 PM (R2fpr)

651 This guy sums up the confusion pretty well. Since I'm only an independent and I'm a Sarah Palin generated political pay attentioner now, maybe I don't understand why you guys are doing this cause I haven't really been observing republican politics but damn, I was saying you both look the same to me, fraternal twins separated at birth and you know what, haven't changed that opinion.

Posted by: curious at September 13, 2010 03:32 PM (p302b)

652 Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 03:18 PM (OWjjx)

I thought he was at 59% at one point. My bad. But he hasn't average around 50, he'd been steadily above that, it was a 53.5% average. But I still think his dropping below 50% is significant as a House incumbent and I don't think he can be called a lock because of it.

Posted by: Rocks at September 13, 2010 03:33 PM (ivAmM)

653 Rino Spartan:
Hey, King Leonidas, maybe we could justgive them just half our weapons. That'd work, right?

Posted by: Radiant at September 13, 2010 03:36 PM (dQdrY)

654 Yeah, you forgot to mention that you
thought that the entire Republican blogosphere was taking orders from
on high and coordinating their message, EXCEPT ACE.

It's helpful to include those little exceptions if you don't want to be misunderstood.

So where did he come up with "elitist conspiracy"?

For some jackass-bitches like tsoj, "elitist conspiracy" is the new "Racism."

So, let's see: That's "jackass-bitches", in addition to the earlier "fucking idiot paranoid cunt", "Suck my cock you nutjob paranoid loser", and "Go fap your dick forever to thoughts of finally getting payback against a world conspiring against you, bitch."

And ace is the one who occasionally lectures people about keeping comments within certain boundaries?

The posts that provoked this nonsense, again, were 28, 100, and 283. Read 'em, and then read ace's response at 293.

I like this blog. I check it every day. I recommend it to others. But, you know . . . I'm pretty sure that it wasn't me that was out of line here.

If O'Donnell wins tomorrow night . . . well, more popcorn, STAT.

Posted by: tsj017 at September 13, 2010 03:38 PM (4YUWF)

655 True. What they can do is show
merit and try to force her out. I wouldn't rule that out, not here. And
if they did have merit, the Dems at least would seize upon it. Think
that Reid wouldn't use it to delay seating her, should she actually win
in November (winner gets seated immediately)? He delayed seating Scott
Brown.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 03:32 PM (R2fpr)

The complaint is against her and the TPE. The national GOP is counting on the TPE to spend millions on their nominees. They will force the DE GOP to pull the complaint. They won't let the DE GOP take down 4 other candidates just save their own and Mike Castle's ass.

Posted by: Rocks at September 13, 2010 03:38 PM (ivAmM)

656 K-Bob in post 667 summarizes pretty well my reactions when actually looking into the charges against her. Weak sauce, mostly. Particularly the "OMG she sed she almost won when it was like 54-39 or somethink!" I can only imagine this was said by people who live in red states. You're a no-name Republican candidate in a blue statethat actually gets 39% of the vote? At least here in NJ, that -is- "almost won". The fact that she even got double digits is enough for her to fairly crow about, given the circumstances she was in, and if her numbers were rising at the time of the election (I don't know), it's even got a fair chance that she could sincerely believe it to betechnically true as well. The claims that she outright lied about that point are very, very weak sauce.

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 03:39 PM (9zHDv)

657 THIS IS A QUOTE (stupid editor)

Mwa ha ha ha!!!!

Posted by: New Comments Thingy at September 13, 2010 03:42 PM (Pson9)

658 You're a no-name Republican candidate in a blue statethat actually gets 39% of the vote? At least here in NJ, that -is- "almost won".
There is no “almost won” in politics. You do not get an “almost vote” in the House or Senate.

Well, unless you are the whatever the hell they call it delegate from Washington D.C. Or Guam. When Guam isn’t tipping over.

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 03:45 PM (OWjjx)

659 @669 -
another Delaware commenter remarked that this thread is like listening to the tri-state area neighbors. I'm in neighboring Delaware county (PA) and your senate primary if of great interest to me partly because of what is occurring inour ownHouse race. The Republican candidate has discovered that the "tea party candidate" running against him has had petitions filed by Democrat activists, and accordingly filed a complaint.
The (R)candidate, Pat Meehan, is no lightweight. He is the U.S. attorney who prosecuted the Philadelphia pay-to-play scandal. (This issue was covered on Ace of Spades by ace or Drew, I can't recall the author). Anyway I'll get to the point: for all the accusations of Right wing jouronolisting levelled at the anti-O'Donnell crowd, how do we know there aren't Democrat plant faux tea partyites in her camp? (without her knowledge of course). There has been mention in this thread of new nics stridently campaigning for Christine, when really, it's only Delawareans who can cast a vote tomorrow.

Posted by: kallisto at September 13, 2010 03:46 PM (+FkcS)

660 I thought he was at 59% at one point. My bad. But he hasn't average around 50, he'd been steadily above that, it was a 53.5% average. But I still think his dropping below 50% is significant as a House incumbent and I don't think he can be called a lock because of it.
His average RCP lead is in excess of 10.

Once you get past 10, you are considered a heavy favorite.

There are no locks – well, Hoevener in North Dakota, DeMint in South Carolina and Coburn in Oklahoma. But each of them has a 40 point lead.

But very few candidates have lost 10 points in 2 months. Particularly given the high name identification people have of Castle. It does happen. Just not often.

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 03:48 PM (OWjjx)

661 I was saying you both look the same to me, fraternal twins separated at birth and you know what, haven't changed that opinion.
What an astute observation! That explains why when I used to pray the rosary in front of the abortion clinic at 11th and Pine, every other protestor praying with me was a liberal democrat. Well done.
/sarcasm off

Posted by: kallisto at September 13, 2010 03:50 PM (+FkcS)

662 What an astute observation! That explains why when I used to pray the rosary in front of the abortion clinic at 11th and Pine, every other protestor praying with me was a liberal democrat. Well done.
Bet Castle wasn't standing beside you either. So what's the diff?

Posted by: Radiant at September 13, 2010 03:54 PM (dQdrY)

663

If she wins the General, the activists can say "We told you so."
If she loses the General,the Castle folks can say "We told you so."

Either way, we will know which was the best approach.

I find your logic to be faulty. It would be much more helpful a benchmark if she where, oh, I dunno, sane?

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie at September 13, 2010 03:55 PM (1hM1d)

664 This has nothing to do with Mike Castle. This has to do with the overused, throwaway, uninformed notion - thank you Glenn Beck - that there's no difference between Democrats and Republicans.
That's the diff.
(Megan?)

Posted by: kallisto at September 13, 2010 03:57 PM (+FkcS)

665 Good point about the "almost won" thingy in 681, Quinn.

I've been reading most of the not-against-O'Donnell posts,
and like Quinn, Rocks, and Vic, I just don't see the bleeding eyeballs, the wild hair, and the dead uncle in the basement vibe that we're supposed to be seeing.

Also, I've seen a LOT of video of Jan Brewer lately, so I don't expect good candidates to sound like Charlton Heston or Margaret Thatcher.

Look, we don't have to love candidates to vote for them. The only reason I think the "you are all fools, suicidal, and crazy for supporting (as if) O'Donnell" posts here have any merit at all is that, in different times, they would be (sort of) correct. And by "sort of", I mean it's still poor thinking to go hyperbolic with the personal crap just because you are concerned with strategy.

Man, if the namecalling and childish ranting comes out for such a simple disagreement, it only underscores why I'll never be part of any political party.

Posted by: K~Bob at September 13, 2010 03:58 PM (9b6FB)

666 (looks around – doesn’t see anybody)

Oh great, everyone is gone. Good, now it is time for

MORE BIG BOLD FONTS!!!

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 04:04 PM (OWjjx)

667 http://tinyurl.com/297bwqn
Castle's ACU ratings
2009: 56
2008: 28
2007: 20
2006: 52
2005: 28
2004: 52
2003: 44
2002: 76
2001: 48
2000: 68
1999: 44
Yes, I did previously misstate his 2008 and 2007 ratings; he's much worse than I'd realized. Still, this proves that the zombie wannabe's claim that I was lying about the "centrist" Castle is the typical scream of a brave Internet hothead.

Posted by: Ken at September 13, 2010 04:04 PM (CDrOo)

668 Check this out. It's from the Weekly Standard. Why theHell can't he simply say that it's "no longer the right path" for us?? Does he or does he not want to win this stinking primary!?!
Yet, Castle remained unapologetic about his support for cap-and-trade, unlike other moderate Republicans, such as Mark Kirk in Illinois and Scott Brown in Massachusetts, who ran from cap-and-trade when they ran for Senate. "Do I regret supporting it originally? Politically, it would have been easier not to, but ultimately if we get to the point where we are actually improving our environment and do the things we need to do, I don’t necessarily think it was a wasted vote."
But, Castle argued, cap-and-trade is almost certainly dead in this Congress and the next: “My assessement is that [cap-and-trade] legislation is not going to come up. I don't think anything that one could characterize as cap-and-trade or cap-and-tax or anything like that will come up. I think there may be some incentives for alternative sources or something like that, but not anything similar to cap-and-trade.”

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 04:04 PM (R2fpr)

669 Mike Castle is pro-abortion. I ask again, what is the difference?
Electing his kind will only alienate folks like me from the party, and he will betray you. Good plan.

Posted by: Radiant at September 13, 2010 04:05 PM (dQdrY)

670 I might add that the ACU site isn't very well organized, so you have to search for the data--but it is there.

Posted by: Ken at September 13, 2010 04:06 PM (CDrOo)

671 684 another Delaware commenter remarked that this thread is like listening to the tri-state area neighbors.
I was not referring to the tri-state area neighbors, but all the neighbors who have moved here from the tri-state area.
Of course the majority of them vote Democrat...

Posted by: Born and Raised Below the Canal at September 13, 2010 04:06 PM (f9czX)

672 I might add that the ACU site isn't very well organized, so you have to search for the data--but it is there.
And again, Lindsey Graham has a 89 this year for ACU. So, Lindsey Graham is not a RINO. Wheewww, I feel a lot better about his reach across the aisle on Global Warming. With that 89 ACU rating, the country is in fine hands with Lindsey. And that gang of 14, well, he has a 89 lifetime rating, so, I am sure we are all in great hands there again.

Sorry for the snark – its not personal. I am just getting to the point where any justification over a candidate begins and ends with an ACU rating. Or candidate so and so was endorsed/blasted by Mark Levin/Sean Hannity/Michelle Malkin whoever.

I don’t care about ACU ratings. Or talk show host. Or bloggers.

Lots of reasons to vote for Castle. Lots of reasons to vote for O’Donnell. But ACU ratings are not really what I think about when I go in and vote. And, as shown with Graham, can be misleading.

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 04:12 PM (OWjjx)

673 Well, it's not like people haven't posted the votes that lead people to believe he's a RINO, and it's not like people have based it only on ACU rating. Pam did a great job of outlining the really odious things this guy has backed, but ofcourse that got completely ignored by the (still ongoing) rants about her use of bold lettering. Cause the guys on the other side, they're sticking to the facts and all.

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 04:16 PM (9zHDv)

674 Check this out. It's from the Weekly Standard. Why theHell can't he simply say that it's "no longer the right path" for us?? Does he or does he not want to win this stinking primary!?!
Or the old standby- "now that new data has come to light, I've reconsidered". Does teh cap and trade poll well in Delaware?

Posted by: kallisto at September 13, 2010 04:16 PM (+FkcS)

675 Check this out. It's from the Weekly Standard. Why theHell can't he simply say that it's "no longer the right path" for us?? Does he or does he not want to win this stinking primary!?!
Or the old standby- "now that new data has come to light, I've reconsidered". Does the cap and trade poll well in Delaware?
Posted by: kallisto

I suppose that if you ask someone here about 'going green', they'd say yes. But we still have some industry here. We have two refineries here! if Scott Brown could could say no in Mass, Castle could sayno in Delaware.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 04:22 PM (R2fpr)

676 Cause the guys on the other side, they're sticking to the facts and all.
I really don’t care who anyone votes for. My point was that ACU ratings can be deceiving. And O’Donnell doesn’t have a voting record – to get a voting record, winning is generally required. And elections are about winning. There are no “near wins” in politics.

Yes, Castle has been around a long time. And in that long time, anyone is going to have votes you disagree with. That is the nature of politics. Like my daddy used to say, want to agree with an elected official 100% of the time….better get yourself elected, otherwise, that ain’t gonna happen.

Personally, I have been waiting for about a week now for an explanation of how O’Donnell is going to make up 11 points in 2 months. I don’t see it happening.

As for Castle, honestly, he is not my cup of tea. But I hate tea anyway, so I guess that is a shitty analogy.

And both sides can drop the “other side is wrong stuff.” Both sides have committed faults in the debate. The election is, thankfully, tomorrow. Hopefully, it won’t involve a recount. Then we start of Wednesday assessing where we are and what needs to be done.

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 04:22 PM (OWjjx)

677 ". And in that long time, anyone is going to have votes you disagree with."
Um, dude, it's a bit more than that. Scroll up and look for those posts by Pam. They should be easy to find, they're in bold

That's more than a few "votes you disagree with". That's full raging fucking RINO.

Posted by: Qwinn at September 13, 2010 04:25 PM (9zHDv)

678 Posted by: Mallamutt
We need to resume the howling and not stop until at least Wednesday. Do ya think that Howard Dean was looking into the future and saw this race when he howled?

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 04:25 PM (R2fpr)

679 I guess I'd rather have a whack job looney in office than a confirmed RINO or a leftist. Call me crazy.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at September 13, 2010 04:26 PM (61b7k)

680 That's more than a few "votes you disagree with". That's full raging fucking RINO.
Yea, yea, I know….he is a RINO. Thanks, I never figured that out until all those post.

Again, I no longer care. No one is going to convince you to change your mind, like you are not going to change a pro-Castle mind.

And the bold was joke. You may have noticed this blog runs on the snarky side. It’s the reason I enjoy being here and posting here. Not stuffy like some other sites. I get razzed frequently. I get told to F.O. at times. I can even make jokes at myself, for example, my horrible spelling. So get over the bold joke – if you are going to get butt hurt every time someone makes a joke at your expense, or your sides expense, this might not be the place for ya.

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 04:31 PM (OWjjx)

681 I suppose that if you ask someone here about 'going green', they'd say yes. But we still have some industry here. We have two refineries here! if Scott Brown could could say no in Mass, Castle could sayno in Delaware.
What's going on with the old Chrysler plant that Uncle Joe rescued?
(You know I can see why even moderates are starting to hate Mike Castle. But it's a choice between him and a radioactive candidate. That isso messed up.Good luck.)

Posted by: kallisto at September 13, 2010 04:31 PM (+FkcS)

682 guess I'd rather have a whack job looney in office
Ahh, therein lies the rub. Can you get her elected? If you could, I suspect that a lot more people would be in favor of her.

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 04:35 PM (OWjjx)

683 . Do ya think that Howard Dean was looking into the future and saw this race when he howled?
No. Howard Dean is just nuts. I think he howls when ordering the breakfast.

IM GONNA HAVE THE EGGS! AND THEN YOUR GONNA SCRAMBLE THEM. THEN YOUR GONNA MAKE SOME TOAST. AND YOUR GONNA BRING ME SOME COFFEE. THEN I AM GONNA EAT THEM ALL AND PAY THE CHECK. YEEEEAAAAAA!!!!!!

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 04:37 PM (OWjjx)

684 There is no “almost won” in politics. You do not get an “almost vote” in the House or Senate.

Well, that's not exactly true. If a candidate narrowly wins (100s of votes), he doesn't have a clear mandate. Smart politicians will realize that means they need to tread carefully and not antagonize their electorate with anything too controversial.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at September 13, 2010 04:42 PM (FkKjr)

685 Smart politicians will realize that means they need to tread carefully and not antagonize their electorate with anything too controversial.
A lose is a lose is a lose. Yes, a near defeat may modify the winner’s voting behavior. Or, more often, it just reminds the winner that next year may be just as tough, so start raising money a lot earlier, getting staffer a lot earlier, etc. More often than not, the narrow winner does not change their mind on big items – they change how they approach the next campaign. If a close election truly effected policy positions, Obamacare would not have passed.

And, the losing candidate still doesn’t get to vote

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 04:47 PM (OWjjx)

686 I suppose that if you ask someone here about 'going green', they'd say yes. But we still have some industry here. We have two refineries here! if Scott Brown could could say no in Mass, Castle could sayno in Delaware.
What's going on with the old Chrysler plant that Uncle Joe rescued?
(You know I can see why even moderates are starting to hate Mike Castle. But it's a choice between him and a radioactive candidate. That isso messed up.Good luck.)
Posted by: kallisto
The Chrysler plant is being torn down. The Univ of Del bought all or most of the land, and has expansion plans.
The GM Boxwood plant will supposedly house an electric or hybrid car company, financed heavily by we taxpayers.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 13, 2010 04:47 PM (R2fpr)

687 And again, Lindsey Graham has a 89 this year for ACU. So, Lindsey Graham is not a RINO. Wheewww, I feel a lot better about his reach across the aisle on Global Warming. With that 89 ACU rating, the country is in fine hands with Lindsey. And that gang of 14, well, he has a 89 lifetime rating, so, I am sure we are all in great hands there again.
So Lindsey Graham is too far left to be acceptable, but Mike "Fuck the Redneck Gun Owners" Castle isn't?

Posted by: Ken at September 13, 2010 04:49 PM (CDrOo)

688 And, the losing candidate still doesn’t get to vote
Whereas the winning candidate not only votes for his party's slate of leaders and committee members, he also votes for who they will be. Coons cannot vote his fellow lefties into the GOP leadership and onto the GOP side of committees. O'Donnell doesn't want to vote for them. Castle, however, can and will.

Posted by: Ken at September 13, 2010 04:53 PM (CDrOo)

689 Maybe it's because kooky people are deluded enough to think they can win while a rational person knows better than to try.

Maybe the Dems are putting them up to it. O'Donnell needs the money...

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at September 13, 2010 04:53 PM (mHQ7T)

690 The term RINO is overused. It's been applied to everyone from Johnny Isakson to Jim Jeffords. The point isn't that Mike Castle is a "RINO." It's that he's a doctrinaire socialist, or at least votes like one.

Posted by: Ken at September 13, 2010 04:55 PM (CDrOo)

691 So Lindsey Graham is too far left to be acceptable, but Mike "Fuck the Redneck Gun Owners" Castle isn't?
Not the point. That just ACU ratings can be misleading. ACU ratings seems to be one of those argument de jour. Very few people vote because of an ACU rating.

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 04:57 PM (OWjjx)

692 If a close election truly effected policy positions, Obamacare would not have passed.

The action of Democrats was unprecedented in that case - in most similar situations, it usually does influence policy positions.

Guys in swing states don't want to vote for highly divisive items.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at September 13, 2010 05:01 PM (FkKjr)

693 after the Miller win every pundit/wanna be "leader" has been looking for
another longshot to back and they found it in O'Donnell ...

This tells me that Palin is not running in 2012. She played this like a talk radio host or FOX news personality rather than someone serious about being the next POTUS.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at September 13, 2010 05:05 PM (mHQ7T)

694 I am so depressed, give me money and make it all better.

I have to admit this woman gives me the willies. I do not think she is a conservative, I think she is a con artist the Tea Party is her latest mark.

Posted by: Terrye at September 13, 2010 05:13 PM (iwbK9)

695 This tells me that Palin is not running in 2012. She played this like a talk radio host or FOX news personality rather than someone serious about being the next POTUS.
Now tell us what her choice in footwear tells us about her personal relationships.

Posted by: Entropy at September 13, 2010 05:38 PM (eL+YD)

696 And that, by the way, is straight out of the leftist playbook -- never
credit your opponent's actual stated reasons for arguing a certain way;
insist his hidden reasons, his motivation, is illicit.

Matt Lewis just said the same thing at Politics Daily, and it's true. The Tea Party is beginning to look like the Ron Paul Revolution on steroids.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at September 13, 2010 05:42 PM (mHQ7T)

697 If a close election truly effected policy positions, Obamacare would not have passed.
Obama interpreted his win as a mandate. And it basically was. He kicked McCain's ass. Beat him by more than Bush won over Gore or Kerry.

Posted by: Entropy at September 13, 2010 05:43 PM (eL+YD)

698 Now tell us what her choice in footwear tells us about her personal relationships.

Her red fuck-me pumps and how often her husband holds her purse in public says it all.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at September 13, 2010 05:45 PM (mHQ7T)

699 The Tea Party is beginning to look like the Ron Paul Revolution on steroids.
Better Paul than McCain.

Posted by: Entropy at September 13, 2010 05:48 PM (eL+YD)

700 I'm interested in knowing how many of you Castle supporters are on board with Tattoo de Plane saying that Sarah Palin cheats on her marriage. If this is the line of the GOP establishment, I want no part of it.

Posted by: Ken at September 13, 2010 05:58 PM (CDrOo)

701 Castle may be a liberal repub, but a repub majority gives chairmanship to repubs on all the committees.
why the hell can't these people understand, the cause to promote is conservatism, Castle may not be a conservative, but he will give the repubs a majority which means conservatism in the Senate with chairmanships have a shot at it.
O'Donneld is a kook, Palin is an idiot for inserting herself in this race.

Posted by: johnc_recent_EX-dem at September 13, 2010 06:11 PM (ACkhT)

702 Palin is an idiot for inserting herself in this race.
So does she cheat on her husband or not? Tattoo de Plane says she does, and I don't see your side disagreeing with him.

Posted by: Ken at September 13, 2010 06:14 PM (CDrOo)

703 As for the palinistas, I support Palin, but the C4P site has convinced me her supporters at that site are more devotees than supporters, they are approaching the Ron paul bots in their zeal for all things Palin.
This is why I truely am hesitating in supporting Palin for president, while I agree with her and support her, she's still too much of a wild card.

Posted by: johnc_recent_EX-dem at September 13, 2010 06:16 PM (ACkhT)

704 So I take it you don't think she cheats on her husband? Why, then, do you tolerate Tattoo de Plane's slander?Obviously anyone who would endorse O'Donnell must be an adulterer. That's the official line now, seeing as it's out there and no one is distancing themselves from it.

Posted by: Ken at September 13, 2010 06:21 PM (CDrOo)

705 His constituents are moochers and looters.

So, he's a shoe-in then.

Posted by: it had to be said at September 13, 2010 06:21 PM (S5YRY)

706 I don't even know what the heck people are talking about. This woman will not win, she tired to against Biden, and was defeated embarassingly. The voters of DE already have an opinion of this woman from 2008, and its not good. She is no Joe Miller and DE is not AK.

Posted by: johnc_recent_EX-dem at September 13, 2010 06:25 PM (ACkhT)

707 So Dr. Krauthammer thinks Castle is preferable. Guess he's a RINO hack.

Posted by: O'Donnell Purity Brigade at September 13, 2010 06:53 PM (uCjoj)

708 Didn't Reagan say something like back the most conservative candidate, but more importantly back the most conservative candidate who can acuatually win. -- in this case that would be Castle.

Posted by: johnc_recent_EX-dem at September 13, 2010 06:59 PM (ACkhT)

709 Christine O'Donnell is a crazy attention whore. There, I said it.

Posted by: the peanut gallery at September 13, 2010 07:17 PM (NurK6)

710 732 So Dr. Krauthammer thinks Castle is preferable. Guess he's a RINO hack.
http://tinyurl.com/34vzcoz
In an April 5, 1996, column in the Washington Post, Charles Krauthammer, who forthrightly supports total gun prohibition, wrote, "Passing a law like the assault weapons ban is a symbolic — purely symbolic — move in that direction. Its only real justification is not to reduce crime but to desensitize the public to the regulation of weapons in preparation for their ultimate confiscation."

Posted by: Ken at September 13, 2010 07:23 PM (CDrOo)

711 Palin, Bachmann, Haley, and now O'Donnell.

I'm waiting for a Republican/conservative woman to come along who DOESN'T get the "crazy eyes/nuts and sluts" treatment. From her own party.

I now return to fapping endlessly about paranoid revenge fantasies, or whatever the hell ace was frothing about.

Can't wait until the next time he warns us to tone it down.

Posted by: tsj017 at September 13, 2010 07:27 PM (vOH26)

712 Has anyone noticed how every female Republican candidate has been accused of being crazy, or slutty -- or both?

Yeah, that Lisa Murkowski was a psychofuckstress.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at September 13, 2010 07:28 PM (mHQ7T)

713 "732 So Dr. Krauthammer thinks Castle is preferable. Guess he's a RINO hack."

No, but he IS just a member in good standing of the inside-the-Beltway media/pol crowd.

Lost a lot of respect for him when he was cooing over Obama's performance on one of Fox's post-debate roundups in '08.

Posted by: tsj017 at September 13, 2010 07:29 PM (vOH26)

714 "737 Has anyone noticed how every female Republican candidate has been accused of being crazy, or slutty -- or both?

Yeah, that Lisa Murkowski was a psychofuckstress."

OK, every female Republican candidate who's backed by the Tea Party or otherwise not deemed acceptable by our Ruling Class.

As we've learned today, you really have to spell things out here in painfully specific detail, or you're a paranoid nutjob loser who gets invited to suck ace's cock.

Posted by: tsj017 at September 13, 2010 07:33 PM (vOH26)

715 So does she cheat on her husband or not?

Ken, I have a question for you. Suck my dick.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at September 13, 2010 07:36 PM (mHQ7T)

716 Has anyone noticed how every female Republican candidate has been accused of being crazy, or slutty -- or both?
I believe Kelly Ayyottee of New Hampshire has avoided these accusations.

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 07:48 PM (OWjjx)

717 Oh god now Krauthammer is counterrevolutionary.
inside-the-BeltwayIt is true - Interstate 495 is a paragon of evil. I've been on it before, which is probably why I don't understand Christine O'Donnell's greatness. I need to donate some money ASAP so she can pay her rent this month.

Posted by: Chris in Va at September 13, 2010 07:48 PM (uCjoj)

718 Guys in swing states don't want to vote for highly divisive items.
But do. One of the great false media stories is that the wave of 1994 was not seen. I go to a source I rarely do, Lawrence O’Donnell, to disprove this. O’Donnell was on the Democratic staff in 1994. They (meaning the Democratic staff) new the Clinton tax increases would kill their incumbents. That is why Clinton started campaigning early in 1994 against Newt. Yet, Clinton and the Democratic leadership got enough Dems to walk the plank to vote for the tax increases.

Again, more often than not, what a close race does is impact your campaign machinery. The policy approach only changes in the spin you sell……

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 07:56 PM (OWjjx)

719 Jesus, is this thread still going?
743 posts I won't give shit about when I go vote tomorrow

Posted by: Born and Raised Below the Canal at September 13, 2010 08:05 PM (f9czX)

720 Not trying to influence how you vote.

Just here to spread my love of

BIG BOLD FONTS!!!!

Posted by: Neilson Television Rating Service at September 13, 2010 08:17 PM (OWjjx)

721 And my frequent use of sock puppets

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 08:17 PM (OWjjx)

722 Kraut also thought the town halls were rude and would turn people off, and the tea parties were not going to amount to much.

But to his credit, he has since said he was wrong.

Posted by: pam at September 13, 2010 08:18 PM (h8R9p)

723 Ken, I have a question for you. Suck my dick.
See, that's why I'm a better judge of this issue than you are. Being straight, I can spot cheating women better than someone of your persuasion.
But hey, don't take it so hard. Here's something for your enjoyment.
http://tinyurl.com/yggtd95

Posted by: Ken at September 13, 2010 08:24 PM (CDrOo)

724 She can't be any crazier than the jackass from Minnesota.

Posted by: ray at September 13, 2010 08:24 PM (hXK0o)

725 "Punk with a keyboard"
Marl Levin

lolololololololo

Posted by: John at September 13, 2010 08:30 PM (YV3eq)

726 Oh god now Krauthammer is counterrevolutionary.
No, but he IS just a member in good standing of the inside-the-Beltway media/pol crowd.
It's true, he is.
http://tinyurl.com/2c4k6mw
WSJ/NRO/Weekly Standard types. Where's he right, he's right, but he's in the bubble, right there next to George Will.
Praytell, where was Krauthammer on TARP? Yuh-huh.
Who's the Bernake fanboy?
Say, where did he go to school anyway? You don't suppose he went to one of the same school as the last 2 presidents and 6 USSC justices? What do you know - Harvard (most all the otherswent to Yale)
Alito - Yale.
Thomas - Yale.
Sotomayor - Yale.
Kagan - Harvard
Scalia - Harvard
Roberts - Harvard
Breyer - Harvard
Kennedy - Harvard
Ginsburg - Transfered to Columbia from Harvard.
George H. W. Bush - Yale.
His opponent in '88, Dukakis -Harvard.
Bill and Hillary Clinton - both Yale.
Gore - Harvard.
W. Bush - Harvard AND Yale.
John F'n Kerry - Yale
Obama - Harvard.
Sarah Palin? Retarded snowbilly bimbo.
So tell me:
Never has there been so little diversity within America's upper crust. Always, in America as elsewhere, some people have been wealthier and more powerful than others. But until our own time America's upper crust was a mixture of people who had gained prominence in a variety of ways, who drew their money and status from different sources and were not predictably of one mind on any given matter. The Boston Brahmins, the New York financiers, the land barons of California, Texas, and Florida, the industrialists of Pittsburgh, the Southern aristocracy, and the hardscrabble politicians who made it big in Chicago or Memphis had little contact with one another. Few had much contact with government, and "bureaucrat" was a dirty word for all. So was "social engineering." Nor had the schools and universities that formed yesterday's upper crust imposed a single orthodoxy about the origins of man, about American history, and about how America should be governed. All that has changed.
Today's ruling class, from Boston to San Diego, was formed by an educational system that exposed them to the same ideas and gave them remarkably uniform guidance, as well as tastes and habits. These amount to a social canon of judgments about good and evil, complete with secular sacred history, sins (against minorities and the environment), and saints. Using the right words and avoiding the wrong ones when referring to such matters -- speaking the "in" language -- serves as a badge of identity. Regardless of what business or profession they are in, their road up included government channels and government money because, as government has grown, its boundary with the rest of American life has become indistinct.
Do you disagree?
And if not, is Krauthammer, for all his graces, not a part of the same clique?

Posted by: Entropy at September 13, 2010 08:34 PM (eL+YD)

727 The thing about campaigns like O'Donnell's is that they'll never have to apologize for getting their asses kicked in a general election. The coterie of in-on-the-ground-floor jock-sniffers that surrounds the candidate gets to walk away feeling all warm and smug, telling themselves, "We shook up the world, and made a powerful statement. Our work has only just begun."

Then, they fade back into obscurity and weasel their way back into the graces of the establishment after a few years.

Posted by: Walt Gilbert at September 13, 2010 08:38 PM (PmZ9N)

728 The worst thing about their elitism is that there is no longer anything intellectually "elite" about Yale and Harvard. As long as you have rich parents, you can get in and glide through school without effort.
It is much more intellectually challenging to get an engineering degree.

Posted by: Ken at September 13, 2010 08:39 PM (CDrOo)

729 Being straight, I can spot cheating women better than someone of your persuasion.

Homophobic teabagger.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at September 13, 2010 08:43 PM (mHQ7T)

730 "Posted by: Entropy at September 13, 2010 08:34 PM (eL+YD)"

YES. Exactly.

Although, around these parts, such talk of our Ruling Class can get you labeled a vengeful loser who wants to get back at the world for all its imagined slights. Or something like that.

Either many here haven't read that piece or they've chosen to dismiss it as just another example of Tea Party, Palin-loving nutjobbery.

Expressing contempt for the unenlightened rubes is apparently the new Big Tent.

Posted by: tsj017 at September 13, 2010 08:44 PM (vOH26)

731 Hey, in Krauthammer's favor he graduated from Harvard medical, apparently. I'm sure that's a tough school. Possibly. Tougher than social sciences for sure.
I wouldn't deny that he's a very inteligent, brilliant guy. And often right. But not always.
And he's not hanging around DC being generally representative of middle-america. Peoria? He's got more in common with... allthe other peoplein DC.
Whom seem, I may add, as they have more and more in common with each other, tohave less and less in common withmost everyoneelse.

Posted by: Entropy at September 13, 2010 08:46 PM (eL+YD)

732 Krauthammer said Palin and DeMint's endorsing O'Donnell was "capricious, destructive and irresponsible." Another fun fact. Delaware is the only state in the union where, as of July, Obama’s approval rating had actually risen from last year to this year.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at September 13, 2010 08:51 PM (mHQ7T)

733
“We stay out of that race because we’re not convinced
O’Donnell can win,” FreedomWorks president and CEO Matt Kibbe said at
the Christian Science Monitor-sponsored event.

FreedomWorks chair Dick Armey shared the ambivalence toward
O’Donnell, who’s sparked a kind of GOP breakdown with her fast-rising
candidacy against party stalwart Mike Castle, who most view as a shoo-in
for Vice President Biden’s old Senate seat should he win the
nomination. Presented with polling data showing likely Democratic
nominee Chris Coons beating O’Donnell in a general election, Armey was
asked “if it’s better for Republicans to lose with a tea party-backed
candidate than to win with a mainstream Republican candidate.”

“I’m going to give a quick answer,” Armey said. “No.”

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at September 13, 2010 08:54 PM (mHQ7T)

734 Devin nunes is on with batchelor, in studio.
He has the heavy hitters on the panel tonight and they will be discussing the election tomorrow.

Posted by: curious at September 13, 2010 09:14 PM (p302b)

735 Tattoo, it's a damn good thing I do not think for myself and merely mimick the ideas of those public figures who I trust to tell me what I think, otherwise I might find your name dropping to be utterly irrelevant trivia.
Because really, it's so important to me what Krauthammer and Armey think. Everyone knows Dick Armey has never been wrong, ever.
I mean just look - his name is Armey. Like Army. How conservative is that? We should follow his guidance unquestioningly on that basis alone.

Posted by: Entropy at September 13, 2010 09:17 PM (eL+YD)

736 Posted by: Entropy at September 13, 2010 09:17 PM (eL+YD)
And the pro-McDonnell forces talking about Sarah and Mark Levin and Sean Hannity are not name droppers either.

Yea, Castle has Chris Christie, Dick Armey, Dr. k.

McDonnell has Sarah, Mark Levin, Sean Hanitty, Rush

I think I have covered all the names……….

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 09:26 PM (OWjjx)

737 And the pro-McDonnell forces talking about Sarah and Mark Levin and Sean Hannity are not name droppers either.
Did they convince you?
If not, why emulate a failure?

Posted by: Entropy at September 13, 2010 09:33 PM (eL+YD)

738 Did they convince you?
If not, why emulate a failure?
Just pointing out that it goes both ways.

Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 09:44 PM (OWjjx)

739 Thanks to Diane and the MSM for making things crystal clear......
guess we now know who the dems and the republicans want in that seat...

Posted by: curious at September 13, 2010 09:53 PM (p302b)

740 Chris Cizilla is saying O'Donnell's own private tracking polls put her down by double digits.

Posted by: Chris in Va at September 13, 2010 09:58 PM (uCjoj)

741 Posted by: Mallamutt at September 13, 2010 09:26 PM (OWjjx)

Don't know how castle has christie, either their is some horse trading going on there or I have wildly underestimated christie

Posted by: curious at September 13, 2010 09:59 PM (p302b)

742 Posted by: Entropy at September 13, 2010 08:34 PM (eL+YD)

Guy, there are upwards of three hundred million people in this country. To get to a position of influence in the government, you have to be one of maybe one thousand out of those three hundred million. You have to be really, really smart and be really really lucky. The fact that so many of them come from Harvard and Yale isn't evidence of some shadowy ivory tower Ruling Class cabal, it's evidence of how difficult it is to set yourself ahead of three hundred million people.No one is seriously going to trust an important lever of government to a guywith a BA from East St. Louis Community College.

Posted by: Paul at September 13, 2010 10:09 PM (DsHk0)

743 Posted by: Paul at September 13, 2010 10:09 PM (DsHk0)
racist!

Posted by: East St. Louis Community College. at September 13, 2010 10:14 PM (p302b)

744 No one is seriously going to trust an important lever of government to a guywith a BA from East St. Louis Community College.
Judging by results, the Ivy's are overrated.

Posted by: toby928 at September 13, 2010 10:14 PM (S5YRY)

745 Posted by: Paul at September 13, 2010 10:09 PM (DsHk0)
Or Eureka College?

Posted by: Delta Smelt at September 13, 2010 10:15 PM (A0VTZ)

746 Although, around these parts, such talk of our Ruling Class can get you labeled a vengeful loser who wants to get back at the world for all its imagined slights. Or something like that. Either many here haven't read that piece or they've chosen to dismiss it as just another example of Tea Party, Palin-loving nutjobbery. Expressing contempt for the unenlightened rubes is apparently the new Big Tent.
Posted by: tsj017 at September 13, 2010 08:44 PM (vOH26)
I don't buy this "Ruling Class" garbage to start out with. What happens if Joe Miller and Marco Rubio win their Senate seats? Are they now "Ruling Class"? If not, why not?But that's a rhetoricalquestion, because everyone here knowsthat this is just some slur to gin up populist resentment of moderates you don't like.

Posted by: Paul at September 13, 2010 10:16 PM (DsHk0)

747 "a vote for Castle is a vote for serfdom.". Of all the dumb fuck things that have been said on this topic, that was the dumb fuckiest.

Posted by: Phil Smith at September 13, 2010 10:16 PM (3gzw5)

748 Krauthammer's more or less a Truman/Kennedy Democrat, albeit an intelligent and articulate one.

Which is better than just about any nationally known Democratic politician today.

But still sucks.

Posted by: MlR at September 13, 2010 10:17 PM (bXmuq)

749 The fact that so many of them come from Harvard and Yale isn't evidence of some shadowy ivory tower Ruling Class cabal
I do not believe it is. You obviously did not read the article. Not that you should - do not. It would waste your time.
Seriously. Waste of your time.
I can tell. Because:
You have to be really, really smart and be really really lucky.
No one is seriously going to trust an important lever of government to a guywith a BA from East St. Louis Community College.
Whatever team either of us is on, there is no 'we'. "We" are not of the same thing.
Frankly it makes no sense that we would be voting for the same people. That could only be the result of some desperate and wretched compromise.
Because what I believe is dinstinctly different then what you apparently think. Polar opposite and frankly, quite hostile and exclusive.

Posted by: Entropy at September 13, 2010 10:25 PM (eL+YD)

750 Seriously.
VP BiteMe? Obama? These are our best and brightest?
Our schools are more fucked than I thought.
I know many people more intelligent then most congress critters. They're fucking morons.
I am not being hyperbolic: First. 40. People. In. The. Boston. Phonebook.
Cynthia McKinney? The dude who's ascared we'll capsize Guam?
Really man? Elites?
If not, why not?
Actually, the article I linked mentions a few like that, and says why not.
Specifically, the article is about the Why and the Why Not for at least the first 4 pages.
But:
But that's a rhetoricalquestion, because everyone here knowsthat this is just some slur to gin up populist resentment of moderates you don't like.
It would probably be a total waste of your time.

Posted by: Entropy at September 13, 2010 10:31 PM (eL+YD)

751 "I don't buy this "Ruling Class" garbage to start out with. What happens if Joe Miller and Marco Rubio win their Senate seats? Are they now "Ruling Class"? If not, why not? But that's a rhetorical question, because everyone here knows that this is just some slur to gin up populist resentment of moderates you don't like."

Well, it depends on what Miller and Rubio do if/when they get elected. They could get co-opted by the existing power structure. (Don't blame me; it's Trent Lott who said, "We've got to co-opt them.") Or they could live up to their campaign hype and not go along with the crowd that got us where we are now (Dems and Repubs alike).

"Ruling Class garbage"? "gin up populist resentment of moderates"? Three possibilities: 1 ) You haven't been paying attention; 2) You're deliberately ignoring what's going on around you; or 3) you're just not very bright.

But hey, by all means, let's get more "moderate" Republicans in government! It's worked out SO well before, hasn't it? Lindsey Graham, the RINO sisters up there, Arlen Specter . . . the list goes on. GOP heroes, one and all! Maverick McCain is probably salivating at the thought of reconstituting his Gang of 14.

And then, once these wondrous moderates are safely installed in the halls of power (AGAIN), they'll start voting with the Dems (AGAIN), and the right-o-sphere will be muttering about why these alleged Republicans keep wandering off the reservation.

Finally, I wish y'all would stop putting words in my mouth. "You say this, but I KNOW YOU REALLY MEAN SOMETHING ELSE!!!!ELEVENTY!!!!" From ace right on down. It's God-damned annoying. Believe me, if I want to say something, I'LL COME RIGHT THE FUCK OUT AND SAY IT. And you'll be left with no doubt of what I'm saying.

For instance: Moderates are pussies and aren't worth a bucket of warm piss. Clear enough for ya?

Posted by: tsj017 at September 13, 2010 10:51 PM (vOH26)

752 Excerpts of some relevant parts.
The most widespread answers -- by such as the Times's Thomas Friedman and David Brooks -- are schlock sociology. Supposedly, modern society became so complex and productive, the technical skills to run it so rare, that it called forth a new class of highly educated officials and cooperators in an ever less private sector. Similarly fanciful is Edward Goldberg's notion that America is now ruled by a "newocracy": a "new aristocracy who are the true beneficiaries of globalization -- including the multinational manager, the technologist and the aspirational members of the meritocracy." In fact, our ruling class grew and set itself apart from the rest of us by its connection with ever bigger government, and above all by a certain attitude.
----
Professional prominence or position will not secure a place in the class any more than mere money. In fact, it is possible to be an official of a major corporation or a member of the U.S. Supreme Court (just ask Justice Clarence Thomas), or even president (Ronald Reagan), and not be taken seriously by the ruling class. Like a fraternity, this class requires above all comity -- being in with the right people, giving the required signs that one is on the right side, and joining in despising the Outs. Once an official or professional shows that he shares the manners, the tastes, the interests of the class, gives lip service to its ideals and shibboleths, and is willing to accommodate the interests of its senior members, he can move profitably among our establishment's parts.
If, for example, you are Laurence Tribe in 1984, Harvard professor of law, leftist pillar of the establishment, you can "write" your magnum opus by using the products of your student assistant, Ron Klain. A decade later, after Klain admits to having written some parts of the book, and the other parts are found to be verbatim or paraphrases of a book published in 1974, you can claim (perhaps correctly) that your plagiarism was "inadvertent," and you can count on the Law School's dean, Elena Kagan, to appoint a committee including former and future Harvard president Derek Bok that issues a secret report that "closes" the incident. Incidentally, Kagan ends up a justice of the Supreme Court. Not one of these people did their jobs: the professor did not write the book himself, the assistant plagiarized instead of researching, the dean and the committee did not hold the professor accountable, and all ended up rewarded. By contrast, for example, learned papers and distinguished careers in climatology at MIT (Richard Lindzen) or UVA (S. Fred Singer) are not enough for their questions about "global warming" to be taken seriously. For our ruling class, identity always trumps.
---
Similarly, Obama "apologized" to Europeans because some Americans -- not him and his friends -- had shown "arrogance and been dismissive" toward them, and to the world because President Truman had used the atom bomb to end World War II. So President Clinton apologized to Africans because some Americans held African slaves until 1865 and others were mean to Negroes thereafter -- not himself and his friends, of course. So assistant secretary of state Michael Posner apologized to Chinese diplomats for Arizona's law that directs police to check immigration status. Republicans engage in that sort of thing as well: former Soviet dictator Mikhail Gorbachev tells us that in 1987 then vice president George H. W. Bush distanced himself from his own administration by telling him, "Reagan is a conservative, an extreme conservative. All the dummies and blockheads are with him..." This is all about a class of Americans distinguishing itself from its inferiors. It recalls the Pharisee in the Temple: "Lord, I thank thee that I am not like other men..."
-----

-----
Describing America's country class is problematic because it is so heterogeneous. It has no privileged podiums, and speaks with many voices, often inharmonious. It shares above all the desire to be rid of rulers it regards inept and haughty. It defines itself practically in terms of reflexive reaction against the rulers' defining ideas and proclivities -- e.g., ever higher taxes and expanding government, subsidizing political favorites, social engineering, approval of abortion, etc. Many want to restore a way of life largely superseded. Demographically, the country class is the other side of the ruling class's coin: its most distinguishing characteristics are marriage, children, and religious practice. While the country class, like the ruling class, includes the professionally accomplished and the mediocre, geniuses and dolts, it is different because of its non-orientation to government and its members' yearning to rule themselves rather than be ruled by others.
Even when members of the country class happen to be government officials or officers of major corporations, their concerns are essentially private; in their view, government owes to its people equal treatment rather than action to correct what anyone perceives as imbalance or grievance. Hence they tend to oppose special treatment, whether for corporations or for social categories. Rather than gaming government regulations, they try to stay as far from them as possible. Thus the Supreme Court's 2005 decision in Kelo, which allows the private property of some to be taken by others with better connections to government, reminded the country class that government is not its friend.
Negative orientation to privilege distinguishes the corporate officer who tries to keep his company from joining the Business Council of large corporations who have close ties with government from the fellow in the next office. The first wants the company to grow by producing. The second wants it to grow by moving to the trough. It sets apart the schoolteacher who resents the union to which he is forced to belong for putting the union's interests above those of parents who want to choose their children's schools. In general, the country class includes all those in stations high and low who are aghast at how relatively little honest work yields, by comparison with what just a little connection with the right bureaucracy can get you. It includes those who take the side of outsiders against insiders, of small institutions against large ones, of local government against the state or federal. The country class is convinced that big business, big government, and big finance are linked as never before and that ordinary people are more unequal than ever.

Posted by: Entropy at September 13, 2010 11:00 PM (eL+YD)

753 Perhaps most relevent to O'Donnell vs. Castle:
The ruling class's appetite for deference, power, and perks grows. The country class disrespects its rulers, wants to curtail their power and reduce their perks. The ruling class wears on its sleeve the view that the rest of Americans are racist, greedy, and above all stupid. The country class is ever more convinced that our rulers are corrupt, malevolent, and inept. The rulers want the ruled to shut up and obey. The ruled want self-governance. The clash between the two is about which side's vision of itself and of the other is right and which is wrong. Because each side -- especially the ruling class -- embodies its views on the issues, concessions by one side to another on any issue tend to discredit that side's view of itself. One side or the other will prevail. The clash is as sure and momentous as its outcome is unpredictable.
In this clash, the ruling class holds most of the cards: because it has established itself as the fount of authority, its primacy is based on habits of deference. Breaking them, establishing other founts of authority, other ways of doing things, would involve far more than electoral politics. Though the country class had long argued along with Edmund Burke against making revolutionary changes, it faces the uncomfortable question common to all who have had revolutionary changes imposed on them: are we now to accept what was done to us just because it was done? Sweeping away a half century's accretions of bad habits -- taking care to preserve the good among them -- is hard enough. Establishing, even reestablishing, a set of better institutions and habits is much harder, especially as the country class wholly lacks organization. By contrast, the ruling class holds strong defensive positions and is well represented by the Democratic Party. But a two to one numerical disadvantage augurs defeat, while victory would leave it in control of a people whose confidence it cannot regain.
Certainly the country class lacks its own political vehicle -- and perhaps the coherence to establish one. In the short term at least, the country class has no alternative but to channel its political efforts through the Republican Party, which is eager for its support. But the Republican Party does not live to represent the country class. For it to do so, it would have to become principles-based, as it has not been since the mid-1860s. The few who tried to make it so the party treated as rebels: Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan. The party helped defeat Goldwater. When it failed to stop Reagan, it saddled his and subsequent Republican administrations with establishmentarians who, under the Bush family, repudiated Reagan's principles as much as they could. Barack Obama exaggerated in charging that Republicans had driven the country "into the ditch" all alone. But they had a hand in it. Few Republican voters, never mind the larger country class, have confidence that the party is on their side. Because, in the long run, the country class will not support a party as conflicted as today's Republicans, those Republican politicians who really want to represent it will either reform the party in an unmistakable manner, or start a new one as Whigs like Abraham Lincoln started the Republican Party in the 1850s.
That is something I have expressed many times before. I am out to see the Tea Party coopt the GOP. Turn the political machine, from a polical machine, to a 'direct action'/policy wing of an activist reform movement.
Weaponize the party, or else it is useless to me, discard it.
There is a cultural civil war afoot, and though we have approximatelytwice the number ofpeople, they outnumber us 1.5 to .5 parties.
It will not do.
The party exists to win elections and empower it's members. Purely. Simply. Succinctly. It is a nihilistic enterprise.
Some of you think that since the party exists to win, and since it needs our support to win, that it will be forced to achieve our goals (to win our support) in order to achieve it's goals.
But it does NOT need to achieve our goals. It needs ONLY to not ASSAULT them as AGGRESSIVELY as the other party. Then it is the "least evil". And you'll take it because it's punches are softer.
And it's goals, by nature, are opposed. It seeks influence and control and power. By it's nature it wants to participate in the expansion of government. Because as surely as winning an election is a route to power, expanding the power of the office is also a means to the sameend.
So they immediately begin to dream of "permanent majorities", of hispandering and tossing pills at seniors and telling bigots to 'shut up'.
I do not give a FUCK about Delaware or who wins the senate seat. In the long run, history will not remember this election tommorow with any great import. Any way you slice it. If Castle wins, you'll not see the last of the Tea Party. If O'Donnell, it won't be the death of socialism.
I need a party that exists primarily to advance conservative policy and reform wherever possible. Not a party that exists to propogate itself and win elections foremost.
Otherwise, we are just hitching a ride. We need our own car. We do not need Delaware.

Posted by: Entropy at September 13, 2010 11:42 PM (eL+YD)

754 Damn, E,

I thought my posts were too long!

Posted by: K~Bob at September 13, 2010 11:46 PM (9b6FB)

755 Tattoo, it's a damn good thing I do not think for myself

Think for yourself? You don't think period. Your decision-making is purely based on emotion.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at September 13, 2010 11:54 PM (mHQ7T)

756 Heh. Well, most of it is not even mine, K Bob.

Posted by: Entropy at September 14, 2010 12:36 AM (eL+YD)

757 Think for yourself? You don't think period.
Substantive retort.
You've blinded me with science.
What, am I suppose to say "Nuh-uh! You suck!" now?
Shall we escalate to Yo Mama jokes?

Posted by: Entropy at September 14, 2010 12:38 AM (eL+YD)

758 "Ruling Class garbage"? "gin up populist resentment of moderates"? Three possibilities: 1 ) You haven't been paying attention; 2) You're deliberately ignoring what's going on around you; or 3) you're just not very bright.
That's some awesome logic there. You're wrong because you're stupid! Maybe time to crack open that Philosophy 101 book again? Oh sorry, I forgot, studying logic is only for Ruling Class elitists. And I don't need to put words in your mouth to make you look like a douchebag.
Entropy, what you're forgetting or not taking into account is that there are a lot of people who are fully aware of the conservative vision of small government and free enterprise and still utterly reject it. They want Free Stuff, and sacrificing freedom is a fine price to pay for them. There are A LOT of these people. And all of them have votes. So, if you turn the GOP into a Tea Party organ, it's pretty much doomed outside of a few conservative bastions, and the Socialist Dems will run the country into the ground. The End.

Posted by: Paul at September 14, 2010 02:29 AM (DsHk0)

759 YES! What we need is a counter-punching, weaponized car if we're going to win the cultural civil war.

Posted by: Walt Gilbert at September 14, 2010 02:38 AM (PmZ9N)

760
If the discrimination O'Donnell alleged in her ISI lawsuit amounted to merely one tenth of the vitriol that's been directed at her in the past couple of weeks, then I'd imagine she was entirely justified in suing.

Not having know anything about the DE senate race, in the past few days I've learned that:

A) O'Donnell supporters reject Castle for such positions as his vote for Cap'N Trade.

and

B) Castle supporters reject Christine O'Donnell because she's a stupid cunt.

I think the best indicator for tomorrow's results is the FOXNews poll released a couple weeks ago showing that 78% of Americans favour term limits on Congress.

http://tinyurl.com/29lompf

Mike Castle has been on the public dole since 1966.

He's toast. Any idiot could have seen that. The Rinos and their assembled "List" surely have chosen the wrong hill to die on. Not only have they lost prestige in backing another sure loser. But in attempting to cut at the feet of their opponent with the most vile and disgusting dirty tricks, they've shamed themselves in their cravenness and have provoked a furious response from their TeaParty opposition- needlessly sowing a level of animosity between the opposing sides that probably won't heal soon if at all.

Some things aren't worth selling-even for buckets of cash or promises of special access.

Posted by: sartana at September 14, 2010 04:31 AM (2stAV)

761 Hayworth was a mistake. He was crooked and nuts, and a scandal ready to happen. He was thrown out for his corruption in the first place.

O'Donnell appears to be another, but the hot chick always seems to have the boys overlooking her flaws as they fall over each other to make fools of themselves to gain her attention.

Character counts. We're already stuck with Rand Paul, although thank goodness his handlers have him hidden in a closet and gagged to avoid unscripted interviews after a few early gaffes. But we'll have him for six years voting against our national security interests . . . nominate in haste, repent at leisure.

Posted by: Adjoran at September 14, 2010 06:17 AM (VfmLu)

762 are replica omega temperamenteritable centenary replica iwc brand. Today, just mention replica tag heuer crystal products, the experts replica breitling think the first one replica rolex brand is Swarovski. Swarovski jewelry luxury rolex and imitated crystal gucci handbags at the top, the senior hublot replica industry replica gucci prestigious replica handbags jewelry hublot replica products.

Posted by: luirge at September 14, 2010 09:47 AM (q2Y5n)

763 Substantive retort.
Matching your finger in ears lalala retort to Krauthammer's and Armey's points. And my point was substantive. Emotion is making your decisions.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at September 14, 2010 09:59 AM (mHQ7T)

764 Shorter Tattoo: "Yuh-huh!"
Nuh-uh!

Posted by: Entropy at September 14, 2010 10:36 AM (IsLT6)

765

ØªÙˆØ¨ÙŠÙƒØ§Øª Ù…Ù„ÙˆÙ†Ù‡ -

ØªÙˆØ¨ÙŠÙƒØ§Øª 2010 -

Ù…ÙˆÙ‚Ø¹ ØªØÙ…ÙŠÙ„ ØµÙˆØ± -

Ù…Ø±ÙƒØ² ØªØÙ…ÙŠÙ„ -

Ø²Ø®Ø±ÙÙ‡ 2010 -

Ù…ÙˆÙ‚Ø¹ Ø²Ø®Ø±ÙÙ‡ -

sl, hglahuv -

Ø³Ù…Ùˆ Ø§Ù„Ù…Ø´Ø§Ø¹Ø± -

k,ht hguhf] -

Ù†ÙˆØ§Ù Ø§Ù„Ø¹Ø§Ø¨Ø¯

Posted by: http://www.sm-0.net at September 14, 2010 11:01 AM (txJx0)

766 casus kamera cizik
kalemi denge
bilekligi ozel bakim
urunleri duvar sticker poker chip adwords ozel ders hediye simli dövme solaryum avc kozmetik moto kurye kurye psy trance trance dis beyazlatici camasir topu ayak kokusu dis beyazlatma yikama topu foot care çizik kalemi

Posted by: Alexandra Menson at July 14, 2011 03:09 AM (zhkcs)

Processing 0.1, elapsed 0.1325 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.047 seconds, 775 records returned.
Page size 479 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.