Wednesday, September 15, 2010

To Spite One's Face

After a tough GOP primary battle in Delaware, the candidate who attracted the Tea party voters because of her true conservative stances won fair and square. Today, the news media is abuzz with negativity.

One example is this article from RCP, the title says it all:

O'Donnell Wins, Bad Blood Simmers in DE GOP

DOVER and WILMINGTON, Del. -- Conservative activist Christine O'Donnell scored an upset victory in Delaware's Republican Senate primary on Tuesday, defeating longtime congressman Mike Castle 53 percent to 47 percent.

It doesn't look so bad at this point. But later on we read:

O'Donnell's surprising win marked yet another triumph for the Tea Party movement and may have ended the Republican Party's hopes of regaining control of the Senate in November. Polls have shown O'Donnell trailing far behind Democratic nominee Chris Coons, the New Castle county executive.

In analyzing the factors for which the conservative candidate is currently trailing the Democratic candidate, we need to look no further than later on in the same article:

In Wilmington, Republican strategist Don Mell and his wife, Jeanne, who is a Democrat, walked across the street from Castle's party to Coons' primary watch party at a nearby pub. The couple donned Castle pins when they arrived at the Coons event and picked up one of the Democrat's yard signs.

"I'm not voting for that woman-she's crazy," Don Mell said. "There isn't going to be any discussion about that."

The same article also mentions that Castle had not called O'Donnell to concede despite the wide margin of victory. It also mentions that in his post-election speech his supporters that he chose not to congratulate his opponent by name.

This article tells me a couple of things:

1.  Castle is  a RINO. His biggest problems with conservatives are his vote for cap and tax, TARP, and his affinity for gun control.

2. His supporters are too. If not, how could a long-time GOP strategist walk across the street and switch sides so easily?

But the real stinker in all of this is the way the Delaware GOP played right into the Democrats' hands by campaigning dirty. They worked extra hard to portray her as mentally unstable. Add to that the way the national GOP worked behind the scenes to anoint their chosen candidate, and you can see why many have had it with Republicans just as much as they have with Democrats.

But this isn't the only instance of negative press this race had received. Let's look at some other article titles about this race:

Delaware Senate Race: A Kamikaze Republican and the Tea Party
Republican Senate chances dealt blow in Delaware
Tea Party Success in Delaware Senate Race Increases Chance of Democrat Win

You get the idea.

I get the impression the Dems have been waiting for a moment like this, which they can manipulate to their advantage. It is another opportunity to demonize Tea Partiers, without addressing the sound constructs of their message.

It could be that the GOP establishment in Delaware will abandon their party's nominee and hand victory over to someone who will continue to support the Obama, Reid, and Pelosi agenda. If this is the case, it could also mean the GOP loses a chance to retake the Senate.

If the sour grapes within the GOP do not cease and desist, if they continue to demonize this woman, she will lose. This means the people of Delaware will lose and as a result, America will lose. They will lose a chance to reverse the course this failed government has driven and lose the opportunity to restore it to a government by and for the people.


Chuck said...

I wrote something similar today although written in haste (and anger) it was not as in depth.

Reading your post a thought occurs to me. I wonder if Castle was a trap?

He is clearly a RINO. It appears he would have been among one of the more liberal members of the Senate, including Democrats.

If the GOP had come close or maybe tied for the Senate, would he remain a Republican?

LASunsett said...


In the grand scheme of things, one can only wonder about the question you pose.

I see little good in putting someone in just because they have an R behind their name, especially when you know they may not support the principles that are important. When we count the votes and some of the Rs vote with the Ds, it's hard to gauge the matter effectively. Collins and Snowe of Maine come to mind.

I would rather have a D in place so that we know how it will play out without having to bargain for something that we can never bargain for. Getting RINOs to shut down the progressive agenda has so far been useless. In the end, they cave in to the bribes and threats.

If O'Donnell gets elected, we have a much better chance of knowing of where she will stand. There will be no guess work. If she doesn't, we will know where her opponent stands, as well.

Anonymous said...

Oh my ... a negative, manipulative press? In America? Crap ... how long has this been going on?

Z said...

LA, considering how fast, horrible, and permanent Obama can change this country in his remaining couple of years, I don't believe we have the luxury of not supporting the Conservative who has a chance.
I like to think even a RINO would turn down his far-leftwing SCOTUS appointees, for example; and he's sure to get another Justice's choice by the end of this term of his admin. That would have been something. As it stands O'D's opponent will probably win and that SCOTUS seat will pass,no problem. That's just one example

Castle is clearly a RINO, or so it seems........
O'Donnell, I know very little about...what I've heard is a little scary, tell you the truth; she's given fodder to the media to REALLY belittle her like they did Palin...McCain lost. I can't stand McCain, but at least we could have got him in and then the TPers could have gone ballistic and insisted the GOP start paying attention.
I hope I'm wrong; I hope O'D wins the election, that's for sure.
I hope I'm SO WRONG in my fears.

I also support Ryan and Cantor and the other guy who wrote that book about Conservatism.......they're REPUBLICANS and CONSERVATIVES: we need more of them and it's a good sign they're rising up. I wonder if the TPers support them?

LASunsett said...

Examples of upper echelon sarcasm per the Colonel:

//Oh my ... a negative, manipulative press? In America? Crap ... how long has this been going on?//

Text book perfect.

LASunsett said...


//O'Donnell, I know very little about...what I've heard is a little scary, tell you the truth; she's given fodder to the media to REALLY belittle her like they did Palin...McCain lost.//

They belittle everyone with an R behind their name. They would have belittled Castle the RINO, just like they belittled McCain, who is also a RINO. McCain was a Dem's dream until he got the nomination.

I see nothing in her past that is nearly as bad as William Jefferson, Charlie Rangel, Maxine Waters, or any other crook that had a D behind their name.

She came from nowhere to win the nomination, she has the same chance with independent support in the general, as long as too many GOPs do not take their ball and go home with an attitude. It's time for people to grow up and we know the Dems are not going to set the example, so that only leaves the Republicans.

Greg said...

To the extent the press thinks O'Donnell doesn't help the GOP win seats, I tend to agree. So does Karl Rove, apparently. O'Donnell is a KOOK. She's apparently a young earth creationist who explains away dinosaur fossils as items planted by the devil to test our faith. She was also in an anti-masturbation campaign in the 90's on MTV, if you can believe it. This is not the kind of candidate moderates like me would ever consider voting for.

That the press is biased against non-Democrats, well, that goes without saying. :)

LASunsett said...

//She's apparently a young earth creationist who explains away dinosaur fossils as items planted by the devil to test our faith. She was also in an anti-masturbation campaign in the 90's on MTV, if you can believe it.//

Never heard either of these. I cannot say that I care much about her religious views. I believe in creation, but I believe dinosaurs lived too.

In short, I want her to vote down big government and restore the Constitutional applications to government. I want her to vote on everything she can, to ensure that we are not going to fold like a house of cards. If she doesn't, then Delaware can vote her out next time.

Greg said...

Dude, just scratch the surface with O'Donnell and it gets bad real quick.

Let me ask you: if the SS came to your house asking if you were hiding Jews, and you were, would you lie to save them? Here's a video that unfortunately requires you to listen to Bill Maher, but provides insight into O'Donnell's warped sense of morality:

You can fast-forward to 1:00 and listen to her argue that lying is always bad, even lying to Hitler to save innocent lives.

A.C. McCloud said...

Moral absolutism is why Rove is splitting a gut. Guess what, when Christ said looking on another woman with lust is adultery, He meant it. Few if any can live up to it, which breeds disdain on those who say it.

That's where they'll keep hitting her. Don't know much about Coons but if he's an entrenched machine guy she needs to use that against him. This is the year of the O'Donnells. Besides, crap, she can't be any worse than Gillibrand.

LASunsett said...


I understand your point. And I agree with you that O'Donnell is over the top on the lying about Jews in the basement. I am not as Ac says, a moral absolutist, I do see the gray areas in life as well as any. She comes from a very staunch Catholic background, where guilt is injected into the human psyche from a very young age.

But let's take a step back here a second. For one thing, she is answering a hypothetical question that I believe she could not answer accurately or honestly because she was at the time a bit naive. She has not ever been faced with such a moral dilemma, nor is it likely she will. At least we hope not.

On another hand, we know that if she still is as black and white on lying, she will not lie to the people if she is elected. At least we hope not. That's a different twist for a pol.

But most importantly ( and I will include AC's comment into account on this part), the reason someone like Christine O'Donnell still is in an election campaign is because Mike Castle voted for the Obama agenda too many times and did not listen to the people that elected him, in the process.

The reason the Tea Party (in general) is so successful, is because they are listening when the establishment is not.

I am a fiscal conservative and a social moderate. Sometimes I have to sacrifice some principles on the social side, to get what I think we need on the fiscal side. And we need some non-spenders right now....badly.

But believe me when I say this, I do have my eyes on social conservatives who want to ram their version of religion down others' throats. I will be watching them if they are elected, and I will take them to task.... every bit as much as I have the flaming liberals who want to ram their doctrine down our throats too.

You can see how I handled one such person on my theology blog, a short while back. Check out the post with 90+ comments. I am not one to deal with judgmental people very well.

In short, you are right. I don't agree with her if that's the way she believes on that topic. But if it wasn't for the asshat RINOs, they would not have much of a platform right now.

LASunsett said...


this came out wrong:

//I am not as Ac says, a moral absolutist,//

I understand you didn't call me a moral absolutist, I just meant to credit you for using that term in the context of this discussion.

Poor punctuation, count off points if you wish. I deserve a lower grade for lack of proofreading.


A.C. McCloud said...

No offense taken, no points lost. You'll need all the points you can get this Monday.. ;-)