Quotes of the day
posted at 11:13 pm on September 7, 2010 by Allahpundit
“Some of the things [tea partiers] seem to advocate go beyond the norm,” says Castle. “I have trouble distinguishing sometimes between the factions out there that are in this ultra-conservative mode. You know—be it the patriots, or this Tea Party Express, or the different factions of the Tea Party. I’ve seen advocacy for eliminating the Department of Education, for example.”…
“There are a lot of things that the federal government does that, you know, might not be explicitly in the Constitution per se,” says Castle. “There are a lot of things that the states do, too. And they’ve been doing it in some cases since the 18th century.” He shrugs. “I do suppose it is a good question to ask.”
***
Over his 17 complete years in the U.S. House of Representatives, Castle has voted the conservative position, as defined by the American Conservative Union, about 52 percent of the time. In 2009, ACU scored Castle at 56. So how did he get that rating from the group last year?
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 organizations that 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.
***
The GOP is a more natural ideological home for most tea partiers than is the other major party, but they also suspect many Republicans of committing pragmatism, if not selling out too easily to Beltway mores. They have a point.
On the other hand, sometimes you need a few “wets” to gain a majority and advance your own ideas. Ask Nancy Pelosi, who rode the victories of Rahm Emanuel’s hand-picked Blue Dog Democrats to the House Speakership in 2006 and then used them to pass 40 years of liberal dreams in this Congress…
Politics in our two-party system is about coalition building, and any successful party must stretch across many groups. Republicans will have to accommodate much of the tea party agenda if they hope to assemble a new majority and avoid third-party challenges. But tea partiers who want to restore proper Constitutional limits, rather than merely pad the ratings of talk radio, might recall William F. Buckley Jr.’s counsel that his policy was to vote for the most conservative candidate who could win.
***
Via Tammy Bruce.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
You mean like Specter changing parties at age 79?
And I’m not even saying a party switch. I’m just saying he’ll ditch the Repubs for an Indy run, and caucus with whoever is in the majority.
Good Solid B-Plus on September 8, 2010 at 12:48 AM
Castle vehemently denies it.
He’s served in public office for 40 years as a Republican as a state legislator, a Lt. Governor, Governor and as DE’s only Congressman for 9 terms.
Jenfidel on September 8, 2010 at 12:49 AM
I don’t think you understand what is happening at the moment. The true conservatives are taking the party back, it is not a purge so much as it is a reutrn to classic small government principles. The “purge” happened in 2006 and 2008 when the party was drowning in deficits and corruption, this time around the voters are changing the Republican party from within instead of replacing them with Democrats who clearly can’t be trusted. The era of Big Government has returned, and it was ushered in by Republicans.
So when you say the party hasn’t gone anywhere, you’re wrong, a big chunk of them were tossed out of office and the rest are desperately clinging to the “I can bring home the bacon!” case for re-election. Cornyn, McConnell and Graham have all experienced the backlash of their ways and been publicly rebuked, even Graham is desperately trying to get some credibility back by sharpening his rhetoric against Obama, but it’s too late for him.
The Tea Party movement is more than a “stalinist purge” and also happens to be more popular than both political parties. That is saying something.
It’s late for me, this is one article I remember reading a while back. Cheney’s Memoirs will be quite interesting indeed.
Daemonocracy on September 8, 2010 at 12:51 AM
And if we’re in the majority, as it increasingly looks like we may be?
Jenfidel on September 8, 2010 at 12:51 AM
Arlen Specter – 44 years of public service as a Republican.
And that’s the point, the 9 terms; he could make an Indy switch and still win. He’s a career politician that Delaware voters will pull the lever for just because they recognize him.
Good Solid B-Plus on September 8, 2010 at 12:52 AM
The same way Christine vehemently denies all the sh!t that you, castle, and both party establishments are peddling. But I repeat myself. His word is worthless, as is yours.
abobo on September 8, 2010 at 12:53 AM
Then he’ll caucus with the Repubs and do his normal 50/50 voting. He’ll vote for all the crap sandwiches we know he loves, just like Graham and the Maine sisters will.
Good Solid B-Plus on September 8, 2010 at 12:53 AM
Castle has already said he would vote against repealing ObamaCare.
We have all sorts of limp noodles running over to the left to vote with them, and it has gotten us what exactly?
Bishop on September 8, 2010 at 12:53 AM
Well gee why didn’t you say so in the first place?
He denies it huh? My bad! /s
Who are you Bambi?
sharrukin on September 8, 2010 at 12:54 AM
It is amazing how many trolls come into this thread and make hatefull unsubstantiated claims about O’Donnell.
Clearly, the LEFTIES are afraid of her conservative values.
Freddy on September 8, 2010 at 12:55 AM
The GOP wasn’t drowning in deficits and corruption, the DNC and the Democrat Congress and the country were under their “leadership.”
Bullsh*t.
Beck is right about this: the era of Big Government was ushered in by Wilson, FDR and LBJ and helped down that road by Clinton and 0bama.
Democrats all.
ABC news? I don’t think so.
If Cheney tries to dump and trash Bush, it will leave the Republican party in ruins.
Jenfidel on September 8, 2010 at 12:55 AM
There is another guy running for senate who said the exact same thing, just as vehement too. His name is Charlie…Charlie…uh…Crisp? Crimp? Clasp? Something like that.
Whatever, it doesn’t matter.
Bishop on September 8, 2010 at 12:56 AM
60% with the democrats. I’ll take 100% with the Republicans.
That’s all we need is one more RINO senator to be part of the ‘gang of this’ and the ‘gang of that’ to always muck up Republican legislative strategy and to turn victories into losses.
How do you know? Do you work for the IRS?
He has avoided all debates even before the aide’s statement. That is a weak cover. That is the strategy of one someone that knows that his postions are indefensible.
She has a message of freedom to carry.
scrubjay on September 8, 2010 at 12:59 AM
Has jenfidel replaced Mary in LA as the resident concern troll?
abobo on September 8, 2010 at 1:00 AM
Oh I see where the problem is. You’re about as economically sound as McCain was.
As disastrous as Obamacare WILL BE, the fact is it has had little effect on the economy so far. Not even the budget cuts to medicare have taken effect yet. In other words Obamacare has done only psychological harm to our economy at this point.
McCain would’ve enacted a stimulus that would resemble Obama’s in one crucial way: regardless of how he may have flip-flopped on the campaign McCain would’ve rejected Tax Cuts as means to stimulate growth because he spent the last DECADE rejecting tax cuts as a means to stimulate anything.
McCain’s stimulus may not have had as much pork in it, but then without relieving the tax burdens on distressed employers and small business investors it would’ve had precisely the same effect on the economy that Obama’s porkulus had: JACK AND SH|T.
So despite your curious loyalty to the arch-RINO from Arizona, there’s simply no reason to believe McCain would’ve been anymore effective at improving the economy as Obama has been. In fact, McCain had an even stronger inclination to ignore and dismiss his economists (Holtz-Eakin and Arthur Laffer himself) than Obama does.
Khorum on September 8, 2010 at 1:00 AM
The “Half” of the time he votes with the democrat party will be no less harmful than a 100% democrat senator from Delaware.
Roll the dice Delaware… DON’t vote castle.
Control of the house is good enough. The Senate would be icing on the cake, but don’t take a chance on Castle… Think about it.. He wins and the Dem’s still hold the Senate. Then what. Take the chance.
If the Republicans to take control, it won’t be filibuster proof anyway.
Judicial review? Forget it. Spoils of the Presidency. Get over it.
Oxrock on September 8, 2010 at 1:01 AM
You mean AnninCa, not Mary in LA. Mary in LA’s a decent poster.
Good Solid B-Plus on September 8, 2010 at 1:02 AM
It’s impossible to get a veto-proof majority. Our best bet is to achieve gridlock until we can get a GOP President in 2012, hopefully take even more Senate seats (lots of vulnerable Dems in 2012).
Good Solid B-Plus on September 8, 2010 at 1:04 AM
Sorry bout that, well played sir. If Mary is reading- that wasn’t a freudian slip- just that us mouth breathing, knuckle dragging, conservative men can’t tell women apart or something.
abobo on September 8, 2010 at 1:06 AM
I’m a decent poster–I just don’t agree with you.
And with that I bid you O’Donnell lemmings Good Night!
Jenfidel on September 8, 2010 at 1:09 AM
No, he hasn’t. He’s said the effort is unrealistic while Obama holds the veto pen, and he’s right.
If Republicans get control of the Senate, then they control the agenda. That gives us more power to stop the Obama agenda. But without Castle, it doesn’t happen. And idiot faux conservatives like you are determined to torpedo our chances.
What a shame you have to do it by lying.
Caiwyn on September 8, 2010 at 1:11 AM
Jenfidel: I fear you are preaching to the anti-choir. But having lived in Delaware a while ago, I agree with your assessment of the situation.
Regarding this election, both sides have stated their cases, let the chips fall where they may. Personally, given the composition of the electorate, I expect something closer to the Washington primary, where the Palin-endorsed candidate racked up a good, solid 1/4 of the Republican primary vote (i.e. got beaten badly). But I guess we’ll see on Tuesday the 14th, eh?
HTL on September 8, 2010 at 1:12 AM
you sound like nothing than a party partisan.
- The GOP lost big in 2006 and 2008 because of corruption scandals and deficits which put off their base. The unpopular war in Iraq did not help either but considering how many Demcorats supported it, they could have fended off the losses if it wasn’t for their drift away from core Conservative principles. they screwed up, their base didn’t show up to bail them out and independents lost patience.
- Ofcourse Beck is right, he is also right when he scolds Bush and Republicans for expanding government as well. If you watch his show, how could you have missed this, he’s been saying it since before he came on Fox News. Reagan reduced Government, The Contract with America balanced the budget, but Bush and his Republican congress actually expanded government as well as spending.
Ok, fine, attack the source, believe what you want. I, and the article I linked to, never said Cheney was going to dump all over Bush, just that he is going to address a clear falling out the two had when it came to policy. That is not dumping on him if it’s fact. We’ll wait until the book comes out, but Bush is no messiah, if Cheney were to take a shot or two at him, Conservatives wouldn’t give a damn because he is old news. We will have 2012 to worry about by then and hopefully a bunch of fresh true conservatives in Congress to lead us back to Reagan and Coolidge.
Daemonocracy on September 8, 2010 at 1:12 AM
I’ve actually come around and agree with losing Delaware rather than seeing Castle rewarded with a promotion. I still think O’Donnell is nuts, though.
But the notion that we need a “veto-proof” majority to do anything major like repealing Obamacare. A filibuster-proof majority may be necessary but not a veto-proof one.
That’s because the likely form that an Obamacare Repeal will take is actually through funding and administrative starvation.
We would oppose all funding and stop all appointments and confirmations. It would be a de-facto repeal. One that Obama can do very little about.
In fact, it’s even sweeter to do it this way cuz then he’d still be in office while he watches his legacy get dismantled.
Khorum on September 8, 2010 at 1:15 AM
Weird but I don’t get the drift of most posters on this post. How is this guy acceptable? He is a cap-n-tax guy. Do we want another John “My Friends” McCave or Lindsey Grahmnesty? This guy voted for DISCLOSE act. That is First Amendment folks… He supports federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. He voted against the surge.
That doesn’t make any sense to me. So tricking around the constitution is OK?
So we have a pro-choice, embryo killing, opposes First Amendment, OK with disregarding the constitution, Cap-N-Tax Disaster…. I don’t know enough about that race so I don’t have a favorite. I think we can do better than this guy. Personally I’d prefer a nut instead.
antisocial on September 8, 2010 at 1:17 AM
lol, yeah AnninCa coined the term “moderate liberal”.
As for Jenfidel, she’s not a bad poster, but is way too heated on this race with the personal attacks. A bit of a Republican party partisan over ideological conservative as well from what I have read in this thread.
I’ll hold my nose and support Castle, it hurts to say so, but I won’t attack Christine.
Daemonocracy on September 8, 2010 at 1:18 AM
From a purely tactical and strategic point of view, doesn’t it seem insane to vote against the guy who will vote with you 1/2 the time and allow a guy who will vote with you 1/10 of the time to win?
Delaware is a blue blue blue state – putting one of its Senate seats into Republican hands, for who knows how long, seems like an incredible opportunity that shouldn’t be wasted.
BadgerHawk on September 8, 2010 at 1:27 AM
Which would be unacceptable in a red state, but in Delaware, it’s either that or a guy who holds all those same positions PLUS supports government run health care, runaway entitlement spending, Card Check, Amnesty, and who knows what else.
BadgerHawk on September 8, 2010 at 1:29 AM
Dude that would be so totally sweet, can you imagine how badly he’d flip out? It’d be like the end of Scarface!!!
abobo on September 8, 2010 at 1:29 AM
Charlie Crist, Arlen Specter, Dede Scozzafava, and John McCain have done how much damage to the GOP compared to four random Democrats?
sharrukin on September 8, 2010 at 1:32 AM
Castle is the one who is the deceiver here. What a great constitutional scholar he is. Obama holds the veto pen…really?… who knew…hmmm…does Castle think that lame excuse for not taking the repeal vote, marking well who does and does not vote for it, and then letting it be vetoed serves no purpose? Like identifying those who are with us and those who are against us? Like hanging obamacare around their necks with a knot that can’t be undone? No, that couldn’t be it. We should all just go along with the lame excuse of a pro-abort republican who doesn’t want to stand up and be counted for who or what he is.
tigerlily on September 8, 2010 at 1:34 AM
Eh. Crist and McCain are from red states, so their moderation is less tolerable.
But picture an opportunity to stick McCain, warts and all, in Kerry’s Senate seat. It’d be a no brainer, right?
If O’Donnell can win, great. But I haven’t seen a single article or poll that states she can.
BadgerHawk on September 8, 2010 at 1:39 AM
Nor will you if the GOP has anything to say about it. If they had such data they would sit on it.
We don’t lose much if we lose Castle and we do gain an actual conservative if we have O’Donnell.
Friends who ain’t are in a position to do a great deal of damage to the GOP. In addition they muddy what should be a stark choice on election day.
sharrukin on September 8, 2010 at 1:47 AM
That’s very true. However, were I a reported or blogger, there’s one question I would love to have answered.
How the heck did he manage to amass an $8 million dollar net worth during the time he supposedly served the people?
kakypat on September 8, 2010 at 3:24 AM
When you find yourself at a conservative crossroad, ask what would Michelle Malkin do? She makes the argument that we need fresh blood in Delaware, so that’s what I would go with.
Hongqi on September 8, 2010 at 5:45 AM
If Castle is so far ahead of O’Donnell why is there so much panic from his side?
Just relax Mike, let the week pass and then give your victory speech. O’Donnell is no threat, or is she?
technopeasant on September 8, 2010 at 6:07 AM
If Republicans can purchase a clue: spending bills start in the House, not the Senate.
Do not fund parts of government so the Senate does not ‘get a say’ in the spending as the spending is zero. Thus the Senate is relegated to its older place of having to wait for the House and being unable to start what the House does not want started. Thus Obama cannot sign or veto what is not on his desk. Make sure all spending bills are simple, easy to read and with this proviso: take it or leave it, we are perfectly happy if anyone else wishes to shut down the government as we are sending fiscally small and prudent bills on those parts of the government worth funding.
Majorities are now lining up behind lower taxes and fewer government services. Go for it. Be a miser with our tax dollars and cut off the bureaucracy, and stop the collection of taxes by cutting off the funding for their collection. Let the American people decide what parts of government they want in 2012. Mikey is jumping ship to the Senate just in time… I hope there is a good candidate for the House Seat lined up to run as that is where the money ball starts and he has just walked away from that.
ajacksonian on September 8, 2010 at 6:24 AM
I have never seen a thread in which Jenfidel wasn’t way too heated with personal attacks–she about goes around the bend on any Palin thread there is. She is not a troll, though, which is a word she throws around about anyone she disagrees with. I want to like her, if only because of her choice of name, but I can’t take the shrill tone she almost always ends up with. Of course, I’m not her cup of tea, either, so don’t take my word.
DrMagnolias on September 8, 2010 at 7:02 AM
Castle/Palin 2012
Ebony and Ivory, Fire and Ice, Yin and yang… you get the picture!
Bradky on September 8, 2010 at 7:19 AM
The United States Department of Education… is a Cabinet-level department of the United States government. Created by the Department of Education Organization Act (Public Law 96-88) and signed into law by President Jimmy Carter on October 17, 1979, it began operating on May 16, 1980.
How did our nation ever function without this bureaucracy?
Buy Danish on September 8, 2010 at 7:23 AM
And to do THAT, all we need is the House (which is a given) and no more than 50 dedicated Senate votes.
All of which can be obtained without Castle.
We’re sitting on 41 as it stands. Only takes nine to dead lock and force Biden to trot out and vote against the people and then say something stupid and add embarrassment for the administration to it’s haughty “Screw YOU, America!”
Nine pick ups without Castle?
No problem:
North Dakota, Arkansas and Indiana are in the bag.
44.
Put your money on these:
Penn. (Going red at the state level is a good omen for the rest of the GOPers down the ticket.)
Wisconsin (Also going red at the state level.)
Washington
Colorado
48.
And two of these:
California
West Virginia
Connecticut
Fiorina may benefit from Boxer being just so damn tiresome and never really incredibly popular with California voters to begin with. She always seems to win by slim margins. Moonbeam at the top of the Dem ticket ain’t going to help her any either.
For a guy who was supposed to be “Unbeatable”, Manchin sure dropped ten points in the spread awfully fast.
Reason: Cap and Tax.
Same reason Toomey’s jumped out to increasing leads in Pennsylvania and the Dems have no chance in KY or OH.
Old King Coal won’t let them go.
Shot in the dark pick that could give us a one seat majority or serve as a wild card if one of those last three doesn’t come through:
Connecticut.
Blumenthal’s running about as an inspired campaign as Coaxley did in Mass. and we saw what happened there…and Linda Mac’s got more money in personal war chest than Brown raised in his entire sprint to the finish, plus, she’s a master of the media.
That’s what made her that fortune and she’s on a relentless assault.
Curious to see where the next Rassmussen poll puts her,as the last three showed Rich in heap big trouble for a “Blue State”:
6/1: Blumenthal 56/33 +23
7/15: Blumnethal 53/40 +13
8/11: Blumenthal 47/40 +7
Sixteen point plunge since June and quite the silent campaign.
Meanwhile, Linda Mac’s smiling face is on TV about 10 times a day AND her voice is on the radio even more. (Media savvy being a big plus here.)
I drive around the state a lot and, while I don’t see many Blumenthal yard signs, I DO see A LOT of Linda lawn signs.
What those last three polls tell me is, while Linda may not have gained support between the July and August polls, Blumenthal just keeps LOSING support to the undecided column.
Eventually, he’s going to have to show his cards or that expanding pool of undecideds are going to start breaking Linda Mac.
I believe that is exactly what will happen and this one’s going to be a toss up down the home stretch and I’m taking Linda Mac FTW.
Blumers is running a Coaxley campaign and I think it’s going to end the same way.
Therefore, Castle is not needed, not for a deadlock or even a majority.
2012′s already going to be a Senate slaughter with all those slim margin ’06ers trying to get re-elected in races they’ve already doomed themselves to lose and at least three more old guard Dems are going down, so don’t sweat it.
Obama can be neutered without the Senate as can the Senate without a Dem house to serve them bills to their liking and very few (if any) cover votes.
SuperCool on September 8, 2010 at 7:38 AM
O’Donnell is unqualified and when you put unqualified people in high positions, they get rolled.
“Outsider” is great, until you try and get something done and you have absolutely no earthly idea how to go about it in the proper manner, to actually accomplish your goal.
Outsiders propose things and they get shot down continually and then they look stupid.
Or they try and bull their way through, don’t follow the proper legislative process and their actions go nowhere.
Or they are led about by the nose by lobbyists or staffers, all of whom which may have completely different agendas.
Elect all the outsiders you want, but don’t expect them to get anything done real or lasting because they are fish out of water.
NoDonkey on September 8, 2010 at 7:46 AM
He did it the old-fashioned way; he married it.
DaydreamBeliever on September 8, 2010 at 8:04 AM
William F Buckley’s policy was to vote for the most conservative that could win. In this case, Castle is no where near a conservative. A vote for him would go against everything Buckley stood for. Lets keep compromising to these backstabbing bastards and everything will be just fine. The leftwing nutjobs and the RINOs are singing the same song, same garbage every election. Can’t wait until the race cards start coming. They will use race like never before. Over 70% of Americans are racist scum and not fit to live is their slogan. Feel free to chime in.
volsense on September 8, 2010 at 8:06 AM
This is exactly the reason that big government is so problematic–our system was not designed to be a year-round glad-hand fest for swamp-dwellers who have found it is ever-so-much easier to live off the taxpayers dime than hold real jobs and only go to Washington out of a sense of duty (yes, this sentence has more hyphens than any sentence in history). The only solution to the problem is outsiders, because the pigs will never voluntarily leave the trough. And I agree with you about the great challengers outsiders face–the only solution is a return to Constitutional government, which Mike Castle has made clear confuses and repels him.
DrMagnolias on September 8, 2010 at 8:09 AM
OK. I’ve listened to and read enough about Ms. O’Donnell to make an informed opinion.
1. She is the most conservative candidate in this race and I hope the voters in Delaware make her the Republican candidate for US Senate.
2. As for the rest of us in the peanut gallery:
Mike Castle???? He is the worst kind of professional politician! A minor infection as a RINO in the House, he would be a plague upon us in the Senate.
Put it this way. If John McCain was running against Castle, I’d vote for McCain. I don’t mind being pragmatic but we conservatives won’t win the Senate by electing Mike Castle when there is a conservative alternative. We would be supporting gridlock.
Randy
williars on September 8, 2010 at 8:19 AM
If your belief in the foundations of our country matter, and your principles match those of O’Donnell, and you vote for Castle because you think he can beat the Democrat…what principles do you really have? The principle of pragmatism? Now that’s worth standing on a hill with a musket in your hands waiting for the advancing redcoats, isn’t it?
Extrafishy on September 8, 2010 at 8:20 AM
Yeah. There ya go.
JohnGalt23 on September 8, 2010 at 8:26 AM
No, you’re not. You obsessively check-in to every O’Donnell thread to make this insightful contribution. Typically, though, you use the word “imbecile.” I guess you’ve decided she’s a little brighter than you thought, so you’ve upgraded her to “moron.” You’ll be back on the next O’Donnell thread, so we’ll see then if you’ve reassessed.
DrMagnolias on September 8, 2010 at 8:29 AM
Reminds me of an answer Woody Hayes gave when asked why he went for a two-point conversion in a game he readily had in hand.
“Because I couldn’t go for three”.
This woman is a disgrace to both the GOP and the conservative movement. She needs to be ground into a fine powder, that powder sprinkled on barren land along with a generous portion of salt, so that nothing resembling Christine O’Donnell may ever grow there again.
JohnGalt23 on September 8, 2010 at 8:32 AM
Sure, you can wish Tea Party candidates would refrain from wandering off on limbs.
Is the “Nice” PC personality being required of O’Donnell in order to please party powers and voters?
The question of who to elect should stay on target, that being which candidate will vote against socialism, and which will mollify more socialism because it’s always manners over matter.
Does Delaware want legislators who listen politely at Townhalls and then return to vote more socialism because going against Washingtonian grain is so darn impractical?
It’s The Spending, Stupid!
You expect a tightwad to play the PC game?
maverick muse on September 8, 2010 at 8:33 AM
There’s a reason you haven’t seen them.
It is because they exist only in the mind of Christine O’Donnell.
They’re under her bushes, along with the Castle operatives that follow her home.
JohnGalt23 on September 8, 2010 at 8:34 AM
How about getting rid of the Dept. of Energy that Carter started more than 30 years ago to get us off foreign oil. We are still on foreign oil, the DOE has a budget of over 23 BILLION dollars, employes 16,000 people. How’s that for big government?
mixplix on September 8, 2010 at 8:35 AM
DrMagnolias on September 8, 2010 at 8:09 AM
Our goal is to dismantle the leviathan government, but we don’t need to throw out the bad from the good and we also need to know enough about the government, in order to actually do it, not just talk about it then run into a brick wall.
We also have troops in the field now. Obama is horribly unqualified and that’s hindering us.
We need Senators who know what they are doing out there, they don’t have two or three years to ramp up.
Republicans will be out again after two years if we send a bunch of rubes to the Senate. And then for the 2012 nomination?
Nominate Palin and Obama will get a second term. He will actually be able to argue at that point that he’s far more qualified and he will be correct.
NoDonkey on September 8, 2010 at 8:35 AM
So, Mike Castle, who has run as a Republican his entire life, at all levels of government, in good years and bad years for the GOP, is going to run as a Republican and all of a sudden decide to switch parties?
Tell me, why didn’t he switch in 2008, when he certainly would have won as a Democrat, and been able to get committee chairmanships?
Sorry, but that O’Donnell inspired rumor simply doesn’t pass the giggle test.
Much like Christine O’Donnell herself.
JohnGalt23 on September 8, 2010 at 8:37 AM
Perhaps so. But then, there are always the unintended consequences to consider. “New” candidates hardly enter politics when they see the grinding of their own bones should they so dare as to impertinently attempt to participate against all odds.
Political parties are run by corrupt bosses just like unions are. That party bosses absolutely detest a candidate makes me interested to see under the facade of disdain. Hatchet jobs of themselves are as distasteful as O’Donnell, no?
JUST ASKING since I’m neutral and just looking on, btw.
maverick muse on September 8, 2010 at 8:42 AM
Aside from the obvious party flipper Specter, did Crist, Scozza and Murko all change party affiliation in the past to become Republican?
Why would Castle not change previously but possibly now? Running his entire political life as Republican, to date has Castle ever been seriously threatened to win an R- primary?
maverick muse on September 8, 2010 at 8:46 AM
I’m not necessarily for O’Donnell, but this statement is silly. By your lights everyone who gets elected to congress that is not already in congress is useless? Is Joe Miller in AK going to be useless and rolled? What about Marco Rubio – or do you mean anyone who hasn’t held any office at all in the past? Is it really your position that we should only elect career politicians? That only career politicians are capable of operating in the Senatore or House?
Monkeytoe on September 8, 2010 at 8:50 AM
The problem I have with Christine O’donnell is that she took what has always been a gentleman’s game in DE, and applied the rules of her native New jersey to it.
She and her campaign took to spreading a slur about Mike Castle being aa adulterous closeted homosexual. That type of campaigning doesn’t fly in DE. The voters of Delaware dating back to the days of Caleb Boggs (and probably to the days of Ceasar Rodney) have liked candidates that go along to get along, that play hard, but play fair, that campaign on their issues and personality, and not throw bombs.
And O’Donnell set herself up as a carpetbagging bomb thrower.
So, I have no problems whatsoever letting the bombs fall on her.
She has income from sources she can’/won’t disclose? I’m going to assume she makes it from prostituting herself, and that would also explain the mattress as a legitimate business expense.
Hey, that’s the rumor.
JohnGalt23 on September 8, 2010 at 8:52 AM
Which of these things is not like the others.
Crist – Unable to garner his parties nomination for higher office.
Murkowski – Unable to garner her party’s nomination for existing office.
Specter – Unable to get party’s nomination for existing office.
Scozzo – Well, never actually changed parties now, did she.
Castle – Never had any problems getting his party’s nomination for office, likely including for US Senate.
Do we see a pattern developing here MM?
JohnGalt23 on September 8, 2010 at 8:56 AM
Mikey, Mikey, Mikey, there you go again.
So after fighting such brutal primary against a conservative and electing to your new promoted US Senate seat, you have stated all you want is to ‘maintain the norm’?
Really?
After Dem controlled Congress since 2006, and especially after 20 months of Obama reign? With all these evidence around you and the nation, you just announced to the Dem side “I am available for backroom deals and bribes.”
Sir Napsalot on September 8, 2010 at 8:59 AM
Even the Founders of our country knew that politics is the art of the possible.
That’s because they were grown-ups, who take governing seriously.
JohnGalt23 on September 8, 2010 at 8:59 AM
Why are O’Donnell’s supporters still spreading the rumor that Castle will switch parties? If they are so eager to engage on the issues, why the smears? Jim Geraghty calmly lays out all the conservative positions Castle has taken this year and last year, and yet O’Donnell’s supporters don’t respond on the issues, they come back with the smears and the childish demands to simply “Kill the RINO.” Why? Just because! This sort of mindless head-hunting is not becoming of a national movement. It reminds me of the Kos Kidz going after Joe Lieberman in Connecticut in 2006.
Why is it so hard to see how important winning this seat is? Now we have people coming up with fanciful scenarios about how the Republicans can still take the Senate without Delaware. Republicans are still trailing in Connecticut and Wisconsin. The Tea Party gave us the wrong guy in Colorado and he is probably going to lose a winnable seat there, and the same thing may be happening in Nevada. Fiorina leads Boxer in California by only one point. Even Mark Kirk in Illinois is not a sure thing.
The only totally sure pickups for the Republicans right now are Arkansas, Indiana, and Delaware if Mike Castle is the candidate. Castle is the only Republican that could possibly win a statewide race in Delaware right now. And remember THIS IS JOE BIDEN’S SEAT. How awesome will it be to watch us win BOTH Obama’s AND Biden’s seats in the Senate on Nov. 2?
rockmom on September 8, 2010 at 9:03 AM
Oh god. You don’t even realize how much of an ass you sound like.
Maybe some here aren’t supporting O’Donnell because they want the GOP to retake the Senate, and she’s NOT electable (spare me your comparisons to “true conservative” Miller in Alaska, that’s a totally different electorate, which is predisposed to vote Republican, unlike the Northeast).
And, based upon what we’ve seen based upon her financials, it’s quite possible she’s corrupt and misappropriating campaign funds to pay for her own personal expenses.
Culling the herd only works well under circumstances of extreme weakness or extreme strength. Right now, conservatives are posed to retake power in Congress, perhaps in both houses, but that is still tenuous, and some of you are doing what you can to sabotage it in the name of rigid idealogical purity.
Vyce on September 8, 2010 at 9:06 AM
O’Donnell: not remotely viable.
Tres Angelas on September 8, 2010 at 9:13 AM
They’ll get rolled if they have no experience working in some level of government yes and they should have executive experience as well.
Even state government is incredibly complex, step it up a notch for the federal government.
It will take a year for people who have never worked for or in the government just to learn the acronyms. They will go into meetings and have absolutely no idea what is going on. None.
It’s not a matter of being smart. It’s a matter of experience. It’s a whole new ballgame.
This is why I think retired military officers would make excellent candidates for elective office.
They’ve all worked in the federal government at all levels for 20 plus years. They’ve been successful at it. Most are very conservative.
Do we have any now who are elected? Very few, because millionaire “conservatives” with a bucket list, decide to take those positions on for themselves, for all the perks.
And they get rolled and they will get rolled.
Running a successful campaign has NOTHING to do with governing successfully (see Obama, Barack).
The military has to live with the consequences of the American people electing rube ideologues so I’ve seen what happens.
NoDonkey on September 8, 2010 at 9:16 AM
Yeah, from crazy unelectable people like Ronald Reagan.
Unfortunately, that’s the bottom line here.
mankai on September 8, 2010 at 9:18 AM
As much as I admire Palin, I don’t want her to get involved in this race. O’Donnell has the right instincts, but she is too easy to target.
victor82 on September 8, 2010 at 9:30 AM
I see plenty of people on this website getting rolled as unpaid RNC spokespeople. That’s life. One day soon, they will wake up and realize that Coon and Castle are deeply in the pocket of special interests pressuring congress for Cap and Trade, and God only knows the backroom deals in the works. People (party-clingers) are acting like moonbats regarding their newfound savior, Castle. The only change coming from that guy will be a bigger office and more high profile lunchdates. Definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over expecting a different result.
RepubChica on September 8, 2010 at 9:41 AM
Mark Levin says vote O’Donnell, and he knows what he’s talking about. I’m with Mark.
pupik on September 8, 2010 at 9:43 AM
Really? I thought the definition of insanity was thinking that there are people hiding under your bushes.
JohnGalt23 on September 8, 2010 at 9:45 AM
Nominate Palin and Obama will get a second term. He will actually be able to argue at that point that he’s far more
qualifiedexperienced and he will be correct.NoDonkey on September 8, 2010 at 8:35 AM
Yet Obama’s accruing the WRONG experience in the wrong direction, to be correct.
maverick muse on September 8, 2010 at 9:49 AM
Sigh…you really need some relief for that raging O’Donnell bo-ner you got going on, Johnny G.
RepubChica on September 8, 2010 at 9:58 AM
Oh, and of course this thread would not be complete without an example of how Christine performs in an interview when they aren’t tossing her softballs.
JohnGalt23 on September 8, 2010 at 9:58 AM
Yeah. I’ve never been one to fall for the “hooker with a heart of gold” routine.
Although clearly there are some in the conservative movement who lack such fortitude.
JohnGalt23 on September 8, 2010 at 10:00 AM
Like I said, for now I’m impartial. People I respect who’ve looked deep and taken a stand are both for and against O’Donnell.
Ace of Spades HQ has been posting her lies and problems for many weeks, and until it spilled over here, I kept a distance.
I wouldn’t want to be legislated by a liar who can’t refrain from smearing opponents with whole cloth. And to show up at Townhalls and be told to STFU would not sit well for me. O’Donnell seems to think that to fight a Leftist, one must play Leftist rules. It’s bad enough to have an entire administration and majority Congress locked in step with those unjust measures. I think that so-called “conservatives” who play Alinsky games are every bit as corrupt as Leftists. I hold to the record without revisionism.
Why play Alinsky when Alinsky is the target to take down?
Then again, WHO IS GOING TO VOTE AGAINST THE MARXIST PROGRESSION that has already convinced too many that the Constitution no longer is relevant since push already came to shove, mowing down rule of law?
maverick muse on September 8, 2010 at 10:09 AM
Manners over Matter
That’s the gist of it.
AS IF voters wouldn’t prefer manners with matter.
maverick muse on September 8, 2010 at 10:12 AM
maverick muse on September 8, 2010 at 9:49 AM
Remember reading about how intimidated Obama was when he went into a meeting with a roomful of Generals and Admirals?
That’s because they all had 25+ years experience, from the ground up, running the government.
Not sitting on the sidelines pontificating, they were in the game.
If Obama sat in a Flag Officer briefing to this day, he would have no earthly idea what was going on.
Never mind the ideaology, should the American people be electing people like this?
Afraid to sit in meetings with the actual people on the ground and in the trenches, running government? Because they are completely ignorant regarding how things function?
It’s not just about reducing the scope of government, which I am all for.
It’s knowing what the hell it is you are doing when you get into office. Not just talking at a 30,000 foot level.
Why does elected office continually have to be amateur hour, on both sides?
NoDonkey on September 8, 2010 at 10:16 AM
Purge the RINOS. Every last one of them. I’ve had 50 years of being stabbed in the back by Moderate Republicans. Burn them all.
SurferDoc on September 8, 2010 at 10:16 AM
This is a very good test. Notice that Buckley did not use the words Republican candidate who could win. He uses the word conservative. Mike Castle is not in any way conservative. Under Buckley’s criteria he doesn’t merit a vote. In fact Mike Castle in exactly like the Liberal Rockefeller Republicans Buckley worked so hard to wrestle control of the Republican party from.
There is a lot of talk of pragmatism to advance an agenda, which is all well and good. The problem with Mike Castle is he’s perfectly happy with the Democrats agenda. His pragmatism leans toward moderating the liberal agenda. If instead his focus was in advancing at least a moderately conservative agenda he could be supported. But he doesn’t. Even now in the midst of a primary he backs a liberal fix to a SCOTUS decision, Citizen’s United, which expands free speech.
He should have been primaried and hard long ago. The idea that he should be advanced to the Senate after years as the most liberal Republican in the House is ridiculous.
Rocks on September 8, 2010 at 10:17 AM
There is no such thing as a Blue Dog.
fossten on September 8, 2010 at 10:22 AM
Cornyn(TX), McConnell(KY), and Graham(SC) are all from states where solid conservatives can win re-election, so they could afford to move further right and not risk losing an election.
But Delaware is NOT such a state–it has elected Joe Biden to the Senate for 36 years! A Senator is supposed to represent the people of his/her state, and if the people of Delaware liked Castle in the House, they will like him in the Senate, where he will be one vote in 100 instead of one vote in 435. For conservatives outside of Delaware, he will vote with us half the time, and might help Republicans become committee chairmen, whereas Coons would vote knee-jerk with the Democrats. We need to be pragmatic here–Castle is the best Senator we can get out of Delaware, and “perfection” may be the enemy of the good.
Steve Z on September 8, 2010 at 11:01 AM
Wow. Eliminating a counterproductive federal department. How extreme.
/sarc
Bobbertsan on September 8, 2010 at 11:05 AM
For the record, Jenfidel has been proven to be a liar on this issue.
She lied about Christine being involved the gay rumor (that was peddled by some organization that used to work for her).
She lied about Christine starting the rumor about Castle switching parties (that was started by Eric Erickson).
She lied about Castle “regretting” his C&T vote (she said that this was covered in a National Review article that make no reference to it whatsoever).
She lied about his desire to repeal Obamacare (he said he would consider it after Obama is out of office — that is not the same as going on record supporting repeal).
Joe Caps on September 8, 2010 at 11:05 AM
Don’t forget to defeat the enemy. The enemy is a dangerous and capable adversary. Do not fool yourselves.
If the conservative movement is serious about destruction of the enemy, winning is an absolute necessity. We cannot win this war without winning committee leadership in Congress.
If what people say here is true, (that she cannot win), then going with her is like sending your principles to fight on ground that you know your soldiers will be slaughtered with no strategic gain. Then you can bury all your principles in a mass grave. Not sure what the point of that is.
I hate this race. I would gauge it this way…if she truly has a realistic chance of winning, then back her. If she cannot win, then backing her is suicidal for a much larger strategy of beating the enemy and shifting the country’s policies rightward.
Saltysam on September 8, 2010 at 11:22 AM
I have to laugh. If this is your standard — don’t support a candidate unless they have bulletproof polls showing their viability — why the hell did you work on Ron Paul’s 2008 campaign?
Firefly_76 on September 8, 2010 at 11:33 AM
Some posters here seriously need some time out. Every thread with regards to DE primary as it gets closer, we have seen non-stop over-the-top hysteria on the same theme by a couple posters hundreds of times throughout the whole day.
When you compare what’s been said, there is not much difference than the same tactics used by the Left. And we have others explaining for such behavior. Well, because ‘she’s our concerned troll, she’s passionate, and she’s always like this’. So certain things about Michelle Obama and the president himself are unmentionables, but similar type of name callings on a ‘nobody’ are tolerated?
Just to show you how old, old schooled I am, here is a free advice. (You know who I am talking about.) Son/Gal, that is not the way to go through life. Go read Dale Carnegie’s ‘How to Win Friends and Influence People”. Like I said, free advice.
I am NOT advocating banning anybody, but the site administrator / monitor need to find ways to tell those to cool off a few weeks. The reason you see this long rant is because the certain people ignore all kinds of mild suggestions.
/rant off, thank you for tolerating
Sir Napsalot on September 8, 2010 at 11:48 AM
HOT!!!
76United on September 8, 2010 at 11:53 AM
LOL it’s always a healthy sign when people in a conservative forum start clamoring for censorship from the powers that be.
Why don’t you go ahead and throw in Godwin’s Law in there and compare people to Nazis.
Khorum on September 8, 2010 at 12:32 PM
Well, he has a point. Johngalt23 and others have been calling O’Donnell a whore and prostitute in the headline threads and elsewhere and yet it’s an outrage if Michelle Obama is compared to a certain movie character.
That isn’t commenting or debate it’s just vulgar smears. Trolls get banned for less. A warning IMO wouldn’t be out of bounds.
sharrukin on September 8, 2010 at 12:42 PM
Perhaps you missed the part where he said he’s not calling for banning anyone; rather, he would like to see the monitors remind people that getting carried away can lead to nowhere good.
DrMagnolias on September 8, 2010 at 1:00 PM
It’s not the polls that bother me so much.
It’s the willingness to p!ss away a slam dunk over someone who clearly has issues with paranoia.
JohnGalt23 on September 8, 2010 at 1:06 PM
Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean someone’s not after you. :)
DrMagnolias on September 8, 2010 at 1:36 PM
I’m not sure who was being referenced here but as to the more extreme statements and the frequency of their appearances – these commenters seem not to know that their statements have the opposite effect of what they intended.
Eren on September 8, 2010 at 1:38 PM
Maybe if naysaying, nattering nabobs of negativity like you would support her, she would win. But of course, when you have nothing but linear thinking, it’s easy to be defeatist.
fossten on September 8, 2010 at 1:44 PM
Glad to hear that Rush Limbaugh guy today, coming down on the right side of this issue…
Akzed on September 8, 2010 at 1:45 PM
Yeah, I’ll trust what he says over JohnGalt23, GoodLt, and Allahpundit.
fossten on September 8, 2010 at 1:54 PM
He’s wrong on this one, sorry.
This woman would be totally in over her head and completely ineffectual.
She doesn’t know the first thing about how the government works.
Being anti-government is fine during the campaign, but at some point, you have to know what it is you are doing, in order to do what you’ve talked about.
You people want to elect novices to government then are disappointed when they get nothing done.
We already have a President who is the least experienced person in the room. Why we need to elect “conservatives” who are also woefully inexperienced I can’t understand.
NoDonkey on September 8, 2010 at 2:02 PM
Of course, that inane assertion applied to Castle before he got elected.
Castle knows better and does the wrong thing anyway.
Thanks Rush Limbaugh!
Akzed on September 8, 2010 at 2:08 PM
I think he’s referring to O’Donnell, but I’m not sure–my response was based on O’D. But, complete agreement with what you said–I wonder how many of us have that effect? :)
DrMagnolias on September 8, 2010 at 2:34 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »