Just a reminder: Sexist RINO establishment ogre Karl Rove is spending millions to help Sharron Angle win

posted at 4:20 pm on September 16, 2010 by Allahpundit

He alluded to this himself in the clip that Ed posted earlier, but since he’s now being treated as some sort of cancer on the party for daring to say that O’Donnell’s a flawed candidate, let’s flesh out the facts a bit. If, as Jeri Thompson suggests, Rove has a double standard for tea-party women, why is he spending boatloads of cash to help someone who, until 48 hours ago, was the most famous woman tea-party candidate in America?

Sure, the fact that he hates Harry Reid is part of it. But what does that prove? Everyone hates Harry Reid.

A third-party group linked to Rove has been the most aggressive, highest-spending outside force behind Reid’s opponent, Sharron Angle, launching withering attacks that have helped keep the onetime long shot competitive against Reid…

Rove wrote in an e-mail to POLITICO that his efforts through Crossroads GPS and its sister group, American Crossroads, are not driven by his personal feelings toward the majority leader. And he declined to lay out his views of Reid, instead referring POLITICO to his new biography — which is none too kind to Reid…

In total, Crossroads GPS and American Crossroads — which was the brainchild of Rove and former Bush White House official Ed Gillespie — have spent $1.7 million in Nevada on ads slamming Reid, most notably on the economic stimulus. The group has earmarked an additional $10 million for Nevada and seven other states to bolster GOP voter turnout on Election Day…

Since leaving the White House, Rove has become a more public critic of Reid, including last year on Fox News, when he called Reid “pathetic and insulting” and a “weak leader” as the health care debate raged in the Senate.

Is $10 million for Republican candidates, some of them tea partiers, enough to earn basic civility from “true conservative” O’Donnell supporters? How about the fact that Rove was enough of a “true conservative” as recently as six weeks ago to guest host the Rush Limbaugh Show? It’s one thing to say, as Ed does, that his criticism of O’Donnell on Fox should have come before the primary, not after; I agree, but then I doubt that most of the people ripping him to shreds now are aggrieved about his timing rather than the fact that he criticized her at all. Question: If the grassroots righties in RINO-stomp mode are all about “sending a message” to establishment figures like Rove, replete with smears about his alleged sexism, why shouldn’t he send one back by pulling the plug on money for Angle? If people think he’s part of the problem rather than the solution, problem solved: No more money. Better yet, let’s have Sharron Angle weigh in on that at the next available opportunity. Does she welcome attack ads against her opponent that are funded by a sexist RINO Beltway insider? Purge him, Sharron!

Rove won’t pull the plug because he wants to win back the Senate — which, of course, is the real reason he’s down on a deep red candidate running in a deep blue state, not because he belongs to the “old boys’ club” or whatever. Speaking of which, read this Matt Lewis piece about the appearance of the “gender card” in conservative politics. You’ll see much more of it next year if, as most now expect, Palin runs for president. Sometimes the accusations will have merit and sometimes, like here, they won’t, and with every bad charge that card will get a little closer to being maxed out. One of the points that’s been lost in the past few days is what a spectacular failure the left’s incessant “race card” politics against tea partiers have been this year: They’ve been smearing grassroots conservatives left, right, and sideways in order to sour independents on the GOP, and yet judging from generic-ballot polling, indies just keep tuning them out. There’s a lesson in that. Use the “gender card” sparingly, and use it when it’s really warranted. It’s not warranted against Rove.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 2 3 4

So all he did was point out that O’Donnell was a flawed candidate? wow, nice way to understate it there buddy. Show me a candidate without flaws. Show me one other candidate that Rove called on the carpet like that. You can even include Democrats to make it easy.

Rove let his emotions get to him and even a simpleton could see that he had daggers in his eyes for O’Donnell in the infamous Hannity segment. No amount of spin doctoring is going to make that go away. But please keep trying.

exceller on September 16, 2010 at 6:08 PM

She’s not just a flawed candidate – O’Donnell is from a camp right next to David Duke’s, Alvin Greene’s, and Sharon Anderson’s (people in the know here in MN know what I am talking about when I mention her!)

She is a F-R-E-A-K when it comes to sex, and the ‘sinfulness’ of lying. She is a W-H-I-N-E-R and G-R-I-F-T-E-R who played the sexism/victim card in order to fatten her purse. She is a L-I-A-R who lies even more when confronted with her previous lies.

Pointing out that she is at a lower level of existence than the typical politician isn’t wrong. What’s wrong is sweeping her flaws under the rug, or denying that they exist.

Those aren’t Cocoa Puffs all over her body, that she told you she pasted on herself – they are really BIG W-A-R-T-S. OPEN YOUR EYES.

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 6:32 PM

Again I ask why don’t Limbaugh and Levin get called RINOs for talking Bush? Karl Rove = RINO for trying to get a moderate elected as POTUS. Limbaugh = Not RINO even though he supported the same moderate POTUS. Got it!!!

terryannonline on September 16, 2010 at 6:11 PM

*sigh*

Terry, they defended Bush against John Kerry and Al Gore. They defended Bush against lunatic Democrat attacks. They also, by the way, regularly criticized Bush when he went squishy. Throughout his administration.

Did you ever actually listen to either of them?

Kensington on September 16, 2010 at 6:34 PM

As a seasoned political analyst/operative, Rove knew better. He knew better, TWICE. He came across as a sore loser.

Gohawgs on September 16, 2010 at 6:36 PM

All of you defending Delaware’s choice of O’Donnell as a reason to somehow respect her win there sound as dumb as anyone who would replace DE with “US”, and O’Donnell with “Obama”.

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 6:17 PM

I haven’t read every post in this thread, but, what I have read hasn’t seemed to say, “Well, Delaware voted for her, so, it’s a good win.”

I have seen people that are concerned that all of the criticism of O’Donnell, especially coming from her own side of the aisle, could make it tougher for her to win.

Now, if you’re like NarutoBoy and some others on here that believe that anyone else is better than O’Donnell, it makes sense to continue criticizing her.

However, for the people that think a flawed Republican is better than a Democrat, they have to recognize that these criticisms are not occurring in a vaccuum. What we have right now is a LOT of criticism of the Republican candidate on the right and the left which allows the Democrat candidate to lay low and win by default.

I don’t see how that helps Republicans at all.

Unless O’Donnell is so awful that it’s harmful to have her as a Republican Senator, suck it up and move on. Not because it’s not o.k. to criticize candidates but because it is not helping to elect a Republican majority (which most of those critical of O’D claim they wanted to see).

Primaries are the time for criticizing each other.

Generals are the time for criticizing the other party.

The primaries are over.

JadeNYU on September 16, 2010 at 6:38 PM

As a seasoned political analyst/operative, Rove knew better. He knew better, TWICE. He came across as a sore loser.

Gohawgs on September 16, 2010 at 6:36 PM

I’m certain that if you looked through Rove’s books and whatnot, that somewhere he would warn you not to be so foolish as to provide prepackaged political ads for the opposition.

slickwillie2001 on September 16, 2010 at 6:39 PM

Is that because you think they are misunderstanding the parts of the Bible that appear to prohibit it?

Or is it because you think it’s moronic to think anything is sinful? Or, a subset of that, that it’s moronic to believe anything that you think is alright is sinful?

JadeNYU on September 16, 2010 at 6:12 PM

If you believe God considers masturbation is a sin, God is either the pettiest anal-retentive creature in the universe, or your dogma is retarded. What’s your pick?

Believing that human sexuality isn’t at least as much about pleasure as it is reproduction leads to all sorts of the goofiness which sprouts from sexual repression. I present Christine O’Donnell as a prime example of what I am saying.

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 6:40 PM

Sigmund on September 16, 2010 at 5:58 PM

Oh look. One of the purest trolls we have. Always too much for you to actually offer an opinion on the topic.

MadisonConservative on September 16, 2010 at 6:12 PM

It sure seemed like an opinion to me. I can tell that you were not amused with it however. Maybe it hit too close to home. You should have just ignored it as now some people my be starting to wonder.

Murphy9 on September 16, 2010 at 6:44 PM

Of course. It’s Karl Rove’s fault her history sucks. Not hers.

MadisonConservative on September 16, 2010 at 5:46 PM

I’m more interested in knowing if your are incapable of understanding my post (in which case it’s not your fault) or intentionally not understanding it (in which case it would be your fault).

Actually I know the answer having been subjected to your non-stop posts in every thread over the years. I do my best to ignore them but every now and then you feel the need to poke the Bear.

TheBigOldDog on September 16, 2010 at 6:44 PM

Why do we only hear the terms flawed candidate, kooky, nutjob, whackjob, etc.. used referencing Female candidates? When are the boys gonna realize, it is pissing us women off and we will start voting for the F candidate in the same way as blacks voted for the AA candidate.
lonestar1 on September 16, 2010 at 5:37 PM
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yes, it has reached the point of being obvious.
That’s a pretty big share of the electorate to be pissing off gratuitously… oh btw, you left out the one that is making me grind my teeth these days… “unelectable”…

fabrexe on September 16, 2010 at 6:44 PM

No actually what would happen is all the RINO’s would be screaming about how he is going to turn the country into a theocracy due to his links to Falwell and how militaristic he is, and a dangerous cowboy that doesn’t understand the ‘nuances’ of international politics.

Sorta like what actually happened when he ran for president.

[sharrukin on September 16, 2010 at 5:29 PM]

Oh, so the only criticism that would ever show up would be by the trolls because back then Conservatives treated Reagan like, um, a Messiah or something, who never did anything wrong that R’s or C’s would complain about and maybe use harsh or nasty language in criticizing him?

Okaaaaaay.

Dusty on September 16, 2010 at 6:45 PM

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 6:40 PM

So, you’re sending Coons some money?

applebutter on September 16, 2010 at 6:46 PM

Oh, is Rove spending millions? Whose money?

disa on September 16, 2010 at 6:49 PM

Nuts & s1uts
It’s not just for Democrats anymore.

They are all the enemy. 90% of them anyway.

TheBigOldDog on September 16, 2010 at 6:50 PM

What’s kookier a personal decision that masturbation is a sin, or a political goal of hampering our entire country with Cap and Trade legislation because you think all of the Earth’s ice is going to melt and drown everyone?

kagai on September 16, 2010 at 6:52 PM

TheBigOldDog on September 16, 2010 at 6:44 PM

So sorry to bother you with an argument you can’t counter without an ad hominem. I forgot your troubles with that.

MadisonConservative on September 16, 2010 at 6:54 PM

It sure seemed like an opinion to me.

Murphy9 on September 16, 2010 at 6:44 PM

That says a lot about you, then, doesn’t it?

MadisonConservative on September 16, 2010 at 6:57 PM

This is probably the dumbest thing I’ve ever read.

exceller on September 16, 2010 at 6:23 PM

Pointing out that many Righties have double standards they refuse to acknowledge when it comes to their differing judgements of Democrats and Republicans who are guilty of the same ethical failings is dumb only to intellectually dishonest Righties such as yourself.

One of the funniest things I’ve seen here during the O’Donnell debacle is how some people here who believe (rightfully so) that 0bamessiah is unqualified to be President have attacked those who have said the same about O’Donnell by pedantically using the technical definition of who’s qualified to be Senator, as written in the Constitution.

I don’t like hypocrites on the Left or the Right, especially the ones who won’t admit they are.

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 6:58 PM

enough to earn basic civility

Well, case in point from Rove Defender: Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 6:32 PM

Norwegian on September 16, 2010 at 6:59 PM

Well Bizarro didn’t get his name by accident and he used to be Bizarro No. 7, but he’s been working his way up.

sharrukin on September 16, 2010 at 6:28 PM

Wow, what a clever boy you are!

Wait ’til you are a year older and reach the second grade, the ‘sophistication’ of your humor will be that much more advanced!

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 7:02 PM

If a bad candidate gets nominated, do they cease to be a bad candidate?

MadisonConservative on September 16, 2010 at 5:06 PM

How much time do you think Olbermann is going to spend on Reid calling Coons his “pet”?

Just because you’ve got what you consider flaws on your side doesn’t mean it’s time to turn the guns around to point into the courtyard and start inflicting “friendly-fire”… is it?

Who else has Rove gone after this hard & heavy? Or are there no other flawed candidates this cycle? Do we have half a dozen clips of Rove making personal attacks on Alvin Greene?

Rove won’t pull the plug because he wants to win back the Senate — which, of course, is the real reason he’s down on a deep red candidate running in a deep blue state

Which makes sense if he stopped his attacks after the primary was over. How does attacking O’Donnell after the primaries are done help take back the senate?

Now his walk-back since then has helped avoid making this worse; but I don’t see why the attack continued once the primary was over; presuming his goal was (R) control of the Senate.

No I don’t have a guess as to what his “real motivations” are… but either he forgot what his own goal was while he was ranting, or control of the senate for the Repubs isn’t it.

gekkobear on September 16, 2010 at 7:03 PM

I’ve been disappointed in FoxNews ever since they first gave this clown air time. Karl Rove was called the “architect” because he was the quintessential NEOCON. For years, I had no idea what a “neocon” was. Turns out, it’s a Big Government Conservative; which, of course, is a contradiction in terms. So a better term would be Statist. But if that’s too harsh, I like to call them the Aristocracy — the would-be Nobility of America.

It appears that, rather than two separate parties, there have for decades simply been opposing factions in One Big Government Party. Those not within this single, Big Government, party are termed “radicals” or “extremists”. This is how the American Nobility refers to its subjects. The so-called “establishment” of the Republican Party must be ousted — destroyed utterly. Do not buy into party loyalty, or the party “line”. Neither exist. Do not buy into the “Big Tent”. You’re not invited. There is only a cabal of Statists/Neocons/Aristocrats trying to maintain control of both parties. Most of all, do not be fooled by the attempts of these “establishment” Republican Aristocrats to get back into your good graces by pretending to be conservative. They despise you as much as the Democrats do.

Lawrence Talbot on September 16, 2010 at 7:04 PM

Unless O’Donnell is so awful that it’s harmful to have her as a Republican Senator, suck it up and move on. Not because it’s not o.k. to criticize candidates but because it is not helping to elect a Republican majority (which most of those critical of O’D claim they wanted to see).

Primaries are the time for criticizing each other.

Generals are the time for criticizing the other party.

The primaries are over.

JadeNYU on September 16, 2010 at 6:38 PM

Like Rush pointed out, getting the Republican majority in the Senate was critical when Castle was the means to it, but now that O’Donnell is the candidate, it’s not so important anymore.
BTW, has Castle called to congratulate her yet?

Extrafishy on September 16, 2010 at 7:08 PM

How about the fact that Rove was enough of a “true conservative” as recently as six weeks ago to guest host the Rush Limbaugh Show?

Rush still has issues with the Bush-bot chip. Rove was as unremarkable on the radio as he is on Fox News.

Whatever O’Donnell’s minuses might be, no candidate was perfect enough to beat the ruling-class choice. Castle’s rap-sheet of leftism is long — a hefty record that reminded me of Huckster’s governorship in Arkansas.

The smears and tantrums of the establishment make the two parties look like one two-headed creature, with the same agenda against the governed. If the efforts spent opposing O’Donnell and Hayworth had been used against Obama, McCain would be president today.

Feedie on September 16, 2010 at 7:09 PM

So sorry to bother you with an argument you can’t counter without an ad hominem. I forgot your troubles with that.

MadisonConservative on September 16, 2010 at 6:54 PM

You barley rate that.

TheBigOldDog on September 16, 2010 at 7:11 PM

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 7:02 PM

Is the 2nd grade where you learn to imply that someone is a young child?

/I’m in the 3rd grade where you learn passive-aggressive questioning.

JadeNYU on September 16, 2010 at 7:21 PM

No I don’t have a guess as to what his “real motivations” are… but either he forgot what his own goal was while he was ranting, or control of the senate for the Repubs isn’t it.

gekkobear on September 16, 2010 at 7:03 PM

Control by the “properly anointed” Repubs is what matters. Conservatives are a danger to the GOP establishment and Rove is definitely establishment, not conservative. What Rush and others have said bears repeating: He never trashed a Democrat the way he trashed the Republican.

Extrafishy on September 16, 2010 at 7:24 PM

I haven’t read every post in this thread, but, what I have read hasn’t seemed to say, “Well, Delaware voted for her, so, it’s a good win.”

I have seen people that are concerned that all of the criticism of O’Donnell, especially coming from her own side of the aisle, could make it tougher for her to win.

Now, if you’re like NarutoBoy and some others on here that believe that anyone else is better than O’Donnell, it makes sense to continue criticizing her.

However, for the people that think a flawed Republican is better than a Democrat, they have to recognize that these criticisms are not occurring in a vaccuum. What we have right now is a LOT of criticism of the Republican candidate on the right and the left which allows the Democrat candidate to lay low and win by default.

I don’t see how that helps Republicans at all.

Unless O’Donnell is so awful that it’s harmful to have her as a Republican Senator, suck it up and move on. Not because it’s not o.k. to criticize candidates but because it is not helping to elect a Republican majority (which most of those critical of O’D claim they wanted to see).

Primaries are the time for criticizing each other.

Generals are the time for criticizing the other party.

The primaries are over.

JadeNYU on September 16, 2010 at 6:38 PM

I, and many others, believe that she is awful to the point of being harmful to the Republican brand, like David Duke was.

If you’d pay close attention to her and judge her by the same standards you’d judge a Democrat, you’d have to admit that she has the ethics of a Leftie and stands out like a very sore thumb on the Right because of this, which is the reason why so many of us haven’t united behind her like we normally would.

As has been pointed out numerous times here, it’s not her sex, nor Tea Party affiliation, nor her defeat of a RINO that upsets us – SHE is the problem. She clearly isn’t a very good nor wise person, and we expect more than that from Republican candidates.

If I’m wrong about this explanation, why don’t you go ahead and coherently prove it.

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 7:25 PM

However, for the people that think a flawed Republican is better than a Democrat, they have to recognize that these criticisms are not occurring in a vaccuum. What we have right now is a LOT of criticism of the Republican candidate on the right and the left which allows the Democrat candidate to lay low and win by default.
I don’t see how that helps Republicans at all.
Unless O’Donnell is so awful that it’s harmful to have her as a Republican Senator, suck it up and move on. Not because it’s not o.k. to criticize candidates but because it is not helping to elect a Republican majority (which most of those critical of O’D claim they wanted to see).

This would be a little easier to take if so many O’Donnell supporters has not been making impassioned speeches about how it would be far better to have Coons than Castle, and a Democrat-controlled Senate than one that has SOME RINOs in it.

As I’ve been saying for a while now, you’re underestimating the size of the rift here. A simple “let’s come together” isn’t going to do it. There really a war going on now between the idealogical right and the “establishment”, but the “true cons” have thrown us moderates into the fray as additional enemy combatants. And despite what some here believe, moderate really does not equal “RINO”.

Vyce on September 16, 2010 at 7:27 PM

Karl Rove is a lot of things. “Conservative crusader” is not one of them. If he persists in ignoring the will of the people to advance a conservative agenda of freedom, he does so entirely at his own risk.

gryphon202 on September 16, 2010 at 7:30 PM

I’ve been disappointed in FoxNews ever since they first gave this clown air time.
Lawrence Talbot on September 16, 2010 at 7:04 PM

Yeah, that bothered me, too. He is a political operative and uses the Fox position to further his goals as political operative. How reliable is that?

Fox News advanced the media-political incest on that one.

Feedie on September 16, 2010 at 7:35 PM

If you believe God considers masturbation is a sin, God is either the pettiest anal-retentive creature in the universe, or your dogma is retarded. What’s your pick?

Believing that human sexuality isn’t at least as much about pleasure as it is reproduction leads to all sorts of the goofiness which sprouts from sexual repression. I present Christine O’Donnell as a prime example of what I am saying.

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 6:40 PM

You really are worried about your pet hobby becoming illegal, aren’t you.

fossten on September 16, 2010 at 7:39 PM

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 6:32 PM

An apt name you chose for yourself.

disa on September 16, 2010 at 7:52 PM

So, you’re sending Coons some money?

applebutter on September 16, 2010 at 6:46 PM

This is typical of the mindless aggression many of you here have, who don’t have much in the tank when it comes to creativity.

There are plenty of people just like me not fitting into your idiotic template, who support the the spirit of the Tea Party, Rubio, Angle, Miller, etc., the ouster of Murkowski, Bennet, etc., who generally agree with the idea that it’s better to support a good Conservative who will more likely lose an election than it is to support a squishy moderate who has a better chance of winning it, and who’d never support a Leftie like Coons (unless the only other viable choice was a far worse Leftie.) In light of this, ludicrously calling us RINOs only makes you like rabid French Rev-lutionaries who are eager for your next execution.

Your job, if you are willing to accept it, is to come up with an alternate explanation to ours, which is that we hold O’Donnell at arm’s length because we believe she is a bad nutter, and nothing more than that. As I said before, I think her lawsuit alone disqualifies her as a candidate to rally behind, and there are many more rotting corpses in her closet than that. Plain and simple, she SUCKS!

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 7:53 PM

Believing that human sexuality isn’t at least as much about pleasure as it is reproduction leads to all sorts of the goofiness which sprouts from sexual repression. I present Christine O’Donnell as a prime example of what I am saying.

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 6:40 PM

The consequences of human sexuality are often reproduction. That’s what mating is all about. Didn’t your mommy explain to you about consequences?

disa on September 16, 2010 at 7:54 PM

Bizarro, you are just being silly. Squishy moderates might as well be raging libs, if they sell out the greatness of America.

When people have been fed lies all of their lives, it’s not surprising that they come to alarming and irrational conclusions. Look at Barack Obama. If he weren’t so dangerous to himself and others, I’d feel sorry for him and Michelle. Sad, pathetic people.

disa on September 16, 2010 at 7:57 PM

Well, case in point from Rove Defender: Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 6:32 PM

Norwegian on September 16, 2010 at 6:59 PM

If you believe unrepetent liars and their verbally abusive defenders are deserving of ‘civility,’ please let me know why…

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 7:57 PM

If I’m wrong about this explanation, why don’t you go ahead and coherently prove it.

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 7:25 PM

I don’t know if you’re wrong or not. I don’t live in Delaware and haven’t followed this race.

I made no claims one way or another on O’Donnell as a candidate. I’m not in Delaware and can’t vote for or against her and haven’t bothered to research her (or Castle or Coons) as candidates.

What I said is that, if a person thinks that she’s so awful that it would be better to have a Democrat win than to have her win, it makes sense to continue criticizing her. If, on the other hand, the person’s concern is that she is not electable and that by beating Castle she cost the Republicans a senate seat (which is what many people here expressed), it didn’t make much sense to continue criticising her instead of focusing on Coons.

You clearly think it would be better to have Coons win than O’Donnell (I’m guessing this holds true even if electing her could provide the Reps with a senate majority), so, as stated previously, it makes sense that you would continue to criticize her.

JadeNYU on September 16, 2010 at 7:58 PM

Lawrence Talbot on September 16, 2010 at 7:04 PM

It’s the Ruling Class vs. the Country Class, as Angelo Codevilla has already pointed out. Those who feel that the masses are basically easy to manipulate, who really need to be managed.

disa on September 16, 2010 at 8:00 PM

Is the 2nd grade where you learn to imply that someone is a young child?

/I’m in the 3rd grade where you learn passive-aggressive questioning.

JadeNYU on September 16, 2010 at 7:21 PM

You’re sense of humor isn’t very good, as your sense of sin isn’t; if you want to enjoy life as much as I do, work on them, sister!

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 8:02 PM

You really are worried about your pet hobby becoming illegal, aren’t you.

fossten on September 16, 2010 at 7:39 PM

OMG, that was hilarious!

Do you believe God is going to let people who practice gay sex, or masturbate, fry in Hell for eternity because their sins of the flesh merit that much pain? If so, you’re nutty, like O’Donnell.

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 8:08 PM

Rove never fought the Dems this hard during the entire 2 Bush Administrations’ years of the Left’s unceasing attacks, baseless slanders, preposterous lies, facile demonization, war criminal harangues and total partisan lunacy, in general… a failure to fight which left a majority of the country thinking Bush was a liar and a jackass… which begat Obama upon us.

Does Rove just not like women?

Something’s odd about his over-reaction here.

profitsbeard on September 16, 2010 at 8:11 PM

The consequences of human sexuality are often reproduction. That’s what mating is all about. Didn’t your mommy explain to you about consequences?

disa on September 16, 2010 at 7:54 PM

Do you believe sexual pleasure is an evolutionary mechanism to ensure that species reproduce, or not? If not, what is the purpose of sexual pleasure in your world?

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 8:11 PM

Do you believe God is going to let people who practice gay sex, or masturbate, fry in Hell for eternity because their sins of the flesh merit that much pain? If so, you’re nutty, like O’Donnell.

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 8:08 PM

Everything suddenly makes complete sense. Now I understand why some people are willing to do the Democrat’s work for them when it comes to this woman.

And I thought only the Left was ruled by sex.

TheBigOldDog on September 16, 2010 at 8:16 PM

An apt name you chose for yourself.

disa on September 16, 2010 at 7:52 PM

This is the kind of trifling response I expect from people with too much pride to admit they can’t refute another’s position.

#1 rule of debate: separate your ego from your argument. I see you still haven’t implemented debate rule #1. Try it sometime – you’ll feel better once you do.

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 8:17 PM

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 8:02 PM

I don’t know much about you, but, from what I’ve seen on this thread, I can quite confidently posit that I would most likely NOT want to enjoy life the way you do.

I’m actually quite happy enjoying it in my own way.

Truth be told, neither your post nor my response was that witty. The difference, unfortunately, being that I seem to be aware of the lack of great comical genius in mine.

JadeNYU on September 16, 2010 at 8:22 PM

Bizarro, you are just being silly. Squishy moderates might as well be raging libs, if they sell out the greatness of America.

When people have been fed lies all of their lives, it’s not surprising that they come to alarming and irrational conclusions. Look at Barack Obama. If he weren’t so dangerous to himself and others, I’d feel sorry for him and Michelle. Sad, pathetic people.

disa on September 16, 2010 at 7:57 PM

I disagree with your simplistic, Black&White purity position that moderates might as well be raging libs; sometimes those squishy moderate Republican senators you revile have voted for and allowed us to get some pretty good Supreme Court justices that we probably wouldn’t have gotten otherwise.

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 8:26 PM

When someone so openly and vocally SLAMS the woman immediately after she had just won the primary, he was also slamming all those people that took the time to go to the polls and vote for her. This was no squeaker like the primary in Alaska either. O’Donnell kicked some butt.

Rove should have shown some maturity and spoke of what a loud message the election had sent across the country instead of pitching a tantrum. Sounded like a Democrat that should have been on Olbermann’s 3-Ring Circus.

joedoe on September 16, 2010 at 8:28 PM

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010

Man, you have some issues!

rebuzz on September 16, 2010 at 8:31 PM

I don’t know if you’re wrong or not. I don’t live in Delaware and haven’t followed this race.

I made no claims one way or another on O’Donnell as a candidate. I’m not in Delaware and can’t vote for or against her and haven’t bothered to research her (or Castle or Coons) as candidates.

What I said is that, if a person thinks that she’s so awful that it would be better to have a Democrat win than to have her win, it makes sense to continue criticizing her. If, on the other hand, the person’s concern is that she is not electable and that by beating Castle she cost the Republicans a senate seat (which is what many people here expressed), it didn’t make much sense to continue criticising her instead of focusing on Coons.

You clearly think it would be better to have Coons win than O’Donnell (I’m guessing this holds true even if electing her could provide the Reps with a senate majority), so, as stated previously, it makes sense that you would continue to criticize her.

JadeNYU on September 16, 2010 at 7:58 PM

This is the problem with you insane, arrogant freaks who support O’Donnell (I don’t believe all O’Donnell supporters are insane, arrogant freaks, just for the record.) You presume to speak for people like me w/o bothering to inquire as to what I do actually think. You have created a straw man; I want O’Donnell to win, as much as I despise her. Unlike you however, I don’t believe in sugar-coating the truth about her just because she represents the Right.

People like you are more concerned with finding fault in others rather than taking the time to make sure you understand them instead before you attack them. You are reckless, and too egotistical to admit it.

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 8:37 PM

Everything suddenly makes complete sense. Now I understand why some people are willing to do the Democrat’s work for them when it comes to this woman.

And I thought only the Left was ruled by sex.

TheBigOldDog on September 16, 2010 at 8:16 PM

Another arrogant moron who blindly supports the nutcase O’Donnell speaks up!

I won’t bother enlightening you about me because it’s more entertaining for me to watch you believe you’re right about me based on nothing more than your own unexamined premises than it would be to converse with you as though you were an adult!

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 8:41 PM

I don’t know much about you, but, from what I’ve seen on this thread, I can quite confidently posit that I would most likely NOT want to enjoy life the way you do.

I’m actually quite happy enjoying it in my own way.

Truth be told, neither your post nor my response was that witty. The difference, unfortunately, being that I seem to be aware of the lack of great comical genius in mine.

JadeNYU on September 16, 2010 at 8:22 PM

Wow – someone with a bad sense of humor tells me I’m not funny. I’m crushed! Next thing I’ll hear is that Stephen Colbert is some kind of comedic genius funnier than Greg Gutfeld!

Just as woman in burkas believe they enjoy life just fine, you do, too. That’s great, isn’t it? :)

Your view of God is closer to a Muslim’s than it is to mine.
People who believe that masturbation might be sinful can’t possibly enjoy life more than someone like me who doesn’t worry about matters as frivilous as how someone chooses to get her/his sexual jollies.

Watch out – if you sin too much, God will spank you, and send you to bed w/o any supper! Then, He’ll send you to Hell for eternity because you touched yourself in a naughty place!

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 8:52 PM

So the wonderful selection in DE has boiled down to:

1) A nut

2) A pet

Mind you that is using the very worst characterization of a politician by those that don’t like her and the very best characterization by a close friend of the other.

November will be so much FUN!!

Popcorn! More popcorn, please!!

ajacksonian on September 16, 2010 at 8:53 PM

Man, you have some issues!

rebuzz on September 16, 2010 at 8:31 PM

I do?! What are they, know-it-all?

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 8:54 PM

Rove and DE GOP chair Ross will likely both be featured in Coons ads against O’Donnell. and they both knew it before opening their yaps.

I don’t care what he’s done for other candidates, he’s helping sabotage mine.

“But honey, I bought you the Lexus and the beach house, how can you hate me now just for boinking your sister?”

Akzed on September 16, 2010 at 9:14 PM

So sorry to bother you with an argument you can’t counter without an ad hominem. I forgot your troubles with that. MadisonConservative on September 16, 2010 at 6:54 PM

He said you don’t understand his post, and wonders if it’s for lack of brainpower or honesty. He’s just concerned about your mental state, as many of us are.

Akzed on September 16, 2010 at 9:19 PM

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010

Im not sure if you have already stated it in detail or not, but what exactly is it that you know about O’Donnell that makes her such a sex freak? I have only been following the race marginally and haven’t heard that accusation leveled at her.

NeverLiberal on September 16, 2010 at 10:10 PM

According to Opensecrets.org SarahPAC hasn’t donated anything to Christine. The only PAC listed as a donor is Ideological.

ButterflyDragon on September 16, 2010 at 4:53 PM

Very belatedly: thanks.

Y-not on September 16, 2010 at 10:12 PM

I just want all of O’Donnell’s supporters to proclaim what she has- if you were in Europe in WWII, you would turn in hiding Jews to the Nazis.

If your candidate is so wise and is definitely NOT a lunatic, join her in her call to expose the Jews! Send them to the death camps with her! Come on, folks, stand behind your gal.

TheBlueSite on September 16, 2010 at 10:31 PM

Well, this is just an opinion from one old lady in PA, been around the block more than once, and have learned to trust my instincts a lot more than I did 50 years ago. Rove was wrong in what he did, no doubt, but the same instincts that would have had me working for Rubio months ago if I lived in Florida, or Miller if I lived in Alaska, or many other tea party supported candidates around the country, make me wince whenever I see O’Donnell on the tube. Maybe she’ll get better, maybe she’ll get herself some handlers who will help her brush up on her use of the English language, but right now I wouldn’t give her a bat’s chance in hell in a debate with Coons. That being said, would I vote for her if I lived in Delaware? You betcha.

oldoldbabs on September 16, 2010 at 10:43 PM

I no longer live in DE – my mom still does – but DE voters are going to have to choose between the lesser of two evils here. And honestly, as much as I don’t like O’Donnell, she’s not as bad as Coons. As I said on the last page, he’s not a popular man to work for, and he won’t be good for the state nor the country. I think more effort should be made towards getting the info out about Coons than hand-wringing over O’Donnell – she’s not the best, but better than Coons and Castle.

Still, makes me glad I live in the next state over. :|

Anna on September 16, 2010 at 10:47 PM

People like you are more concerned with finding fault in others rather than taking the time to make sure you understand them instead before you attack them. You are reckless, and too egotistical to admit it.

that’s what they call projection,

chasdal on September 16, 2010 at 11:27 PM

Another arrogant moron who blindly supports the nutcase O’Donnell speaks up!

I won’t bother enlightening you about me because it’s more entertaining for me to watch you believe you’re right about me based on nothing more than your own unexamined premises than it would be to converse with you as though you were an adult!

Bizarro No. 1 on September 16, 2010 at 8:41 PM

QED

TheBigOldDog on September 17, 2010 at 12:55 AM

Rove is a Bush Family consiglierie. Therfore, what Rove does will always be aimed at stopping Palin’s momentum for 2012. Beyond that role he will never make any sense to today’s Tea Party movement.

jimw on September 17, 2010 at 2:41 AM

Limbaugh didn’t support Bush. He supported Bush over Kerry. There is a HUGE difference.Same with McCain. Rove was the progressive agenda behind Bush. He is pissing his pants at the thought of a conservative takeover because he knows that leaves him out!

Redglen on September 17, 2010 at 11:52 AM

Rove has a double standard for tea-party women, why is he spending boatloads of cash to help someone who, until 48 hours ago, was the most famous woman tea-party candidate in America?

Because her opponent is a roadblock to his party’s return to establishment power. He is using her, like other TEA Party members, to further Republican establishment power. He, like all the establishments, only want power.

Nice strawman argument though, AP.

dominigan on September 17, 2010 at 12:35 PM

…but then I doubt that most of the people ripping him to shreds now are aggrieved about his timing rather than the fact that he criticized her at all.

Based on… what research exactly? Your infamous tea leaves that you spread about and then re-arrange to your liking?

Trust me (hey, you said it, so why can’t I)… it was not only when Rove trashed O’Donnell that is at issue, but also what he actually said. Not the words of an “analyst” but the words of a pissed off partisan. Fine. He can be a pissed off partisan, but he can’t have it both ways.

Had he offered some cogent, reasoned analysis after the primary while offering the candidate best wishes on the side, in his “party operative” mode, this piece would not be up on this blog or anywhere else.

So, yes, it has a lot to do with what he said… AND when he said it.

I guess we’d have to conduct an actual (scientifically valid) poll of “most people” to find out, ultimately, which of us is right so, for now, I’ll keep my own counsel, thanks.

IndieDogg on September 17, 2010 at 1:13 PM

Those aren’t Cocoa Puffs all over her body, that she told you she pasted on herself – they are really BIG W-A-R-T-S. OPEN YOUR EYES.

If you believe God considers masturbation is a sin, God is either the pettiest anal-retentive creature in the universe, or your dogma is retarded. What’s your pick?

Hoy crap. At least she isnt as bad as Castle who voted against the surge in Iraq. Id take some one who opposes your right to spank the mokey rather than some one who think “this war is lost” and the liberation of Iraq isnt worth it anyday.

Those arnt cocoa puffs on Castle, those are love bites he got while in a big faggy three way with Obama, Harry Reid and Barney Frank.

sheikh of thornton on September 17, 2010 at 2:08 PM

It is important to remember that while Rove may be spending millions those aren’t his millions any more than Zero’s stimulus spending came from his personal checking account. He’ll have fun, fun, fun ’til the credit card gets taken away.

Rove’s recent loose tongue probably has cost a bundle needlessly too although his attacks on O”Donnell seem to have worked to her advantage rather than against her.

viking01 on September 17, 2010 at 2:22 PM

Im not sure if you have already stated it in detail or not, but what exactly is it that you know about O’Donnell that makes her such a sex freak? I have only been following the race marginally and haven’t heard that accusation leveled at her.

NeverLiberal on September 16, 2010 at 10:10 PM

There are some choice quotes here: The S.A.L.T.

O’Donnell: The Bible says that lust in your heart is committing adultery. So you can’t masturbate without lust.

O’Donnell: The reason that you don’t tell them that masturbation is the answer to AIDS and all these other problems that come with sex outside of marriage is because again it is not addressing the issue. You’re just gonna create somebody who is, I was gonna say, toying with his sexuality. Pardon the pun but-

That group was freaky. Nobody normal obsesses about the sex life of others; only neurotics who are sexually repressed do.

Bizarro No. 1 on September 18, 2010 at 6:46 AM

that’s what they call projection,

chasdal on September 16, 2010 at 11:27 PM

No, it wasn’t. I am not a projector. If you believe I’m wrong, go ahead and try to prove it. Otherwise you look like a passive-aggressive, hit & run poster.

I will admit sometimes I am careless and too harsh, which I work at changing. I went back and look at what I said in this thread, and 2 corrections I need to make are:

1) I said, “anyone who believes masturbation is a sin is a MORON, as well as a freak of nature.” However, that didn’t accurately reflect my opinion. This is what I should have said: anyone who believes masturbation is a sin is acting freakishly and moronically

2) To JadeNYU, I said, “This is the problem with you insane, arrogant freaks who support O’Donnell…” I should have said instead, “Your problem is that you are being presumptive…”

I apologize for my errors.

Bizarro No. 1 on September 18, 2010 at 7:05 AM

QED

TheBigOldDog on September 17, 2010 at 12:55 AM

You made an incredibly bad inference about me from what I said about sex, and looking at your other posts, I can’t see a reason to correct you because I don’t believe you’d accept my explanation as the truth, and I never feel like defending myself anyways.

As I said before, watching people like push your own buttons w/o realizing it is more enjoyable to me than talking to you as though you’d be genuinely interested in what I’d have to say! :)

Bizarro No. 1 on September 18, 2010 at 7:13 AM

Hoy crap. At least she isnt as bad as Castle who voted against the surge in Iraq. Id take some one who opposes your right to spank the mokey rather than some one who think “this war is lost” and the liberation of Iraq isnt worth it anyday.

Those arnt cocoa puffs on Castle, those are love bites he got while in a big faggy three way with Obama, Harry Reid and Barney Frank.

sheikh of thornton on September 17, 2010 at 2:08 PM

Making excuses for/defending a nut like O’Donnell by talking about Castle’s flaws instead makes you look nutty, too. Her numerous mental and character flaws still exist, whether Castle is mentioned or not; you just don’t want to talk about them. Don’t feel bad, though. There are a lot of intellectual dishonest partisans like you around on both sides of the political fence!

Bizarro No. 1 on September 18, 2010 at 7:20 AM

Regardless of Rove’s good deeds, he was wrong to attack O’Donnell. He deserves the beat down he’s been getting. Anyone who was a Presidential confidant to one of the Bushes IS part of the establishment. You can’t get more establishment than the Bush family. 51 Senate seats uber alles is not a justification for attacking O’Donnell after she had won. You win some, you lose some. Politics ain’t bean bag. Get over Karl, Charles and AP. Maybe you NE/establishment types should secede. We’ll let y’all go. In closing, remember that Commandments trump rules and Reagan’s 11th Commandment trumps Buckley’s rule. Shut up Karl. Eventually people will forgive, but not now.

JimP on September 18, 2010 at 10:25 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4