-
Peter Wehner Responds
June 19, 2013 | 4 comments
-
Cummings Accused of Subverting IRS Investigation
June 19, 2013 | 4 comments
-
Gerson, Wehner, and the Losing Old Ways Crowd
June 18, 2013 | 18 comments
-
Hannity: Secure the Border First
June 17, 2013 | 6 comments
-
Charles Krauthammer and The Limbaugh Theorem
June 14, 2013 | 27 comments
The Spectacle Blog
William Proxmire, the late Democratic Senator from Wisconsin, was a smart guy. Born and raised in a well-to do family in Illinois, he moved to New York to do the finance thing. He married a Rockefeller for a while.
But Bill Proxmire wanted a political career. So he took out a map of America and finally settled on Wisconsin as the place he would make his political fortune. Arriving, he was shortly elected to the state legislature. Then things became interesting.
He ran for governor. And lost. He ran for governor a second time. And lost. He ran for governor a third time. He lost.
By now the political sophisticates thought they had Proxmire pegged. He was a loser, and they branded him as such. But a funny thing happened next.
With the death of the famous GOP Senator Joe McCarthy, there was suddenly a special election to fill McCarthy’s Senate seat. Proxmire jumped into the race against a popular governor. The “loser” charge was instantly on everyone’s lips.
Proxmire would have none of it. Instead, in the fight of his life against the state’s political establishment, Proxmire turned the tables. He admitted that, yes: he had lost three races for governor. He was trying again. But there was no shame in losing, he said, because most average Wisconsites had lost at something, and they could identify with him. He wanted the votes of every Wisconsin voter who had lost in love or in a sport or lost a job or lost a parent or a child or anything or anyone they cared about. And his opponent could have all the voters who had won at everything they tried.
In a stunning upset, Wisconsin voters went with Proxmire. He was a highly popular senator for 32 years
The story comes to mind as Christine O’Donnell’s campaign for the United States Senate unfolds in Delaware. Her critics are pointing to supposed O’Donnell “problems” with a mortgage, taxes, the IRS and rent.
Meanwhile, opponent Mike Castle, currently the Congressman, once the governor, before that the lieutenant governor, and now the state party establishment’s favorite for the Republican nomination, has, presumably, cruised through life having none of these problems.
So in the style of William Proxmire, let’s pose the question. If Christine O’Donnell were to get the votes of every voter in Delaware who has had a mortgage, rent, or tax problem — and Mike Castle has had zero experience with this and wants the votes of those who have never had any of these problems: who is more in tune with the everyday problems of ordinary Delaware voters?
Is it perhaps worth connecting the dots? That somebody who has no experience with this, who is unenthusiastic about repealing ObamaCare but supports Cap and Trade is part of the reason the rest of the American people are having mortgage, tax, and rent problems in the first place?
William Proxmire had this game figured out once. One suspects the O’Donnell campaign may be getting it as well — which is what accounts for the flurry of “negative” O’Donnell stories. Are they really “negative”? Or are they an indication that one candidate lives the average life up-close-and personal, and the other is clueless?
Just asking.
View all comments (38) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Jeffrey Lord
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/09/07/christine-odonnells-proxmire-a
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Sweet Home, Alabama
- His Reach Exceeded His Grasp
- The Lehrman Standard
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Martin| 9.7.10 @ 5:55PM
Proxmire had a Yale degree, Harvard MBA and Harvard MPA, plus a war record in military intelligence. I'm only mildly an intellectual or career snob -- I like Palin and happily tolerate Angle -- but at some point a senatorial candidate becomes unqualified. Ms O'Donnell is beyond that point. I support most Tea Party candidates over most establishment types and almost all RINOS, but there are limits. She's very unlikely to win in November, and would almost certainly be an embarrassment if she did.
Jeffrey Lord| 9.7.10 @ 6:22PM
Martin..
"Proxmire had a Yale degree, Harvard MBA and Harvard MPA, plus a war record in military intelligence."
And so? So did George W. Bush have the first 2...and he, according to the American left, is dumb as a post. Get thee to the nearest copy of The Ruling Class by Angelo Codevilla. Just out.
Obama went to Harvard Law. And here we are in all this trouble. Ronald Reagan went to Eureka and won the Cold War, as Margaret Thatcher said, without firing a shot.
Come to the Country Class, Marvin. You'll be fine. Promise. I left the Ruling Class and lived to talk about it!
NotDelusional| 9.7.10 @ 6:00PM
I guess what the GOP needs to do is nominate more flaky deadbeats like O'Donnell, huh? What brilliant insight we get from American Spectator.
I'd be glad to have O'Donnell's vote in Congress, but anyone who thinks she has a prayer of winning the general is delusional. If you just want to stop Castle, fine, but don't pretend she's a credible candidate in a state like Delaware. You just make yourself sound like a member of the Kool-Aid Party.
Jeffrey Lord| 9.7.10 @ 6:24PM
NotDelusional....
"...GOP needs to do is nominate more flaky deadbeats "
As opposed to lifers on the public dime? Nothing flaky there?
Terry| 9.8.10 @ 1:46PM
Well Said!!!!
cold hard truth| 9.7.10 @ 11:01PM
we are better off with the democrat winning and castle purged from the party. this must become a conservative party.
the hard truth is that the democrats will have to defend 25 out of 33 seats in 2012...a guaranteed loss of 6-10 more seats...
we may as well cleanse ourselves of the rinos who would drag us down and blur the distinction between the parties. 2010 is just the beginning, 2012 will be another tsunami and we will have all 3 houses plus a clear conservative mandate.
MacAoidh | 9.7.10 @ 11:23PM
Agree completely. Castle voted against Bill Cassidy's amendment which would have ended Obama's offshore drilling moratorium; having him lose and his career put to pasture is a worthy end in and of itself.
Trends are strongly enough Republican that if we resist the urge to embrace awful candidates like Castle who dilute and poison the party's brand - Castle is NOT a Scott Brown or Chris Christie by any means - we will capture a working majority in the Senate to go with the one we will have in the House, and have a Republican president to boot, by January 2013.
Conservatism works every time it's tried. It would be nice if Republicans tried it. Losing a race in Delaware isn't the worst thing in the world; in fact, it's not worse than having Fifth Column activities within your own caucus.
tonypal| 9.7.10 @ 11:27PM
There's much in your post that makes sense. I was torn on the idea of winning back the senate this go around. One can see how senate republicans, acting as a strong minority with 48 votes could cause Obama much trouble while making a plausible case that their minority status makes them essentially impotent. Leave it to the House to conduct the investigations. Fewer parliamentary procedures and much more aggressive conservatives.
On the other hand, Obama has two more years to mess around with the courts. His longest lasting legacy is likely to be the placement of tenured radicals in positions of great power, especially on the courts. We will need every possible vote to deal with that.
Besides, Obama's blaming it all on republicans right now, so who cares if he tries to triangulate over the next two years. The American people are onto Obama and aren't buying the line that Bush and the republicans are to blame. One of Obama's many problems is that since he's used this tired excuse one too many times, going forward it has all the impact of calling a republican racist. Republicans no longer care about the name calling; they're too pissed off.
You're absolutely right about 2012 and the number of democrats up for re-election. How about we get our own filibuster proof senate. So the more the merrier. Having said that, I'm all for Rinos like Castle going down, even if it costs us a seat. We'll make up for it elsewhere or down the road in '12.
Nick| 9.7.10 @ 6:18PM
"She can't win!"
This is what we were told about Scott Brown last winter.
This is what was said about Marco Rubio last year.
This is what was said about Pat Toomey in '04.
Ronald Reagan supporters were told, "He can't win," in 1980.
There is no such thing as "they can't win."
Not to mention that Caslte is 71, has been on the public dole for a total of 40 years, is for Cap-n-Tax, has voted against the American right to keep and bear arms, and won't vote to repeal O'BamaCare.
The choice is clear.
Michael | 9.7.10 @ 6:33PM
Stupid, meaningless article. Christine is going to lose because she is a loon and because she would lose the general. Simple as that.
Nick| 9.7.10 @ 6:37PM
Only liberals think she is a "loon."
Lullabys, Legends and Lies| 9.7.10 @ 7:52PM
Hey Nick: What the worst case scenario's here? Next week, Castle wins the primary and we're stuck with a RINO for the general election. Or next week, O'Donnell beats Castle, and then she loses in the General Election, and we're stuck with a Democrat for the next six years instead. Castle acts, and votes like a Democrat anyway, so what's the difference? I'll take my chances on this "loon" long-shot, because the other choices, are just Liberals anyway (Democrat or Republican). Plus on top of that, she's pretty cute too, and I've already sent her my contribution, so I'm not getting it back anyway. This is the year of the outsider, the long-shot, the Tea Party Candidate, so I'm not worried about her, I think Delaware is going to come out for her in the end, even if she is a "loon" So let's go Looney Christine!!
Nick| 9.7.10 @ 8:15PM
LLL,
I agree. Especially about Miss O'Donnell being easy on the eyes!
I'm more worried about another political hack, like Castle, whose been on the public dole for a total of 40 years, getting into the Senate, than anything else.
It is the entrenched power in D.C. that is as big a danger as liberals having control of the Congress and the Presidency.
When they have been in the same office for more than 10-12 years, it is time to move on. Now is the time for We the People to enact our own version of TERM-LIMITS!
Ken (Old Texican)| 9.8.10 @ 9:17AM
Nick
LLL
I just did a remarkable thing. I actually went to Christine's senate run web-site and did a little research.
I like her. I like her resume' and I REALLY like her endorsers; her references if you will.
I'm going to support her , even though the idiots in Delaware don't deserve her.
I recognized her immediately of course from FOX segments.
Sam| 10.21.10 @ 4:05PM
Karl Rove said her ideas are "nutty".
ds80| 9.7.10 @ 9:28PM
Good evening to you, RINO Mike (and I believe I am being quite generous).
No Name Caller| 9.8.10 @ 8:54AM
She's a loon? Only libs resort to name calling. Why is that? Michael must know the libs are on the ropes and has nowhere else to turn but toward name calling.
JJ Brannon | 9.18.10 @ 4:17PM
Yes, but a loon can win in a lackadaisical Primary by a small margin of votes [3500] where she'd be trashed in the General of a Deep Blue State.
JJB
Jerry| 9.7.10 @ 7:52PM
Nick,
I'm a diehard GOP conservative. But I agree with Michael that Christine a loon. She comes across as an absolute fruitcake who has no idea what she is doing. Am not sure I have ever seen a more unserious candidate. As a Republican I am embarrassed by her and the support she is getting here and elsewhere.
Comparing her to Pat Toomey, Marco Rubio, or Scott Brown is absurd. Unlike Christine, these guys have impressive accomplishments and come across as serious, credible candidates.
Nick| 9.7.10 @ 8:08PM
Jerry,
I'm sorry, but with all due respect, you sound like you work for the Castle campaign.
I've been watching Miss O'Donnell on political shows since the mid-to-late 90's, when she used to be a regular on shows like "Politically Incorrect" and "Hannity and Colmes." She wasn't a loon back then. She smacked mealy mouthed liberals around with her solid Christian conservative arguments.
You obviously know nothing about her, except what you have read, which are lies. Try doing some more research on her, you will see that I'm telling the truth.
beboper| 9.7.10 @ 8:41PM
Nick,
The castle support comes from those who stupidly believe an R at any price is worthy of support, RINO or not. The former sell out and vote against the party when their support is needed the most. This is Castle and he would be so much more destructive to conservatives in the Senate than he ever was in the House.
The Castle support has a lot of opinions - the O'Donnell support puts its money where its mouth is - like the Tea Party Express.
As conservatives, we realize that it's better to stand and lose with Christine than be sickened by a Specter surrogate like Castle.
Getting rid of Castle would be its own reward.
Nick| 9.7.10 @ 11:11PM
Excellent post, Beboper.
I couldn't agree more.
fruitcake?| 9.7.10 @ 11:04PM
the democrats have debbie dumass stabenow in the senate...christine can stand next to her and look like a female einstein...
Texas Mom 2010| 9.8.10 @ 11:01AM
REALLY? You haven't seen a more 'unserious' candidate? How about Al Green? The truth is that many Americans are tired of 'smooth' career politicians and would prefer to have someone they could trust even if they were not always the best speaker.
Cincinnatus| 9.7.10 @ 9:05PM
Mike Castle, if elected, will be a reliable vote FOR Cap & Tax. We would not vote to repeal or defund ObamaCare. He co-sponsored the DISCLOSE Act that would abridge the 1st Amendment by banning candidate specific ads prior to elections by grass roots organizations but leave Unions untouched. Castle's liberal voting record speaks for itself.
The Republican Establishment fears O'Donnell because it knows it can't control her. Why else they assist in the bashing of another Republican over her mortgage issues despite published evidence to the contrary that there was never a foreclosure.
And what's all this about all the MBA ,PhD's & loads of government required to be in the House of Senate. For what?? To be as smart as Harry Reid, Chris Dodd or Barney Frank??? How many degrees does it take to shred the Constitution or bankrupt the counrty? Seems to me that the folks with the alphabet soup after their names are the ones screwing up everything.
Liberty is priceless & Castle has already shown his contempt for it. Delaware, the choice is simple. Liberty or Tyranny. O'Donnell who will stand up for Liberty or Castle who has voted for Tyranny i.e. Cap & Tax, DISCLOSE Act, TARP, multiple bailouts, etc, etc, etc. Castle's 40 years on the public teet is long enough.
The votes of the Democrat Coons would be indistinguishable from Castle. Happy with the way things are?? Vote Castle. Want a return to the American principles of limited government, individual liberty, sound money & economics? Vote O'Donnell.
O'Donnell is a nut| 9.7.10 @ 9:30PM
Can we please dispense with the asinine "Coons and Castle are the same" nonsense. National Review did an analysis of Coons's and Castle's positions and voting records. Castle votes with conservatives 52% of the time, whereas Coons is rated as having voted in a conservative fashion a whopping 12% of the time. Castle voted against the stimulus and Obamacare. Arguments that Coons and Castle are interchangable are quite simply not to be taken seriously.
O'Donnell is a nut| 9.7.10 @ 9:27PM
You have got to be kidding me. Now unemployment and using campaign funds to pay the rent are being put forth as positives for a candidate? The logic that is now being used to continue the support of the O'Donnnell campaign, despite her huge negatives (marks against her that can't be explained away by simply putting the word problems in scare quotes) has gone from the realm of completely asinine to absolutely surreal. What is the next argument going to be? That a double-digit deficit in the polls less than 60 days before the election is actually a good thing? If a body was found in the trunk of her car, I believe some people here would try to argue that it was a net positive for her campaign.
The above blog post is quite simply one of the most ludicrous I have ever read. O'Donnell is the Republican Party version of Alvin Greene, a shockingly unserious and unqualified candidate that is an embarrassment to the party.
Nick| 9.7.10 @ 11:20PM
Haven't you ever heard of Ronald Reagan's 11th commandment? You are treating Miss O'Donnell with the contempt that should only be used against liberals, like Castle.
Aren't you aware that Mike Castle voted multiple times against the 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms?
You are either a liberal troll, or one of Castle's paid political hacks. Go write your libel somewhere else.
Kenneth E. MacAlister Jr.| 9.7.10 @ 9:42PM
Save your breath Cincinnatus. Most Republican voters are making it clear a majority of Republicans in Congress, even if they are RINOs is more important than putting a conservative majority in Congress. Also these people will be the FIRST ones yelling & saying "Never again" when the RINOs sell out the Party & vote for more Leftwing Democrat rubbish in the future. Pathetic!
Charles A Vanvelzor| 9.7.10 @ 11:16PM
52 % just doesen't cut it!!!!!!!!!!!
Yosemeti Sam| 9.8.10 @ 12:58AM
Um, about this Christine O'Donnell.
Q: was she ever a community organizer?
NO?
Well then - she is one up on this vagabond politico in the Peoples' White House.
What other creds do she need!
Castles are for tourist attractions - not for the Senate!
russel| 9.8.10 @ 10:06AM
It's time to dismantle the good-ol-boy network , and Castle is a prime example of going along to get along . A RINO serves themself . He's been there far too long ; time for fresh blood .
albert constantine, jr| 9.8.10 @ 10:42AM
A bit of Delaware electoral history: the Senate seat for which Castle and O'Donnell are vying has been in Democratic hands since 1972. In that election, 29 year old upstart Joe Biden defeated incumbent Sen. Hale Boggs (I had met Biden previously while he was campaigning door to door for the New Castle County President's race, and my negative assessment of his character has changed little in 40 years). In a major upset, Biden won, and in the 38 years since, the seat has voted to confirm every leftist federal judge, and been on the wrong side of just about every foreign policy initiative designed to protect America (google Biden and high tech bullies, or consult his 091101 Op-Ed that the US doesn't need a missile shield). For those who are of a conspiratorial mindset, check out Charles Brandt's book about Teamster's Union professional killer Frank Sheeran (" I Hear You Paint Houses") and see what help Brandt says the late Sheeran told him he provided in order to assist Biden in that 1972 election. I do believe as much as I might at times despise Castle, he would be a little better than Biden. That being said, on 091410, when I cast my vote in the Delaware Republican primary, it will be for O'Donnell.
Chris Corbett| 9.8.10 @ 2:25PM
I haven't known what to think about this race, so after reading this did some online research, youtube, etc. My conclusions:
1. Yeah, O'Donnell has flaws, but nothing outrageous. Probably nothing that exceeds those of a large ratio of current "respectable" GOP politicians, who are more deft at hiding their skeletons. So I have no ethical qualms about voting for her.
2. She is extremely--extremely--informed and articulate about the mission-critical principles that must guide our nation and economy.
3. Castle is an embarrassment and a disaster. At 71, he's not only a RINO, but a dinosaur of Rockefeller Republicanism. Many have said that O'Donnell is simply too whacko to vote for, but Castle seems simply too liberal to vote for.
4. Previous posters make a good point that Castle is expendable this year, even if O'Donnell loses the general. I think this makes sense. Let's get rid of Castle while we can, and who knows, maybe O'Donnell will pull it off in November.
Bottom line, I'll send money to O'Donnell. She's a patriot; Castle has screwed the country one too many times.
John Barry | 9.8.10 @ 4:44PM
Christine O'Donnell is a true conservative. America needs straight talking conservatives now.
America has had its fill of liberals who will bankrupt the country sooner than many people realise.
The real loons are the liberals who spend and spend. Out with liberalism. Out with half baked conservatives. In with true conservatives like O'Donnell who will tackle the deficit.
Ed| 9.11.10 @ 10:34PM
These "O'Donnell is a loon" posts are sickening. As a senator, will she vote as a constitutionalist and a staunch conservative? Yes, she will. That means she gets my support.
She is the only one in this race who strikes me as having day-to-day common sense. Just listen to her speak for God's sake. That's not a "loon". That's someone who might be my relative, or my next-door neighbor. Screw all of you who never had trouble paying a bill at some point in your life. O'Donnell is the candidate most worthy of our support.
levotb| 9.13.10 @ 12:39PM
I'm an Indy Con and cannot support O'Donnell as she refuses to disclose her position on illegal immigration which is very suspect. I mean, it's a no brainer to be against Amnesty, for the fence and for attrition thru enforcement (not to mention for E-verify being mandatory, for expansion of the 287.g program that cities are screaming for), etc. Others here are defending O'Donnell as "a true Conserative" but if she were truly a Conservative, she'd be outspoken on this very important issue. Delaware has a terrible illegal alien problem being a liberal-controlled state.
I'm certainly NOT for the GOP Machine candidate but I'm not supporting O'Donnell until she states her position on this very important issue. What's she afraid of, anyway? Losing the Hispanic vote which goes to the Dems by big margins every time? Is Rove running her campaign (just kidding)?