-
A Long Record of Obamite Thuggery
May 16, 2013 | 3 comments
-
DeMint Supports Defense
May 14, 2013 | 5 comments
-
Update on Tom Perez
May 14, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Tiger Woods Sinks Lower
May 12, 2013 | 20 comments
-
I Ask Anurima Bhargava for a Date
May 10, 2013 | 8 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Jeff, in response to your play on my play on the idea of classiness: For the record, I think there is almost nothing classy about Nancy Pelosi and nothing classy about Barack Obama. And I absolutely do take offense at the idea that every battle between moderates and conservatives, ESPECIALLY this battle, is about “ruling class” vs. “country class.” I totally agree with Angelo Codevilla’s thesis, but it’s just plain silly to pretend that every battle is a battle that fits within that construct. And to put that construct on it is to say that the only or even main reason to fail to support O’Donnell is a desire to be of the “ruling class” or a secret mindset that is in concert with that class. As somebody who has spent a career doing just the opposite, I resent that, even if no offense was meant.
Furthermore, Jeffrey doesn’t address my arguments about character, and about suing our friends at ISI. Nor does he even attempt to give any credit to other arguments that could possibly be reasonable. Such as: the idea that winnability IS important in an election where a Senate majority hangs in the balance, for very conservative reasons. Subpoena power, for one. Does Jeff not care that his pet issue (for which he deserves great credit for bringing to light) of the job offers to Sestak and Romanoff could be brought into a hearing under oath if the GOP holds a majority with Castle but doesn’t hold a majority without Castle? What about judges? A majority could mean the difference between several awful nominees getting through and not getting through. And so on.
Finally, what about the idea that if O’Donnell continues to say and do bizarre things, she can effectively become the media poster child to “prove” just how nutty those GOP conservatives are, and thus discredit conservative GOPers across the board?
These are real concens that have nothing to do with whether someone has the views of the ruling class or the country class. They are concerns with profound implications for conservatives. And they are reason enough to stop putting labels on those who disagree. I don’t mind the disagreements; I mind the labels. And they damn well ought to stop.
View all comments (80) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Quin Hillyer
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/09/13/nope-jeffrey
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Downton’s Class System — and Ours
- Obama’s Drone War
- Peace in Our Times
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
Margie| 9.13.10 @ 9:16PM
I too would like to put in my petition to stop being called a serial traitor to conservatism by one, Tim*.
Thank you.
Occam's Tool| 9.13.10 @ 9:51PM
Tim*, if I recall, hates the Jooos, Margie, whereas you support all things good, including Israel. Tim* is unfit to buy your personal hygeine products, ma'am.
Margie| 9.13.10 @ 10:04PM
Thank you, sir. Coming from a man with real class, that means a lot to me.
Tim*| 9.13.10 @ 10:16PM
You're about as irrelevant , as your comment Tool Job .
ds80| 9.13.10 @ 10:59PM
All you need to do now, Tim*, is stick out your tongue and the picture will be complete. Can you stop acting like a 5th grade crybaby?
Tim*| 9.13.10 @ 11:04PM
That's really stupid advice .
You must be a 4th grader , Sport .
Walt Gilbert | 9.13.10 @ 9:28PM
I've had serious disagreements with Mr. Hillyer in the past -- particularly where McCain and Hayworth were concerned. But, he's dead right on this one. And, oddly enough, it was the all the labeling that pushed me into the McCain camp in late 2007.
Look ... you can't go around calling everyone who disagrees with you a RINO and then feign dismay when people accuse you of labeling others as traitors to the conservative cause.
Jim| 9.13.10 @ 9:44PM
I like all the parties engaged in this dispute and respect their various arguments and positions. In the end, do I want to spend the next six years reading/watching depressing news stories about how Castle, Snowe, and Collins have formed some awful "coalition" to stab conservative positions and principles in the back? NO WAY!
Siegfried X| 9.13.10 @ 9:50PM
Would you also vote for Democrats in the general election for the same reasons you give for voting for moderate Republicans during the primaries?
That's the point, that a lot of us consider RINOs to be Democrats, so we vote against all of them, all the time. The Republican label is meaningless because there is no party discipline. So I really don't care less which party has a majority. The only thing that matters to me is how many conservatives there are.
So just as I would vote for a flawed conservative Republican rather than a Democratic saint, I would vote for a flawed conservative Republican rather than a RINO saint.
No good can ever come out of voting for someone besides a conservative. If everyone would vote for ONLY conservatives, we could have a conservative congress in ONE election, and the entire congress could be conservative in 3 elections. But because people are hypnotized into the partisan trap, they keep voting for non-conservatives.
Occam's Tool| 9.13.10 @ 9:53PM
I would prefer to have a rascal that votes correctly than a Saint who raises my taxes.
"America has no native criminal class, except for Congress." Mark Twain
Tim*| 9.13.10 @ 10:23PM
We Tea Party Rebels have supported and financed Christine O'Donnell's Campaign and tomorrow Delawarean Republicans get to vote in a closed primary .
The Castle RINO-CINO Apologists tried to tap dance away from and hide Castle 's RINO-CINO Record , but We Tea Party Rebels dropped a Moneybomb on The Campaign and tomorrow we get to see the results .
The Tea Party Rebellion Escalates .
Rise Up !
PCC| 9.13.10 @ 10:58PM
If one follows Buckley's dictum to support the most conservative candidate who can win in the general, then Castle's your man, however objectionable one finds some of his positions.
Those who support O'Donnell in the primary despite the very real risk of gifting the seat to the Democrats in the general are not serious about stopping the Obama/Pelosi/Reid agenda.
They just want to polish their consciences and shoot spitballs from the corner.
Seriously?| 9.14.10 @ 9:46AM
If we have learned one thing it should be that electing RINOs doesn't work. If we keep on this same path it will just be the same cycle. People elect republicans (they fail), people elect democrats (they fail), people elect republicans power (they fail), etc... Where does it stop?
I say give people a clear choice in the general election: the Conservatives or the Progressives. In this unusual political environment, I believe even a less than perfect Conservative candidate can win in a blue state.
Jeffrey Lord| 9.13.10 @ 11:24PM
Quin...
This entire thing began, as near as I can figure out, with a full scale assault of name-calling on Christine. You yourself are up there calling her "bizarre." As stated, before I would ever step into a fight between two conservatives I know I would want to make sure of the facts. Time is gone...I have zero ability to read lawsuits, interview Christine, interview ISI etc. I have not a clue to the story.
I just don't honestly get the business of taking offense. None is intended. O'Donnell gets in this race, and instead of her stand on issues, from my perspective she had a bucket of personal assault dumped on her. I saw a clip of Castle tonight. Not word one about her view on the issues. Just trying to smear her. That is hardly straight-up stuff from a Senate candidate. Which piqued my curiosity the first time I focused on this. Why do that to her? Why the visceral negativity? This was what happened to Palin. To Angle etc. Geez, the Delaware GOP nominated her two years ago for the same job...now they say she has no qualifications? Not to put too fine a point on it, then why nominate her in the first place? Where was Castle? Did he support her as the Senate nominee in 2008?? If so he better have a good explanation for supporting somebody he now considers so reprehensible. Honestly, I just don't get the gut level "sic 'em" response. There's plenty of room for discussion. But assailing her personally is, I would suggest respectfully, wrong.
All I did here is apply the Codevilla argument to a Wall Street Journal editorial that was, I thought, over the top. And to not one but 4 NRO writers ganging up on her. I can only say I'm hearing from conservatives who agree - some with serious credibility and well-known names. This is not to foment anything....simply to call attention to what seems to be a pattern. And try and figure out why. Again, this is a conservative family discussion, and I have plenty of reason to think the discussion will continue long after this race is put to bed.
In any event, this issue is not ours to decide. It belongs to Delaware Republicans. And I'm perfectly happy to abide by their decision if they choose Castle. The question is, if Castle loses will he deliberately sabotage her and try to force the "loser' thing to happen?
Life is short. Vigorous debate is good. I take no offense, and respectfully none is intended. I'm baffled at the thought.
Walt Gilbert | 9.14.10 @ 12:29AM
"The question is, if Castle loses will he deliberately sabotage her and try to force the "loser' thing to happen?"
Isn't that something that should have been considered before throwing all that Tea Party and talk radio support behind her? I certainly wouldn't blame him if he did. Hell, I wouldn't really blame him if he ran as an independent.
After all, like you said ... it's not our issue to decide. It belongs to the voters of Delaware.
Patriot| 9.14.10 @ 12:32AM
Jeffrey--exactly!
Siegfried X| 9.14.10 @ 5:39AM
Castle refuses to rule out running third party. This is a big double standard, that we are told that conservatives must be loyal to the party but not moderate Republicans. Conservatives are told they must vote for a candidate which they disagree with, for the good of the party, even if that RINO candidate won't support the conservative candidate if he loses.
Quin| 9.14.10 @ 8:03AM
Jeff,
When somebody sues my conservative friends (I say that generically; I only know the ISI folks through a few short conversations at big receptions), using a charge usually wielded by liberal feminists, my natural and immediate reaction is to wonder if the plaintiff is really a conservative we want to get behind. It baffles me that you can be so uninterested in a lawsuit against one of the oldest and wisest conservative organizations in the country. When you add to that a whole host of other strange parts of Ms. O'Donnell's record -- NOT smears, but actual, incontrovertible facts -- it raises issues. It MUST raise issues. Character does count. That's why I wanted somebody solid to challenge David Vitter in Louisiana -- because character does count. If character doesn't count, then you can keep on singing the praises of Duke Cunningham, who voted conservative on most issues but who now sits in jail, having done incalculable damage to the cause.
I repeat that I am NOT endorsing Castle. All along, I have merely argued that this was not a battle that conservatives from outside the state should spend a lot of time and money and effort on, because resources aren't scarce and, to my mind, Ms. O'Donnell does not seem such a clear choice that the resources would be well spent.
Siegfried X| 9.14.10 @ 10:56AM
Castle gets 3/4 of his money from out of state. All the money from the RINO leadership, like the NRSC is out of state. The small amount of money given to O'Donnell just partially neutralizes Castle's incumbant advantage.
As far as her lawsuit goes, and the vandalism and stalking complaints, has anyone proven that her allegations aren't true?
What about candidate John McCain suing the New York Times to prevent them from publishing a story about him sleeping with some lobbyist? American Spectator was pretty quiet about that one.
What if similiar allegations surfaced about a Republican candidate 3 days before the genera election? Would you vote Democratic? Not vote because there were unanswered questions hanging?
Siegfried X| 9.14.10 @ 11:00AM
We are voting for politicians, not saints. I'd always support the conservative, then let the legal process sort things out.
Two wrongs don't make a right, which is what letting a RINO or Democrat win is.
Siegfried X| 9.14.10 @ 11:02AM
"incalculable damage"?
There are crooks all over the place in politics. Sometimes voters reelect them.Wrangle will probably win his primary today, then be reelected in November.
Siegfried X| 9.14.10 @ 11:09AM
The Republican establishment told us to vote for Ted Stevens in 2008, even though he had multiple felony indictments.
Jeremiah| 9.14.10 @ 11:25AM
He was cleared, Siegfried. That was a setup.
Siegfried X| 9.14.10 @ 11:37AM
Stevens was actually found guilty before the election, and the RINO leadership still said to vote for him. That's the way it was on election day.
So the point is that they said we should vote for Stevens, who was found guilty, but people are saying now to vote against O'Donnell because of some unproven allegations.
(After the election, the government found evidence of prosecutorial misconduct and asked for the charges to be dismissed. That didn't prove that Stevens was innocent. It proved that he didn't get a fair trial. He could have been retried, since he hadn't been proved not-guilty, but because of his age they let him go.
Jeremiah| 9.14.10 @ 2:30PM
According to CBS News chief legal analyst, Andrew Cohen: "AG Eric Holder declared he was not able or willing to defend Stevens' conviction in court against allegations that government lawyers and investigators improperly withheld evidence from Stevens' defense team and even FABRICATED evidence that was shown to jurors." "The government admits now that it is finding new evidence that Stevens' trial was unfair and improper."
In other words, the government lied and tried to railroad Ted Stevens. It had nothing to do with Stevens' age and everything to do with trumped up charges and prosecutorial misconduct.
It was a setup.
BokSteve| 9.13.10 @ 11:29PM
Sorry Quin, we just can't stomach any more RINOs. Jim Jeffords was a Republican once too. Going into the presidential election, I surprised by how many of my conservative friends refused to vote for McCain - now I understand why. We have to start somewhere if want conservatism to prevail. No more RINOs!
Tim*| 9.13.10 @ 11:36PM
Lee Edwards distinguished fellow at The Heritage Foundation and author of new book William F. Buckley Jr.: The Maker of a Movement:
"• Buckley would delight in the tea party's willingness to challenge the establishment. "
"• Buckley would like the tea party's determination to place principle above party, any party. "
SoCon| 9.14.10 @ 1:00AM
WFB would have loved the Tea Party Movement; Ronald Reagan, too! They were two great men who were highly principled.
We sure could use their counsel right now. What a mess!
Intel| 9.14.10 @ 1:07AM
Love the logic. Can't stomach RINO's, so elect as many liberal Democrats as you can. Brilliant strategy. Victory through forfeit.
Jeremiah| 9.14.10 @ 1:20AM
It's not logic, it's principle, troll--something you Fascist Liberals know nothing about.
I don't know what you're clucking about, you leftist morons are going to get your clocks cleaned in November.
Walt Gilbert | 9.14.10 @ 1:25AM
Enjoy the principled ass-kicking in November.
Jeremiah| 9.14.10 @ 1:54AM
Whose? Yours?
You mean when we Republicans take 60-70 House seats and probably the Senate on November 2? I most definitely will enjoy it!
Cheers, loser.
Walt Gilbert | 9.14.10 @ 2:03AM
I see you're not willing to go out on a limb and predict that O'Donnell is going to win if she manages to get past Castle tomorrow. Or, are you?
If O'Donnell wins, you can forget about the Senate.
Enjoy, dumbass.
Jeremiah| 9.14.10 @ 3:55AM
Doesn't matter, troll, your destructive leftist agenda is dead and so is your stupid, corrupt fascist liberal party.
And you know it, too, that's why you're in such a foul temper. America's rejected you!! I know it hurts real bad :), don't keep a loaded gun on your nightstand on November 2.
Stay strong, loser.
Walt Gilbert | 9.14.10 @ 7:53AM
When the Tea Party coalition cracks up because of the misguided idiocy of brainless morons like yourself, it ain't going to be me that the paramedics will have to cut down from the shower nozzle. In the meantime, enjoy the very apex of your political relevance. The clock is winding down fast.
Breathe deep, dumbass.
Jeremiah| 9.14.10 @ 11:08AM
Ha ha. You're amusing. Your bloated, worthless party is facing a complete meltdown in 7 weeks and you're issuing warnings about the Tea Party Movement.
We're still ascending, clown, and you're in the toilet; where you belong, I might add. November 2, 2010--we flush.
Now go away and steal some more hard-earned money from average Americans, it's what you Marxist nobodies do best. (That, and destroy jobs).
Have a nice day.
Walt Gilbert | 9.14.10 @ 1:09AM
http://publicpolicypolling.blo.....umber.html
Wow. Twenty-six points to make up in less than two months.
Intel| 9.14.10 @ 1:29AM
The reason nobody cared that she ran in 2008 was because there was no expectation of victory. To forfeit an election that we were heavily favored to win would be demoralizing. Dems were already looking at a bleak electoral picture. Taking Biden and Obama and possibly Reid's seats would have been devastating to the Democrats. To gift wrap a valuable Senate seat to the Democrats would give them a tremendous morale boost.
NVA Patriot| 9.14.10 @ 6:36AM
Let's all be clear - the agenda to stop is the entire progressive agenda. And we need to do more than to stop it. We need to roll it back.
I was at the early Tea Party Rally's. I was at 9-12-09. There are no writers from the Weekly Standardard, NRO, and not many at American Spectator who understand wat has happened to the electorate.
We in the electorate - many beyond the Tea Party understand that most of Washington based 'governence' be it politicions, bureacrats, or commentators have lost touch witht the founder's vision.
DE is the test - Which candidate discussess issues - Not Castle. Which candidate reflects the majority position roll back Obamacare - Not Castle - fox hole conversions are discarded in this analysis. Which candidate attacked the person and won't debate issues - That would be M Castle.
I lived in DE. There's a factory in Newark. They are in a Union becasue they must be. They will vote for O'Donnell in the general. There are many small business owners and citizens who have suffered under Biden and Castle. They were never voted out becasue the voters did not see a chance to throw them out. Now they do. Now they will.
We gave Republicanism a chance. It failed and led to McCain. We rejected Repulicanism - which is Dem lite - which is socialism by a thousand cuts vice the socialism of Obama.
No - anyone who supports republicanism over a viable but imperfect conservative IS IN THE RULING CLASS and by definition must be removed from a position of authority over their fellow citizens whom they seek to rule NOT represent.
And as other commentators noted - We in the country class are sick and tired of the double standard and lack of respect. If a ruling class person doesn't pay taxes - no problem. If we in the country class don't pay taxes - we fight tax liens and risk jail. If a conservative loses, we must support the Party. If a RINO loses then no problem - stay in the ruling class using another party or write-in campaign. There is another measure of who is in the ruling class. We know the ruling class is going to do everything to hold power. We expect it. It is how we identify them through their behavior. IF you want more prof look at the Do-gooder McCain - the one who wants money out of politics. I blelieve he used $20M to destroy JD Hayworth. Russ Feingold is going to try do the same. We missed our chance to deal with McCain. Too bad. We will take out Feingold. This election is about taking the House back. The senate is gravy & would not be in play but for WE THE PEOPLE - not Quin, NRO and the Weakly Standard - all of whom support the unprincipled Castle over the smeared and possibly tainted ODonnell. WE THE PEOPLE - We're patient. We took 50 years to defeat the Russina communists. It won't take that long to defeat our ruling class and replace them.
Mark this - WHEN CASTLE loses he will actively work to destroy ODonnell and NO ONE in the RULING CLASS will stop him. He can be stopped easily. Let him know - If you mess this up we haul you before committeee and explore how on a congressman's salay, you amassed a fortune - but that won't happen. Not today.
But tomorrow - yes it will. Tomorrow might be 1 more election or it might be 3 more but it will happen. We have had it.
TennesseeVolunteer| 9.14.10 @ 7:22AM
Huzzah to you, Patriot. I will never rest until I have seen a return to principle, ethics, small government and more individual liberty. This is not a one election battle. This is the beginning of along Revolutionary War to restore the honor of this country, one Congressman, Senator and President at a time. And the work must be done by we the little, country class in middle America.
Tim*| 9.14.10 @ 6:46AM
Now Remember Trolls .
The Club for Growth Rates Castle .
Castle scores a horrendous 43% from CFG for 2009. Again, since his announced Senate bid he has been much more conservative than previous years. In 07 and 08 he earned a 35% and 26% respectively. In every year, Castle has had the most liberal voting record of any member of the 175+ Republican caucus. So in 2008, when Arlen Specter scored a 44%, Mike Castle scored a 26%! The CFG ratings give us more of an idea of how much of a statist the member is than the ACU.
Purple Lips| 9.14.10 @ 7:30AM
And while everyone is knee deep in the O'Donnel-Castle brouhaha, Boehnner and McConnel have proven why they don't deserve thier senior positions. As usual, the GOP is caving. These 2 men have all but waved the white flag vis-a-vis the expiration of the Bush Tax Cuts. The President didn't even have to cancel one of his 30 or so vacations.
Keep this in mind when considering Castle. O'Donnel may indeed be a Nut or a Slut. But that would be an improvement over the RINOS.
Siegfried X| 9.14.10 @ 8:04AM
Would you vote for Obama if he called himself a Republican?
I wouldn't. I vote based on issues, not party.
Lesser Weevil| 9.14.10 @ 3:28PM
It might not be that bad--we could depend on him to vote "present" most of the time.
I've been voting for Republicans practically since the Whigs disbanded and they rarely fail to disappoint. I completely understand the antipathy that many posters here express towards "electable" Mike Castle. If conservatives let the GOP leadership treat them like doormats, they will deserve whatever they get. But sometimes you have to make the best of a bad deal. This talk about preferring a Democrat is just stupid. Philosophically, Scott Brown fits right in with the Maine ladies. Does *anyone* think that we would have better off with Martha Coakley?
Tim*| 9.14.10 @ 8:11AM
Looks like Republicans are Trumping Democrats and forcing The Tax Cut Debate Focus into The Senate .
" The Senate Republican leader proposed legislation on Monday to continue all of the Bush-era tax cuts indefinitely, testing the willingness of Democrats to allow a tax increase on the wealthiest Americans in a weak economy and making clear that a partisan fight will extend deep into the campaign season if not beyond.
The proposal by the Senate leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, came a day after the House Republican leader, John A. Boehner of Ohio, suggested a potential compromise, saying he would vote for President Obama’s plan to extend the cuts only for households earning less than $250,000 if he had no other choice.
In part, Mr. McConnell’s proposal illustrated the greater leverage that Republicans enjoy in the Senate, where they control 41 seats — enough to filibuster and block any bill. While Mr. Boehner cannot stop House Democrats from forcing a vote on the president’s favored tax plan, Mr. McConnell made clear that he would have a say and that he wanted to put a handful of wavering Senate Democrats on the spot. "
Siegfried X| 9.14.10 @ 8:23AM
Problem is that McConnell doesn't have the votes. He's only got a minority in favor of the full cut, and not enough votes to filibuster the whole thing.
JP| 9.14.10 @ 8:47AM
The problem is McConnel flinched first. My gosh, I would hate have any of these guys on my side during negociations. Both Houses have enough votes to extend the full Bush 2003 tax package for another 2 years (not filibuster proof, but large just the same). Pelosi and Obama have this bottled up in a procedural process that does not allow an actual floor vote in the House. However, with the elections now only 50 days away, and growing public alarm over the approaching tax increases, there are enough Dems in both houses that will force the issue. And if the President does not sign the bill, his party is finished. All of the pressure is on Pelosi and Obama -not Boehnner and McConnel. But thier remarks these last 2 days essientially pulled the carpet out from underneath the taxpayers. And when those taxpayers who earn less than $250,000 a year see thier tax bill go up (Yes, thier taxes will go up. All Obama intends to do is extend EIC payments. The increase in rates will take effect for the middle class), people will wonder what use is the GOP.
I cannot believe McConnel and Boehnner are willing to remove the pressure. Heck, negociations haven't even begun yet and they are waving the white flag.
Siegfried X| 9.14.10 @ 9:27AM
McConnell didn't flinch. He gave a decent speech. The pressure is on. Boehner screwed up, not McConnell.
It is very possible that this can be delayed until after the election.
Tim*| 9.14.10 @ 6:06PM
"Mr. McConnell’s proposal illustrated the greater leverage that Republicans enjoy in the Senate, where they control 41 seats — enough to filibuster and block any bill. "
Intel| 9.14.10 @ 8:36AM
Siegfried X, having more votes does matter. Having more Senators than the other side do matter. When you have the majority, you can change the direction of this country a lot easier than in the minority. That's why every Senate seat is important and forfeiting a Senate seat just to make a point is so destructive and counter productive. Open Senate seats in blue states where the GOP would be heavily favored are so rare, you have to take advantage.
JP| 9.14.10 @ 9:01AM
Intel,
History is not on your side. The GOP had the majority of Senators 1995-20001, and again 2003-2007. And within the majorities there were the following:
Jim Jeffords, Lincoln Chaffee, Ben Gordon, Susan Collins, Olympia Snow, Richard Lugar, Susan Collins, Arlene Specter, Kay Baily Hutchinson, and Trent Lott. These Senators ran the most important committees, steer legislation, and essientially controlled the business of Congress. They constantly were out-foxed by Clinton, Daschle, and Kennedy. Heck, in 2001 before Jim Jeffords jumped ship, Lott offered power-sharing to Daschle despite having a tie-breaking vote in VP Cheney. No, RINOs serve no purpose other than cutting deals with Dems. They have no loyalty, and they will leave the party if need be (See Jeffords, Specter, and Crist).
Siegfried X| 9.14.10 @ 9:24AM
I agree. Having more CONSERVATIVE votes does matter. But the number of Democratic / Republican votes is nearly meaningless.
Siegfried X| 9.14.10 @ 9:31AM
I only vote for conservatives. If there's a conservative Republican, then he gets the vote, even if there are third party conservatives. If the Republican is RINO, then I vote third party conservative.
The Republican Party can have all of my votes, simply by running conservative candidates. If they don't run conservatives, then it's their fault they lost my vote.
Sean| 9.14.10 @ 8:40AM
Ok, so what happens when we get a majority with RINO's and they act like Democrats? That tars the whole Republican party brand for the next election where we have a chance to form a true conservative majority.
Intel| 9.14.10 @ 8:46AM
Are you worried that Castle's moderate views will infect the rest of the Senate? We're talking about one seat, not a majority. The heavy majority of caucus would be conservatives which is good, but you still need moderates to prove the margins to get a working majority. That's how politics work in the real world.
JP| 9.14.10 @ 8:52AM
Intel,
Here are a list of Senate RINOs (or potential RINOs):
Graham, Lugar, Collins, McCain, Brown, Snowe, Chambliss, and Alexander. Add in Castle and perhaps Carly Fiorina and you 11 GOP Senators who will be able to control and steer the agenda. They will form a block that will be able to negoicate with Obama and the Dems. If you want to know what happened to the Contract with America, well the GOP Senate is what happened to it. This will be a repeat of the 1990s.
Jeremiah| 9.14.10 @ 11:13AM
Ah, look at the cute Concern troll; still pumping furiously in his hamster wheel and still going nowhere.
Gotta keep that astroturf paycheck coming as long as he/she can--November 2 is coming fast.
That's how it works in the real world.
Jeremiah| 9.14.10 @ 11:17AM
Gotta hand it to DNC trolls like Intel; facing political destruction in November and still working feverishly on Conservative blogs.
Imagine if the losers got real jobs--they could actually do something positive.
Randy| 9.14.10 @ 9:27AM
Castle voted to impeach W.... that disqualifies him in my book.....
Derek Leaberry| 9.14.10 @ 9:43AM
If I were a Delaware Republican, I am not sure who I would vote for today. Mike Castle is a liberal Republican who supports the murder of unborn children, probably supports homosexual "rights", and would be a weapon for the vile John McCain and his villainous sidekick Lindsey Graham and their treacherous desire to force amnesty for 30, 50 or 100 million illegal Third World migrants. Miss O'Donnell, on the other hand, seems to be an erratic grifter who tried to shake down her employer, the conservative Intercollegiate Studies Institute, for advocating the very Catholic teachings on the female role in marriage. Frankly, like most women, Miss O'Donnell is in need of the male guidance of a husband to keep her from her capricious female emotional impulses. However, Christine O'Donnell is right on the issues and is a conservative.
I guess I've just made up my mind.
Margie| 9.14.10 @ 1:54PM
"..for advocating the very Catholic teachings on the female role in marriage. Frankly, like most women, Miss O'Donnell is in need of the male guidance of a husband to keep her from her capricious female emotional impulses."
Sickening. The God of the Bible says no such thing about women as you say. In fact, Christ fulfills the needs of everyone, men & women alike. There is also NOTHING in the Bible as to having to marry only to produce children, so if that's what O'Donnell was protesting~ I say, more power to her!
Purple Lips| 9.14.10 @ 2:15PM
That's right! Christian Women for the Pill Unite! You can call you group The Mutual Masterbation Society. For, when you get down to it, that's what the Marriage Act comes down when you eliminate children from it.
Jeremiah| 9.14.10 @ 2:39PM
Ouch! That was mean. Wonder if you're unable to have children, does that mean your marriage is included in the "Mutual Masturbation Society?"
Margie| 9.14.10 @ 3:11PM
Screw you, buttwipe. Who do you think you are assigning to me a lie? Lowlife.
Liars go to Hell.
Derek Leaberry| 9.14.10 @ 5:12PM
Signs of an unhinged mind in need of male guidance.
Matt| 9.14.10 @ 6:31PM
What a nasty exchange.
Derek, you sound unhinged all of the time; what's your excuse?
Margie| 9.14.10 @ 6:31PM
Uh huh. I react to a lying weasel and you you rejoice. Then you spew your lies about the Bible and twist it to suit yourself and hold yourself in high esteem.
Liars like you God will deal with. I just point them out.
Beth| 9.14.10 @ 7:06PM
You both sound like nut cases.
Derek Leaberry| 9.14.10 @ 2:46PM
Ephesians 5:22
1 Corinthians 14:34
1 Corinthians 11:3
Genesis 3:16
Margie| 9.14.10 @ 3:12PM
You serve a lie. I serve Christ. Twist the Bible at your own detriment.
Margie| 9.14.10 @ 3:27PM
I should add for those who don't know. All of the above verses speak to how a Christian woman should behave toward a right Christian husband. They say nothing, NOTHING about a woman having to marry. And therefore Mr. Peaberry's above statement is false and unBiblical: Frankly, like most women, Miss O'Donnell is in need of the male guidance of a husband to keep her from her capricious female emotional impulses."
Men like him are to be shunned.
Chuck O'Leary| 9.14.10 @ 9:59AM
Gents:
I am very disappointed in the heated rhetoric. I am most impressed with the Codavilla thesis, but a true member of the "Country Class" can still be a bad candidate or bad Senator. Even worse, such a candidate can do harm to the entire movement. The astonishing hunger in the country to be rid of the "Ruling Class" is leading people to man the barricades for anyone from the "Country Class", regardless of their merits. The case of O'Donnell reminds me of Debra Medina versus Rick Perry in the Republican Primary here in Texas. Perry is a good, conservative governer, but he's been in office too long and people are suspicious of him. If Medina hadn't self-destructed on Glenn Beck she may well have won the primary. And now, given her lack of experience and propensity to say slightly kooky things (a la O'Donnell) we'd be on our way to having "Governor" Bill White.
I believe in a modified form of the "Buckley Rule" - I will vote for the most conservative candidate who would make a good elected official, not the most conservative candidate who can win the general election. Only by showing a preference for conservative "Country Class" values can we ensure their eventual success. But latching on to a bad candidate, who will become the crazy poster child of the entire Tea Party, is a terrible idea.
Respectfully,
Chuck in Texas
Jeremiah| 9.14.10 @ 11:22AM
You're just another RINO.
Castle has already proven himself to be a BAD elected official; the NRA has given him an 'F'.
Don't you believe in the 2nd Amendment? Castle doesn't and that's more than enough for me to kick him out of office. Now, that's a great idea!
Bo| 9.14.10 @ 11:41AM
You're calling "Chuck in Texas" a RINO? Good gravy. Do you conisder youself to be the only R not INO?
The Democrats are loving this kind of stuff:
http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonath.....e-delaware
This is what's going to allow them to keep the Senate.
Jeremiah| 9.14.10 @ 2:36PM
Yeah, I am calling Chuck a RINO, Bo; you, too.
RINOs like you and "Chuck" are why we're in this mess--grow a pair, will you? Stop whining about the dummocrats, who cares what they think?
Ryan| 9.14.10 @ 11:59AM
Mrs. O'Donnell sure is pretty.
Judy| 9.14.10 @ 2:33PM
I don't think she's married, Ryan.
Bob-O| 9.14.10 @ 2:54PM
There is no question that Jeffrey Lord is correct in this discussion. Quin is bothered that O'Donnell sued a group that she worked for, for a reason that is "usually" according to him, used by lefties. The only people who know what happened are the interested parties and I expect it was a they said, she said and the suit went nowhere. Is that right? So no one knows, Quin doesn't know the people at ISI but thinks they have a good organization and reputation. They have good intentions no doubt but again on one knows what happened. The party endorsed her when they didn't have anyone better according to them and now attacks her since they think they do have someone better and care nothing about principles that Quin says he cares about since O'Donnell sued ISI, but obviously doesn't care about since he is backing Castle and the Republican party here. Mike Castle is a disease on the Republican party just like Arlen Specter, Olympia Snoe, Susan Collins, Lindsey Graham and others are diseases of the party. No principles leads to disaster and Castle has none. O' Donnell has principles and Sarah palin who also has principles has endorsed her and the Republican party regulars don't want that connection to happen in Delaware, they want their power to bostruct the will of the people of Delaware and the nation. They just want to win...so they say, but I think that they really want to control things for themselves and the state and nation be damned. Damned elitists.
Oldefarte| 9.15.10 @ 10:23AM
Jeff is correct!
Oldefarte| 9.15.10 @ 10:37AM
Furthermore, PRINCIPLE trumps WINNING any day, any time. It was reported yesterday that Castle supported/voted for an IMPEACHMENT action against Bush, voted FOR Obama's/Democrats' healthcare and cap and trade legislation, which is/was reprehensible and unforgiveable IMO. Obviously, the voters of Delaware agree with this, since they rightly voted for O'Donnell. As to the Louisiana/Vitter deal, the truth is that some AH's [Democrats/RINOS] over there financed/ran a strawman fellow judge against Vitter using the WHOREMONGER charge/label, when this same Republican judge was hypocriticall guilty of the same thing [he had an affair with a fellow judge's wife, later married her, was upon her death, legally sued by her children, and thereafter had another affair with the former girlfriend of his own SON....talk about WHOREMONGERING!]. As to Delaware etc, these RINOS and their supporters had better get it through their thick heads that non-conservative/rational Republicans are just as much of a threat to this country as are the radical Cemocrats now in control of our government. As the youtube video linked to a previous TAS article stated, WE'RE COMING AFTER YOU [AND HAVE HAD ENOUGH OF YOUR LIBERALISM ON 11/2/10], so BOTH Democrats and Republicans [RINOS] had better get ready !!!!!!!!!!