May 7, 2013 | 6 comments
May 7, 2013 | 0 comments
May 5, 2013 | 13 comments
April 25, 2013 | 11 comments
April 19, 2013 | 67 comments
To Spectator Readers:
Brian Walsh, spokesman for the National Republican Senatorial Committee, responded to my posting on the Christine O’Donnell charge, made live and on-air to Sean Hannity on his radio show, that the NRSC was being less than supportive of her campaign.
Mr. Walsh has responded on behalf of Senator John Cornyn, the Senator from Texas who is Chairman of the NRSC— twice. As promised, we are publishing his response verbatim. This post is NSRC response # 1. NSRC Response # 2 will run as a separate post.
Hi Jeffrey — I just saw your note below and wonder why you didn’t take a moment to contact the Committee yourself before printing it? Could you tell me why?
Would also be curious for your thoughts on which Republican candidate should be receiving less money — Ken Buck? Joe Miller? Rand Paul? Pat Toomey? These are all very close races where the NRSC is currently investing money. Are you suggesting national Republicans should abandon those races and send that money to Delaware instead? It’s a fair question. Also you missed this story on the AP wire this afternoon -
But needless to say your piece below [O’Donnell on Hannity: NRSC Sabotage of Her Campaign?] is inaccurate on several fronts. Will you be willing to update with a response?
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
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.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
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?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?