The American Spectator

Casey Abell| 8.18.11 @ 11:16AM

I honestly didn't know that Christine O'Donnell was even in politics any more. Why doesn't she just get a job - okay, not the easiest task in Obama's economy - and leave the rest of us alone?

Hobbes| 8.18.11 @ 2:37PM

Like!

Derek Leaberry| 8.18.11 @ 11:46AM

The question was rather an easy one. In the 7000 years of civilization, no one until the last twenty years or so has even suggested that homosexuals should be granted the right of marriage. And, as homosexuality is a deviancy, it should not be encouraged by the implied acceptance that a right of marriage would grant it. That Christine O'Donnell retreated so cravenly from the civilizational norm that marriage should be reserved for a man and a woman just shows how "conservatives" have surrendered the culture to the Gramscian Left.

simon templar| 8.19.11 @ 1:49AM

Derek..the proper response is to laugh it off and sit back and watch your nation and civilization flushed down the toilet. If you are not comfortable with that then run for the hills.

solidground| 8.18.11 @ 11:56AM

People like O'Donnell are the Achilles heel of the Tea Party movement. Their blunders provide the LSM with all the fodder it needs to tar every anti-progressive as bigoted, ignorant and homophobic. Would someone please shut her up?

BD57| 8.18.11 @ 12:09PM

Perhaps she is - but she shouldn't be. It appears O'Donnell is first & foremost a bad candidate.

IMO, it's not surprising that, in the first real "Tea Party" election, some of the candidates who espouse "Tea Party" ideas & values would turn out to be very flawed.

In time, the pool of candidates will get deeper.

simon templar| 8.19.11 @ 1:51AM

You are the achilles heel of trolls. Would someone please shut you up?

martin j smith| 8.18.11 @ 12:03PM

She should not have gone to CNN> Period. Having done it, I think it is not so bad to walk off when interviews are obnoxious. I don't see any reason to sit there and listen to this crap. Perhaps an alternative would be to prepared for such an encounter and basically challenge interviewers motives. But really I think that if I were in this situation I would thanks but no thanks.

BD57| 8.18.11 @ 12:20PM

Disagree about walking off.

Whether you're selling a political philosophy or a book, your goal is to get people who otherwise might not consider "buying" to take a look. Storming off is going to be taken as thin-skinned ("You ran for political office & you were asked about a political issue ... you agreed to go on the show .... you get asked a rough question & you bail?") or ignorant ("What were you expecting? Love poems?"). Neither one is likely to convince the "shopper" to give a second thought to your ideas or your book.

Someone like O'Donnell, who was reviled in the press her entire campaign, should expect the crap to come and be ready to answer it all in a cheerful manner. If she can't pull that off, she shouldn't go on the show - there are plenty of venues which are likely to be "O'Donnell friendly" (Rush, Levin, Laura Ingraham, Hannity, etc.) if you want a softball "book interview."

When the left libels conservatives & Tea Party types, the correct response is LAUGHTER.

simon templar| 8.19.11 @ 1:45AM

Yeah, you are right. I am laughing my ass off at your idiotic comments. You are right, this does feel better.

Ricco| 8.18.11 @ 12:20PM

Two words: Media Training

simon templar| 8.18.11 @ 1:45PM

Do you people hate yourselves? Are you self flaggelators? So, let's review.

By nature because I am a conservative I need to accept that I can be shat upon without objection and should just eat the shit with a smile. Nothing is beyond the pale and anything that is done to me is fair game.

If I am a liberal, then I must be dealt with respectfully and if not, apologies must be forthcoming and quickly. If I, the liberal, bald face lie on national TV, no one should dare call me a liar or challenge my lies.

If I am a conservative and on a pannel of talking heads, I should never dare to raise my voice or speak with conviction and rawness about my positions or when defending myself. If I do I risk being called uncivilized and using violent rhetoric.

If I am a liberal and on TV, I have the freedom to say anything I want even if it is making fun, smearing, or offensive...children and small animals are up for grabs as well. If questioned or challenged I am covered under the free speech clause and the "if you can not take it, get out of the kitchen" response.

Of course, If I am a liberal I can have a complete show that contains explicatives, smears, and downright lies and later apologize for them admitting I doctured the videos and remain on the air.

If I am a conservative and I do this, resignation is expected within the hour.

If I am a liberal and go onto a conservatives TV show, I damn well better be treated fairly and not sabotaged or there will be hell to pay and accusations of unprofessionalism. Heck, if all else fails, I can always go on O'Reilly!

Did I get it right? Just want to get it clear so I know what to do.

BD57| 8.18.11 @ 3:19PM

Some of those are "the rules" Simon, because your purpose for going on TV isn't to assuage your own ego, it's to advance the cause.

"Eat shit with a smile?" No ... Fight back with humor and a smile. All the "diva storming out" routine does is give people a reason to think maybe the crap spouted about you is accurate.

"Raise your voice ..." Depends ... can you do it as an expression of passion & not anger / disgust?

"Speak with conviction and rawness about my positions or when defending myself ..." Probably not a good idea, especially where the latter is concerned. Are you advancing ideas or yourself? Put your ego aside - in the long run, YOU don't matter all that much ... the ideas do.

Bottom line ... never, ever, EVER let your ego get in the way of the message.

simon templar| 8.19.11 @ 1:34AM

One's ego has nothing to do with it. Apparently, you still do not get it. You think you are going to advance your cause by going along with the double standard and accepting the rules? It has never worked,that is why they control the media, the educational institutions, the message, and the government for the most part.

IT is about not being played a chump, not cowering, not allowing them to control the situation and not allowing them to CONTINUALLY write the NARRATIVE.
It is about self respect and demanding respect.

Now, implying that I am advocating storming off a set is a little childish trick to skirt the main issue here. No, you do matter. When people see that you do not have enough self respect for yourself and you allow others to trample, manipulate, talk over you, and insult you, and all you can do is smile and politely and quietly sit there they begin to wonder just how much passion and conviction do you have about what you are selling. Show it. It is not for your audience to guess what is in your mind.

You seem to miss the point entirely. As long as you accept these double standards, they control the 'court', they call the plays, and they drive the game. You are just a reactionary. Have you heard that term before, smarty pants? It is a left wing concept and term for the right wing. They act, you react. You then are stuck in this mode and essentially rendered powerless as they drive the narrative.

I did not advocate pitching a fit about unfairness. Another childish ploy to dismiss. Don't lecture me about life. I am advocating you stay in there and give it right back, outwit them, out talk them, outsmart them. The idea is to expose the PC, the manipulation, the double standard right to their faces.
That is your problem, you do not have to cope with shit..let them cope with you.
You remind me of the mentality of black people before the civil rights movement. Now, you boys just need to cope..life is unfair...learn to smile and make a little self effacing joke for the white man..they will like you better..now do not get that uppity tone!
I have EMANCIPATED you!

simon templar| 8.18.11 @ 1:49PM

Oh, I am sorry, I forgot the last rule.
If I am a liberal and am mistreated on TV, I can walk off with ease and self righteousness because the next day I will be a hero standing up for truth to power. I can expect a ticker parade and a booking on the View where I can cry about it and get support. Hey, maybe I can even get the View to walk out with me.

BD57| 8.18.11 @ 3:21PM

To this ...

Yes, life is unfair. And while "everything would be better if the rest of you people got with the program," that just isn't going to happen.

Your choice is pitch a fit about unfairness (in which case most people will tune you out) or learn how to cope.

Funny thing - - - likeable people are more likely to get a "fair hearing" than SOB's.

simon templar| 8.19.11 @ 1:38AM

Bottom line ... never, ever, EVER let THEM get in the way of your message.

See my comment above.

martin j smith| 8.18.11 @ 1:54PM

I think that number of Republicans freshman and veteran alike could use a tutorial on handling the MSM by some smart media experts. I am actually quite serious about this notion and I am somewhat surprised this is not happening now. Anyone who wants to go for elected office no matter how or low in position should consider having a coach in media self defense.

simon templar| 8.18.11 @ 2:03PM

They could take a few notes from Breitbart and West. They do not roll over, take no prisoners, and knock it right back at them. They know the game and the tricks played and are always ready to defend conservativism without apology.

simon templar| 8.18.11 @ 1:55PM

Oh, sorry, forgot the most important one.
If I am a conservative and I do anything less than eat the shit, then I damn well better not expect other conservatives to defend me. I would be better off looking to do something else for a living and leave the field and control of the field to the Liberals.
Now, it is complete.
Hey, this could be the "Rules for Dumbass Conservatives without a Clue."
Aaron, you could co-write it with me!

simon templar| 8.18.11 @ 2:00PM

Oh, I should put a disclaimer on my comments for those not smart enough to recognize sarcasm. I was not endorsing this double standard. What I am advocating is rejecting it. Stop apologizing, stop being played, and start hitting back!

Interested Conservative| 8.18.11 @ 2:40PM

The faster his show ends the better. Unfortunately, Ms. ODonnell is not appropriate for that task. So far, only Jon Stewart has shown himself the only outsider guest capable of ending a CNN show.

That said, there is a tremendous opportunity here for an investigative journalist to review Mr. Morgan's background and watch the results.

That, or simply inertia, time and Fox will do the job.

I'd prefer the exposure and sunshine.

ifiwereking| 8.18.11 @ 5:11PM

O'Donnell's ineptitude on this and other occasions is an embarrassment for anyone and any cause with which she is associated and indicates her lack of viability as a candidate for political office.

simon templar| 8.19.11 @ 1:43AM

Troll. Shut up. You are the embarrassment.
You embarass the human race with your lack of logic and idiotic statements.
If we use your logic, the Obama has finally and completely destroyed liberalism forever.
Ok, on second thought I agree.

albert constantine jr.| 8.18.11 @ 10:33PM

If all that is said here against Ms. O'Donnell is correct, than one must consider how low the regard was for Mike Castle by the Republican primary voters of Delaware last year, since she was certainly viable enough to defeat him.

johnny jameson| 8.19.11 @ 4:28AM

Piers Morgan did what any good interviewer would do. The lady clearly is a looser an has no place in public life

DeAnn Craig| 8.19.11 @ 12:37PM

Christine O'Donnell herself was quite immature during this interview. Calling Piers Morgan a "Cheeky Bugger?" Does she know the connotation "Bugger?" Like all of the Tea Party Members, immature, lack of full Historical disclosure in their remarks and statments about our Political History doesn't even bear truth to the Facts...especially since our "Democracy" was founded on the systems utilized and stilleffectively practiced by Indigenous Nations to the U.S. Not once have any of these Idealogues state the influence of successful societies documented before European usurping of this Country from its Indigenous Nations. Sad commentary on their basis for wanting to live like their "Founding Fathers" and their interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.