I don't know what in God's name has happened to my friend Jeff Lord. Below he posted yet another wild allegation, this time that Rep. Castle of Delaware somehow was in favor of impeaching GW Bush. Somebody else I respect sent this info to me last night as well, and I said it looked bad for Castle BUT THAT IT BORE LOOKING INTO BECAUSE IT ALSO SEEMED LUDICROUS. Jeff needs to start thinking like a journalist and not just like an activist. A journalist actually checks things out before publishing them wildly. Well, Powerline answers the charge, irrefutably, here. But I didn't even need Powerline to tell me that things weren't as they seemed, i.e. that this was not necessarily the pro-impeach vote it looked like on the surface. Why not? Because a closer look at the 24 Republicans who voted yes told me all I needed to know. Included were some of Bush's most stalwart allies, such as fellow Texans Ralph Hall and Kevin Brady. Also included was Frank Wolf, one of the most level-headed members in all of Congress and a rather solid conservative. And also included was David Dreier, the longtime head honcho for the GOP on the Rules Committee. BINGO! Nobody knows procedure like Dreier does. And nobody is more a party team player. With Dreier on board, it is CLEAR, circumstantially but with overwhelmingly obvious logic, that those who voted to send it to committee were doing so in the knowledge that this move would likely scuttle the bill. So 166 GOPers could vote against it entirely, demonstrating how ludicrous the whole idea of impeachment was, while 24 selected (and safe) conservatives could vote to send it to committee to ensure that, yes, the resolution would die a slow death. That is how things work in the House. It is nothing more than smart parliamentary tactics. And it is utterly unremarkable. The fact that Castle's office at the time made ABSOLUTELY CLEAR that he completely opposed impeachment (again, read Powerline), is mere icing on the cake for what common sense and a little EASY digging already would tell anybody who wants to look at objective facts.
Yes, facts. They remain stubborn things. Mike Castle isn't my cup of tea (pun intended). Christine O'Donnell's issue positions do indeed make my heart go pitter-pat. But the baseless allegations (about Castle's personal life, in a major bit of slander; and about this impeachment vote, among others) have all run in one direction. The actual FACTS about character -- not smear jobs, but just the facts, ma'am -- have not shone a positive light on Ms. O'Donnell. All of which is why conservatives outside of Delaware should not have made this race a cause celebre. No need to endorse Castle. But just stay the heck out, rather than waste precious time, resources, and effort -- and rather than further driving a wedge between conservatives and Castle, when an olive branch might make him more likely to come back our way if he is elected.
But I digress. The main issue here is to correct the record. The post below distorted the record badly, and needed to be addressed.
Share this Article
Like this Article
Print this ArticlePrint Article