You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Politix
Why Christine O'Donnell's victory is scary
2010-09-16
In which a Washington Post lib laments the fact that the impending stampede of trunks isn't going to be bipartisan. Like the current Congress has been.
Partisan Democrats are delighted about Christine O'Donnell's Republican primary victory over Rep. Mike Castle in the race for the open Delaware Senate seat.
We'll see what happens in November. She wasn't supposed to win against Castle, either.
I'm despondent.
Take a deep breath. Have a cigarette. It'll help you relax.
From the Democratic point of view, the defeat of the moderate, well-known Castle turns what had looked to be a lost cause into a likely win.
For now. If Castle was supposed to tromp her let's see what happens next. My crystal ball's in the shop for repairs.
Yesterday she was down 25 points and had $90K in the bank.
Overnight people donated a million dollars and she's trailing Coon by 11. Sounds like a lost cause to me, NOT!

Keeping the seat in Democratic hands could be the margin of control in the Senate. So the folks who focus on electing Democrats and keeping a Democratic majority can't be blamed for breaking out the champagne over O'Donnell's win.
Go ahead. Get a little tipsy. It's good for you.
Not me, for two reasons.
A tee-totaler, are you? What's the other reason?
First, I had thought the silver lining of this election year might be to produce a Senate with a more robust cadre of moderate Republicans.
Because Publicans love sending RINOs to Congress. Tell us how conservative you are, how you're gonna get rid of the national debt. Then go sing sweet harmony with Nancy and Harry. Oh, yeah. We need more of that.
That caucus has pretty much dwindled to the two senators from Maine, with very occasional company from colleagues such as Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown and departing Ohio Sen. George Voinovich. It's awfully hard for a caucus of two to break with the party.
Which brings up the question of why they should break with the party, and why Dems shouldn't break with their party to support things like tax cuts and fiscal responsibility and prosecuting thugs standing outside polling places with truncheons and attitudes.
Peer pressure isn't just a phenomenon of middle school. It's alive and well in the U.S. Senate, and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has done a good job of keeping party discipline. A larger number of moderates among his herd of cats might make that more difficult and enhance the prospects for bipartisan legislating.
"Bipartisan" seems to equate to supporting Dem policies whether the Dems have Congress in a hammerlock or not. I think most of the country's been shocked and disgusted at the contemptuous lack of bipartisanship by the Dems. There's no reason for anybody to want the Pubs to do anything other than assert control. "Moderation" -- since it's likely the Pubs aren't going to get the hammerlock the Dems have had -- is going to consist of insisting their own side be heard and even occasionally have its way. If Boehner can't achieve that then he's going to get bounced.
There is strength in numbers, and you could imagine a bolstered group of (at least relative) moderates made up of the likes of Castle, Carly Fiorina (Calif.), Mark Kirk (Ill.) or Dino Rossi (Wash.)
Yasss... Another Gang of Nine or whatever it was, more Mavericks.
Now, it's as plausible to envision a bolstered Jim DeMint caucus, following the disturbingly powerful junior senator from South Carolina: Sharron Angle (Nev.), Rand Paul (Ky.), Ken Buck (Colo.) -- plus the two other incumbent-slayers of the primary season, Mike Lee in Utah and in Joe Miller in Alaska. Scary.
Very scary. I'm positively clutching myself. I'll probably put somebody's eye out with this thing...
But not as scary as reason number two: the ripple effect of victories such as O'Donnell's on other Republican lawmakers. Republican members of Congress look at races such as those in Utah, Alaska and now Delaware and think: There but for the grace of the Tea Party go I. They will be that much more watchful of protecting their right flank against a primary challenge. They will be that much less likely to take a political risk in the direction of bipartisanship.
They'll be that much less likely to dump any principles they brought to Washington and go for the boodle.
In this sense, it matters less whether O'Donnell will win the general election -- that doesn't seem likely -- than that she won the primary.
Welcome to the Revolution, toots.
The Delaware result might be good news for both Tea Partyers and Democrats. It is not good news for the cause of good government.
Like we've had for the past couple years...
Posted by:Fred

#11  Evangelicals actually believe in the triune God and try to follow the moral pathway of the 10 Commandments. All of which is anathema to modern pseudo-liberalism -- which is actually a neo-Marxist philosophy that ignores Locke, Smith, and Paine.
Posted by: Shieldwolf   2010-09-16 22:31  

#10  Zhang Fei: Suddenly, I think this is the reason that she is eliciting such blind hatred from the elites of both parties, because she is a "real" Evangelical, and thinks like they do, and the elites hate and fear that.

Comparing masturbation to adultery is a purely moral, not ethical stance. That is, Evangelicals would never think of codifying it into law--it is a personal ethos, part and parcel with real Evangelicals.

And other things she has said are pure Evangelical. So what is it about Evangelicals that "makes the heathen rage?"
Posted by: Anonymoose   2010-09-16 19:07  

#9  Goodness, Ruth Marcus must be on the A list for all the DC cocktail parties. She is the rare breed that can flit from a conversation about health care on to another about the virtues of fiscal responsibility. All without missing a puffed shrimp. You see, she is post-modern and loves the paradoxical. Ruth will suggest that she really believes in something and yet she has that innate ability to see the intrinsic value in the opposite. She is proud of her liberal “courage” even though she knows most view her as simply shallow. All of which makes her the non-threatening sap you can ask to help clean up afterwards. Best yet, she will then thank you for giving her a sense of duty.
Posted by: DepotGuy   2010-09-16 18:44  

#8  I'd recommend this lovely young lady's future husband discreetly place a copy of the above video in a safe deposit box. It might just come in handy at some distant, future date.
Posted by: Besoeker   2010-09-16 17:16  

#7  Here's the MTV video of a 1996 young evangelicals interview (including O'Donnell) on abstinence and masturbation:

Posted by: Zhang Fei   2010-09-16 17:05  

#6  Boys and girls, there is nothing inherently wrong with bipartisanship. In fact, it can do a lot of good. If some Democrats want to join with the Republicans to repeal Obamacare and cut the budget and stuff like that, I say we let the groovy love vibrations flow.
Posted by: Mike   2010-09-16 16:43  

#5  She currently has 107% of the $1 million she was asking for. A number which is still subject to change, in a good way.

Importantly, her opponent also has about $1m for his campaign, but as his support is "normal", he probably won't get much more. All she has to do is ask for more.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2010-09-16 15:37  

#4  O'Donnell just finished an ugly primary. Coons sailed through unopposed. The numbers reflect that. Give Christine a chance to start running against Coons and lets see what happens.
Posted by: Iblis   2010-09-16 15:02  

#3  I'm all for bipartisanship if it means fiscal responsibility. If it means more of the same spending like drunken sailors than we are better off without it. Hopefully a few of the survivors after November will realize this and show a new spirit of restraint because although the Tea Party term might go away at some point I think the attitude is here for a long time.
Posted by: rjschwarz   2010-09-16 14:27  

#2  Any Republican that talks about "bipartisanship" and "moderation" needs thrown out at this point. It has brought our country nothing but ruin and until the progressive-communist-socialist agenda is destroyed, it is not welcome.
Posted by: DarthVader   2010-09-16 13:09  

#1  keep whistling past the graveyard
Posted by: Frank G on the road   2010-09-16 12:58  

00:00