Althouse: "I was dabbling in witchcraft, I've dabbled in Buddhism."

October 1, 2010

"I was dabbling in witchcraft, I've dabbled in Buddhism."

"I would have become a Hare Krishna but I didn't want to become a vegetarian and that is honestly the reason why because I'm Italian, I love meatballs."

89 comments:

Synova said...: LOL!

Meatballs. That's really funny.

Are we supposed to think there is something wrong with her attempts to be amusing however long ago that was when she was on a show because she kept it lively?

It's like a blog, isn't it?

Don't be boring!; 10/1/10, 10:23 PM
JAL said...: I think POTUS dabbled in coke.

And Islam.

No one cares.

See libs? That was easy.; 10/1/10, 10:25 PM
Clyde said...: It would be like trying to make an estimation of Goldie Hawn's intelligence based on watching her in skits from Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In. Just because someone plays a ditz doesn't mean that she necessarily IS a ditz!; 10/1/10, 10:27 PM
Anonymous said...: People, listen to me. This woman is a third-rate hack riding the wave of the Tea Party phenomenon. Delaware is not a conservative state and you conservatives and libertarians would have been much better off with Castle.

Let's try the patented Seven Machos shoe-on-the-other-hand test as well. If this person had said all this ridiculous shit, and done all (so little?) that O'Donnell has done and she was a Democrat, would you be defending her?

Come on. Actuality is a friend of yours.; 10/1/10, 10:36 PM
Clyde said...: (And coincidentally enough, Goldie is a practicing Buddhist, according to Wikipedia.); 10/1/10, 10:37 PM
GMay said...: 7M,

And how many of the same have the Dems been putting in office for decades? As long as she votes the right way, I couldn't care less about this stuff. Looking at Castle's voting record, it doesn't look like she can do any worse.; 10/1/10, 10:42 PM
jungatheart said...: JAL:
"I think POTUS dabbled in coke.

And Islam."

Get with the program, JAL. Your willful ignorance has not gone unnoticed.; 10/1/10, 10:43 PM
Anonymous said...: GMay -- She's not going to win. That's the difference. I know we've had this discussion before, so we are just having it in front of others now, but having leadership in the Senate really matters. Castle would have won and that would have meant that Republicans would have leadership in the entire chamber as well as in the committees.

How she votes doesn't really matter. That's like saying are you going to buy the sausage or not. What really matters is what is actually in the sausage, and who controls the Senate controls the sausage-making process.

It's vital to accept that liberal states aren't going to produce conservative politicians very often. Rahm Emmanuel understands this, which is why he organized a bunch of conservative Democrats to run in conservative congressional districts.; 10/1/10, 10:50 PM
PatHMV said...: Seven, I generally agree with you, BUT... the primary is over. NOW, at this moment, the choice is between her or the hard core "progressive" (i.e., half socialist) Democrat. So TODAY, if you care about electing conservative candidates, the focus should be on trying to help her get elected (if you can without violating fundamental principles, of course). Tell the folks who supported her over Castle "told you so" AFTER the election. Until then, regardless of her possible idiocy, she's still a better candidate than the alternative NOW available.

Plus, the battle between the "pure at all costs" and the "let's be sensible and win a few elections" factions is going to last for several election cycles (forever, really). If we "let's win a few" types don't support the primary winner, vocally and without continuous carping about the primary campaign and result, well then we'll not have a leg to stand on in the future when we ask the "pure at all costs" folks to support, say, a future Castle.

My own state GOP Senator is a reprehensible human being, but he's going to win, and I'm going to vote for him, because the only alternative is a moderate Democrat. We no longer have the option of a Castle. We weren't able to convince the Delaware GOP primary voters that he was the best choice. So let's suck it up and support the winner of the primary, whatever we think of her.; 10/1/10, 10:59 PM
Anonymous said...: Pat -- I'd definitely vote for her. I voted for McCain, man.

I encourage all Delaware residents to vote for O'Donnell.; 10/1/10, 11:00 PM
a psychiatrist who learned from veterans said...: Isn't there a Talmudic principle that you shouldn't gossip about people because it might get back to them and they might commit suicide? Isn't that what happened to that poor kid who could have had a life and enjoyed the violin? How can any of you associate yourselves with this Maher, how can I avoid the complement, douchebag?; 10/1/10, 11:06 PM
Anonymous said...: Who said I am associating with Maher? Very cruel. That kind of gossip could drive me suicide.; 10/1/10, 11:09 PM
Synova said...: Does anyone know if Castle ever met O'Donnell in a debate?

Anyone have any advice on how to google for that? My google-foo sucks.; 10/1/10, 11:10 PM
NotWhoIUsedtoBe said...: I think wasting this much time on a candidate who probably isn't going to win is a bad strategy for both sides.

For Republicans, there are plenty of other races to win.

For Democrats, there are plenty of other races to lose.

I wish I didn't have to hear about this person anymore. I wouldn't vote for her because she has a lot of... issues. If we're going to look at experience and record, O'Donnell should lose.

In the meantime, we actually have a Senate race hear in Colorado which matters just as much and gets zero national coverage. I guess that's OK with everyone, even though the vote counts just as much as Delaware's.; 10/1/10, 11:11 PM
PatHMV said...: Seven... yeah, it hurt me a lot, too, pulling that lever for McCain.; 10/1/10, 11:15 PM
Anonymous said...: I think somebody should write an article from a psychological perspective about the way that attractive female Republican conservatives make the left go bat-shit insane. There are some serious issues to explore there.

The person that we all thought Camille Paglia was going to be before it turned out she just had the one trick would be an ideal author.; 10/1/10, 11:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Delaware is not a conservative state and you conservatives and libertarians would have been much better off with Castle.

If the majority is small enough that Castle would have tipped the balance, the majority would be small enough that its power would be held hostage to a Jeffords-style defection by and of the RINOs. The result would be a Senate where the leadership pushed through a Democrat Lite agenda, motivated by the desire to retain their personal power.

The fact that the Tea Party wouldn't swallow a Castle even at the possible price of the Senate is a message every single Republican Senator can understand. It's "be solid or you're through." 47 Republicans united (by fear of the Tea Party) in obstructing the left is vastly preferable Senate to one with 51 Republicans enabling the left.; 10/1/10, 11:22 PM
Anonymous said...: 47 Republicans united

Good luck, pal.

Say, if you are interested, I got this bridge in New York City to sell..; 10/1/10, 11:26 PM
MikeDC said...: The reason attractive female conservatives make liberals go insane is the same reason homosexuals make a not insignificant number of people go insane.

At our core, we have a desire to propagate. Folks who in any way subvert that desire run afoul of our basic drives. Men don't like gay men because they're a temptation to switch teams. Women don't like gay men because they decrease the pool of potential mates.

As political beings, just like as sexual beings, we have a desire to see our beliefs passed on. So a traitor, one who seems like us but plays for the other side, is not not an opponent but a heretic.; 10/1/10, 11:28 PM
Anonymous said...: Mike -- Most of what you just said is wrong. The rest of it I did not understand. None of it has anything to do with why attractive Republican female politicians drive the left bat-shit insane.

The key word here is attractive. Nobody gives much of a shit either way about Jo Ann Emerson.; 10/1/10, 11:30 PM
Jim said...: So we are supposed to believe that she is any stranger than say...Al Franken (dabbled in comedy)...Robert Bird (dabbled in the KKK)...Ted Kennedy (dabbled in stunt diving)..etc..etc; 10/1/10, 11:36 PM
NotWhoIUsedtoBe said...: 7M

What I learned in 2008 was how misogynist this country was.

Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin felt the wrath of the Democratic party. And that's supposed to be the liberals...

Really eye opening for me.

That being said, O'Donnell shouldn't be a Senator, for the very good reason that she has no experience, and what she does have isn't very helpful.; 10/1/10, 11:37 PM
lucid said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 10/1/10, 11:42 PM
lucid said...: I think nominating O'Donnell was a huge mistake.

But, having said that, I also think that O'Donnell's candidacy may wind up hurting the Dems nationally.

This is because O'Donnell brings out the worst in the Dems--as with Bill Maher--when they attack her.

Their viciousness and condescension toward almost everyone other than themselves becomes more and more emphasized in what they are communicating.

And it is the Dems' sense of being so much better than everyone else and of believing that they should be able to tell us what to do even against our own wills that is part of the emotional momentum of this anti-dem election cycle.

So let them attack O'Donnell as viciously and haughtily as they want to.

They just remind us all the more of what is in them that we hate and can't wait to vote against.; 10/1/10, 11:45 PM
Chip Ahoy said...: Synova,

+"Christine O'Donnell" +"Mike Castle" +debate

Apparently Castle refused to debate, (he was entitled to the candidacy, you know, so why should he? ) but a debate with Coons is scheduled.; 10/1/10, 11:45 PM
Anonymous said...: Castle sure did run a dumb campaign. That much I grant. For a politician, he didn't understand much about the current state of politics.; 10/1/10, 11:48 PM
exhelodrvr1 said...: Hillary talked to Eleanor.; 10/1/10, 11:50 PM
Anonymous said...: Good luck, pal.

Like I said, united by fear. Bennet, Murkowski, Crist . . . none of those defeats unambiguously demonstrated a willingness to let a Democrat win in the name of purity. Castle did.

If, say, Snowe doesn't come away from that worried about a Tea Party assault on her in 2012, and vote with that concern in mind, she's a lot dumber than I thought.; 10/1/10, 11:50 PM
Synova said...: "Apparently Castle refused to debate,"

You know... I just assumed this was the case. But I figured if I was going to fret about it, I should be certain.

Look at it this way... Castle was supposed to serve the people in his district and he, HE, allowed O'Donnell to gain that nomination without ever having to stand up in a public forum to answer serious questions.

And I do blame him. Just like I blame any other "candidate" who thinks that they are smart to ditch debates as a way to avoid making mistakes and avoid giving the other candidate/s legitimacy or air time they don't pay for.

It's irresponsible and voters should punish the behavior and nip it in the bud. Pronto.; 10/1/10, 11:57 PM
Anonymous said...: a willingness to let a Democrat win in the name of purity

I think this is dumb. Look at what's happening to the left as we speak. It's a crackup, with moderates and radicals both blaming the other side for the disaster that is Obama's presidency. The same fate portends for the Republicans. You aren't going to drive out moderates and win elections.

Also, if you think that a conservative Democrat can win in Maine then you are truly and completely deluded.

Listen, dude. I am highly conservative/libertarian. But I am also a political realist. You want a party without moderates, then what you want is a party that is going to attract maybe 30 percent of the electorate. Conservative Republicans cannot win in Vermont. Liberal Democrats cannot win in Alabama. We are a strong, diverse, diffuse country. Grow up and deal with it.; 10/1/10, 11:59 PM
jungatheart said...: 7M, or anybody, please walk me through what is wrong with this statement:

"The fact that the Tea Party wouldn't swallow a Castle even at the possible price of the Senate is a message every single Republican Senator can understand. It's "be solid or you're through." 47 Republicans united (by fear of the Tea Party) in obstructing the left is vastly preferable Senate to one with 51 Republicans enabling the left."; 10/2/10, 12:02 AM
Anonymous said...: Deborah -- That's not the message. The message is: don't run a dumb-ass front porch primary campaign. Get out and address the Tea Partiers. Advocate to them and come to an understanding with them.

Furthermore, the fact that O'Donnell is a third-rate hack with no experience riding the Tea Party phenomenon doesn't ultimately matter. I'm going to put the money sentence in bold for you: conservative politics is not a political winner in Delaware.

Finally, Scott Brown of Massachusetts ain't voting like a limited government conservative. He is not solid.; 10/2/10, 12:09 AM
Chennaul said...: Riiiiigggghhht-

Like you guys *innocently* want o know the specifics.

Try the fact that Erik Erikson said on CNN that he had it on good inside information that castle would switch parties once elected.

That Insider-never named.

*******************************

Try that on Hannity it was reported that Castle voted for Obama Care.

That's probably the dumbest lie because the House held firm. Not one Republican voted for ObamaCare.

Yesterday, Rush Limbaugh said, “He voted for the stimulus, and the people are saying, ‘Well, we need to get control of the Senate, Rush, and if it’s gonna take a guy like Mike Castle in Delaware to get control of the Senate, then we’re going to have to go for that, we’re going to have to do it.’”

I suppose Rush may have been referring to the 2008 stimulus and not the more well-known 2009 one, but the earlier one passed 81–16 and quite a few staunchly conservative senators voted for it, including Richard Burr of North Carolina (lifetime ACU rating of 91), John Thune of South Dakota (87.7), David Vitter of Louisiana (93.8), Jim Bunning of Kentucky (94.5), Mitch McConnell of Kentucky (89.6), Sam Brownback of Kansas (92.7), Pat Roberts of Kansas (86.8), Saxby Chambliss of Georgia (92.8), and Orrin Hatch of Utah (89.1). (And, of course, President Bush signed it into law.) If this vote is the defining litmus test of conservatism, more than half the Senate Republican caucus came out RINO.

Then, while discussing this race with Michelle Malkin last night, Sean Hannity said, “We have another case emerging next Tuesday, Delaware. Christine O’Donnell, the establishment is trying to assassinate her character, smear her. Mike Castle voted for Obamacare, TARP, cap and tax, the establishment wants him. What can we interpret from that?”

NRO; 10/2/10, 12:16 AM
Chennaul said...: Or how about that O'Donnell ran an ad making the same false claims?

Weekly Standard; 10/2/10, 12:18 AM
Chennaul said...: Or how about the lie that Mike Castle voted to Impeach a sitting war time President-George W. Bush?

That lie well Patterico decimated them on that.

Patterico; 10/2/10, 12:20 AM
Chennaul said...: How about the fact that Christine O'Donell when she did not win the Republican nomination ran a write in campaign in 2006?

Gasp!; 10/2/10, 12:21 AM
Chennaul said...: Or how about the claim that Christine O'Donnell made that Mike Castle had people threatening her well being, and had people break into her campaign office when she was running against Joe Biden in 2008?

Without filing a police report at the time.

Mike Castle has been a politician for decades in Delaware yet Christine O'Donnell was the only person making those kinds of claims against him.; 10/2/10, 12:24 AM
Anonymous said...: I have been holding back something my intuition has told for a long time but, after those posts by Mad -- facts I never knew -- but now, given these damning facts, I'll say it:

Christine O'Donnell is a shallow opportunist along the lines of the worst unscrupulous shysters Congress has known. Christine O'Donnell strikes me as the kind of person who ultimately is primarily about the fame and wealth of Christine O'Donnell.; 10/2/10, 12:26 AM
Chennaul said...: Then you know-you could listen to just the first three minutes and 16 seconds of Christine O'Donnell in this radio interview-

WGMD Radio

And explain just what in the hell Christine O'Donnell is doing there?

Keep in mind that there are only three counties in Delaware and, losing a county by 10,000 votes that is a small county in a small state is not-

"almost a tie".; 10/2/10, 12:29 AM
Chennaul said...: And then Synova being an ex-member of the military you should be familiar with certain codes-being willfully ignorant about wrong doing-is that acceptable?; 10/2/10, 12:37 AM
Anonymous said...: Isn't it possible that O'Donnell put a hex on Castle and is now experiencing Nirvana?; 10/2/10, 12:46 AM
Chef Mojo said...: @7M & madawaskan:

So, what you're saying is that you'd rather see Coons in the Senate.

Just wanted to clear that up.

We now return you to our regular RINO whine-fest...; 10/2/10, 1:04 AM
Anonymous said...: So, what you're saying is that you'd rather see Coons in the Senate.

Dude, what I am saying is that O'Donnell is going to lose because a majority of people in Delaware aren't going to vote for her. I can only repeat myself so many times.

Here it is in Spanish: O'Donnell va a perder.

In German: O'Donnell wird verlieren.

Russian: O' Donnell идет потерять.

What part don't you get? Is it the part where I am not saying what you want to hear?; 10/2/10, 1:09 AM
Chef Mojo said...: @7M & madawaskan:

Seriously. That's your choice now. Coons or O'Donnell. Take your pick.

It's really that simple.; 10/2/10, 1:09 AM
Anonymous said...: Mojo -- I said above that I would vote for O'Donnell. I further all Delaware residents to vote for O'Donnell.

Nevertheless, O'Donnell is going to lose. She's not going to win. Losing will be what happens to her. A win she will not obtain.

You are pretty stupid to be yelling at me and calling me a RINO for this statement.; 10/2/10, 1:14 AM
Chef Mojo said...: @7M:

And when she loses, won't you feel so validated?

Slag her to your heart's content, 7M. I get it. But in the end, it's self righteous, self destructive dweebs like you that create these self fulfilling prophecies.

You hold it in your hands like an egg, only to crush it with your rage.

wv: phyric. Man, I couldn't have asked for a better wv with a gun to my head.; 10/2/10, 1:15 AM
Anonymous said...: when she loses, won't you feel so validated?

No.

in the end, it's self righteous, self destructive dweebs like you that create these self fulfilling prophecies

While I am honored and deeply touched that you think I have the power to harness the Internet to make the people of Delaware conform to my political predictions, I don't think I actually have such power.

You hold it in your hands like an egg, only to crush it with your rage.

Are you sure I'm the one with the rage?

So, to review:

1. O'Donnell will lose.

2. Seven Machos is just a guy at Althouse predicting an election.; 10/2/10, 1:19 AM
chickelit said...: And explain just what in the hell Christine O'Donnell is doing there?

I listened to it and wondered what the hell? It sounded like a set-up.

The radio guy waffled on his numbers too: "Ok Ok what about the second county?..."

Not sure I get your point with that particular radio blurb madawaskan.; 10/2/10, 1:34 AM
Gabriel Hanna said...: I think O'Donnell is a looney who cost the GOP a Senate seat.

And it is totally worth it. If the GOP establishment candidates get thrown over for obvious looneys, then they will know that they can't just go back to business as it was in the Bush years.

They know now that they have to put up or shut up.

Totally worth a Senate seat.; 10/2/10, 1:44 AM
chickelit said...: I think O'Donnell is a looney who cost the GOP a Senate seat.
.
.
.
Totally worth a Senate seat.

Such certainty with still a month to go!; 10/2/10, 1:51 AM
traditionalguy said...: The plain truth on display in the Delaware Senate race is whether or not a Sarah Palin endorsed Momma Grizzlie will continue that steam roller tactic using gutsy women to defeat the Carl Rove machine. O'Donnell is not the reincarnation of Jefferson/Washington/Lincoln. She is a symbol of the strength of Carl Rove against the strength of Sarah Palin. That role means that an all in attitude of "why not win this one?" is all that O'Donnell needs. Winners...love them or leave them for a loser.; 10/2/10, 2:01 AM
Anonymous said...: If I may, before I go to bed, let me ask you brilliant political minds a question:

When O'Donnell loses, and Republican operatives survey the political landscape, do you really believe that they will conclude that candidates better adhere to the Tea Party worldview? Will they say, gosh, O'Donnell got beat but if only we ran candidates less like Castle and more like O'Donnell in places like Delaware, we'd win?

Because that's not what they are going to conclude. And I think if you will apply some basic reasoning, you'll agree.; 10/2/10, 2:05 AM
chickelit said...: When O'Donnell loses, and Republican operatives survey the political landscape, do you really believe that they will conclude that candidates better adhere to the Tea Party worldview?

At this point, one cannot predict what surprises November will hold, so it's futile to imagine what strategists will be thinking then.

It's fun to talk about this stuff though and I bid you pleasant dreams 7-machos; 10/2/10, 2:14 AM
traditionalguy said...: The game will be played on November 2, 2010. The scores being announced by Rove and friends are not the scores, they are America's Politico style Tokyo Rove-isms. Win or lose it, O;Donnel IS WILLING TO FIGHT. That is why she is no RINO. Let's wait and see whether she wins on voter refudiation of the Democrats. Shameful winners like O'Donnell can then repent of winning while a woman at their leisure.; 10/2/10, 2:19 AM
Revenant said...: When O'Donnell loses, and Republican operatives survey the political landscape, do you really believe that they will conclude that candidates better adhere to the Tea Party worldview?

I don't see O'Donnell as representing "the Tea Party worldview". Yes, she's fiscally conservative. But she's also extremely socially conservative -- something that has nothing to do with the Tea Party movement -- and that's what's going to sink her.

It is a shame that the only fiscal conservative in the race was also so conservative on other issues. But, hey. Can't win 'em all. There's always 2016.; 10/2/10, 2:36 AM
Unknown said...: It would appear that all the National Socialists can use against her is this one interview on a show nobody watches.

Apparently her platform today is sufficiently threatening to all the small c communists that they need to destroy her as quickly as possible because they can't debate her on the issues.

MikeDC said...

The reason attractive female conservatives make liberals go insane is the same reason homosexuals make a not insignificant number of people go insane.

The homosexual thing has to do with Biblical injunctions, and it isn't quite the same thing because most people don't go as insane as the self-anointed sophisticates like to tell themselves.

But let a Log Cabin Republican take a major nomination in NY or CA and watch the Lefty smear machine go into high gear in the exact same way. The issue here is that the Left is supposed to own women and this is the year of the big revolt. Witness Gloria Allred doing the same thing (well, trying and failing) with Meg Whitman.

Keep in mind how Peggy Noonan and all the other ship-jumpers told us Sarah Palin wasn't ready for prime time until she galvanized opposition to ZeroCare with those two magic words, "death panels" .; 10/2/10, 5:10 AM
Hagar said...: O'Donnell won the Republican primary election for senator in Delaware. Now let us support her!; 10/2/10, 8:02 AM
John henry said...: Maher threatens to release embarrassing information about O'Donnell unless she provides him something of value ie; appearing on his show.

Why is this any different from saying "I have some embarrassing video and will release it unless you give me $100,000"?

It seems to me that what Maher is doing meets the legal definition of extortion:

"The crime involving a threat for purposes of compelling a person to do an act against his or her will, or for purposes of taking the person's money or property."

So could the professor or perhaps an attorney tell me why O'Donnell would not have an action against O'Donnell? Seems like there could be both criminal and civil actions here.

But, I am not a lawyer.

John Henry; 10/2/10, 8:02 AM
AllenS said...: Very good points, John Henry. Too bad Gloria Allred is busy.; 10/2/10, 8:08 AM
Fred4Pres said...: This is kind of funny, but hardly damaging. So what.

Christine will probably lose this election, but it is more about Mike Castle not endorsing her and Republican infighting.; 10/2/10, 8:27 AM
Fred4Pres said...: I do like meatballs.

I bet Fred Thompson likes meatballs too.

Bill Maher does not. I do not trust a person who dislikes meatballs.; 10/2/10, 8:30 AM
jr565 said...: C'mon are people protesting this serious? Now buddhism is akin to witch craft? If someone dabbles in buddhism they are now unelectable?
What young adult or teenager isn't going from ism to ism trying to figure out what they believe in before finally landing on something that best fits them. in her case it was christianity, but in others it might be buddhism.
The Beatles had their Hare Krishna moment and they were in their late twenties. George Harrison carried on with his buddhism till his death.
You can have people who are murderers who come to Christ and become born again, why is it so hard to understand that someone might come from another belief system which they found wanting. And the word dabble means they tried it out but never really got that into it. So her buddhism was never that deep to begin with.; 10/2/10, 9:00 AM
ndspinelli said...: My God..this woman is Italian?? Combine her w/ Pelosi and I am more than embarassed.

Please accept my apology on behalf of all Italians..mea culpa, mea culpa, mea culpa.

Finally, one could be a vegetarian and eat an Italian diet quite easily, Italians don't eat a lot of meat.

Meatballs? Hell, I could give up meatballs...veal and sausage would be a problem.; 10/2/10, 9:20 AM
Big Mike said...: @Seven Machos, you're perfectly correct as far as it goes. But the trouble is that her opponent is every bit as big a wacko as she is. Just Bill Maher isn't poking fun at him so you don't realize it. And Coons is a wacko about the economy.

So if I lived in Delaware I'd hold my nose and vote for O'Donnell, because the choice isn't between a fine, upstanding politician and a wacko, it's between two wackos and O'Donnell is the less dangerous of the two.

And does anybody besides me think that there's something wrong with our 21st century primary system?; 10/2/10, 9:28 AM
Anonymous said...: O'Donnell is not going anywhere. But, what if she won? That would be good for Obama/Biden.

My hero in orders are:

1. Obama/Biden
2. Pelosi
3. Reid

If Christine wins, she will be Reid's problem. But, for us in the WH community, this will be good. She will create one problem after another for the Senate. When Palin runs (we will hope she does), then voters will see what a mess Palin-O'Donnell are for us.

Okay, dokey, I want Christine to lose, but if she won, then that will still good for us.

So, I am okay either way. Main thing: GOP/Tea Party as far away from WH as possible.; 10/2/10, 9:30 AM
GMay said...: 7M said: "Because that's not what they are going to conclude. And I think if you will apply some basic reasoning, you'll agree."

I'll agree to a point, and I don't think anyone seriously thinks that Republicans are going to move strongly back toward fiscal conservatism due to incumbents getting primaried by Tea Party candidates (or their coattail riders). But I do think it will force many of them to rethink their stances on what makes them electable. And I think that might move them in a positive direction.

"Purity" would be nice, but the same sort of pragmatism used by the left for so long that they foolishly abandoned with the election of Obama will win in the end. The pessimist in me doesn't think that long game exists.; 10/2/10, 9:33 AM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: So many issues to consider.

1. Who didn't do dumb stuff when they were a teenager and try out all kinds of ideas. I learned to read Tarot Cards about then....doesn't make me a gypsy.

2. The animus of the media to Republican women is really scary. The vicious retaliation, attempts at destruction and out and out wishing for physical harm and rape rise to Taliban levels. There is something seriously deranged about it.

3. The primaries are over and the people of Delware (those that vote anyway) has been spoken. Instead of tearing down O'Donnell because she isn't the picture perfect Republican candidate people should either support her.....or here is a better idea. If you aren't from Delaware STFU. It isn't your business.

I actually think she is a looney tune. However, if the people vote for her...that is what a representative government is about. WE get to choose the loonies that we want to represent us.

vw: untars. It is really hard to get your reputation back after you have been tarred by the MSM; 10/2/10, 9:36 AM
Mr. D said...: I said a lot of stupid things when I was young. Just not on a Bill Maher television show.

If O'Donnell is elected somehow, she won't be the biggest joke in the Senate by a long shot. Our senate delegation in Minnesota trumps her easily. And I don't just mean Franken.

But 7M is correct. O'Donnell is not likely to win, unless there's some video evidence of Coons standing on the Kremlin balcony with Andropov or something.; 10/2/10, 9:54 AM
Lincolntf said...: There is no way O'Donnell will be worse than the idiots that the Dems elect every year. Franken, Hastings, McKinney, etc. have all lowered the bar so much that it's impossible to disgrace public office any further.
And if a young Christine O'Donnell was playing around with notions ranging from Wicca to Hinduism, at least she wasn't blasting coke up her nose like the current CinC.; 10/2/10, 9:56 AM
Trooper York said...: Seven Machos said.....
Let's try the patented Seven Machos shoe-on-the-other-hand test as well. If this person had said all this ridiculous shit, and done all (so little?) that O'Donnell has done and she was a Democrat, would you be defending her?

Jeez I don't know. Is Al Franken a Senator or what. The bar is pretty low dude.

I mean Carrot Top would get my vote if he would lower my taxes for crying out loud.; 10/2/10, 10:09 AM
Hagar said...: It looks to be a bad year for establishment candidates. As the Democrat - and Republican - establishments coalesce around Coons, the voters of Delaware may well elect O'Donnell just to show them what they think of both their houses!

(Could this be how Franken got elected in Minnesota?); 10/2/10, 10:38 AM
sakredkow said...: My own state GOP Senator is a reprehensible human being, but he's going to win, and I'm going to vote for him, because the only alternative is a moderate Democrat.

I don't want to sound too self-righteous about this, but I don't understand how people can make these kind of bargains. As time goes on I come to believe that character is a lot more important than political ideology.; 10/2/10, 10:56 AM
jr565 said...: ndspinelli wrote:
Meatballs? Hell, I could give up meatballs...veal and sausage would be a problem.

So you're slamming her for her idiocy and saying that italians don't eat that much meat and then say that you yourself would have problem giving up veal and sausage, both meats. What if instead of meatballs she had said "sausage" or "veal" would she suddenly be less stupid?; 10/2/10, 11:01 AM
jr565 said...: Deborah wrote:
"I think POTUS dabbled in coke.

And Islam."

Get with the program, JAL. Your willful ignorance has not gone unnoticed.

which one are you suggesting willful ignorance on? He did attend a madrassah as a child, that could be considered "dablling". Not to imply that he was ever a full on muslim, but by attending this school he probably was exposed to more Islam than O'Donnell ever was exposed to wiccanism or buddhism. And as far as the drugs. Obama admitted that he was a cokehead and drunk in high school. He did more than dabble. In fairness to him he stayed away from H, but that doesn't invalidate his admitted drug use. He smoked AND inhaled.; 10/2/10, 11:05 AM
jr565 said...: Seven Machos wrote:
Listen, dude. I am highly conservative/libertarian. But I am also a political realist. You want a party without moderates, then what you want is a party that is going to attract maybe 30 percent of the electorate. Conservative Republicans cannot win in Vermont. Liberal Democrats cannot win in Alabama. We are a strong, diverse, diffuse country. Grow up and deal with it.

I find it hilarious that someone going out of their way to essesntially throw tomatoes at O'Donnell is the one saying that convervatives need moderates because they can't win in certain states, and that convervativism is a big tent. Yet, here you are throwing your tomatoes. Sounds like you have an awful lot of litmus tests as to who to invite into your conservative party, and if they don't meet your criterion you'll berate them and their chances of winning. Which is fine, but I don't understand then why you don't think conservatives might not view RINO's/moderates with the same degree of scorn that you view O'Donnelly and similarly want them out of the party with the view that even if they win they will not work towards conservative goals.; 10/2/10, 11:16 AM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: (Could this be how Franken got elected in Minnesota?)

This and the extra magical votes found in car trunks.; 10/2/10, 11:38 AM
Synova said...: "It looks to be a bad year for establishment candidates. As the Democrat - and Republican - establishments coalesce around Coons, the voters of Delaware may well elect O'Donnell just to show them what they think of both their houses!

(Could this be how Franken got elected in Minnesota?)"

It's sure as heck how Jesse "The Body" Ventura got elected in Minnesota.; 10/2/10, 12:23 PM
jungatheart said...: jr565,
I was joking. Obama got a pass for a whole hell of a lot, from the press and from his sycophants, before he was voted in.; 10/2/10, 12:53 PM
Rialby said...: I wouldn't consider myself a cheerleader for CO'D but let me say this... wasn't this the whole fucking plot line of the latest Julia Roberts movie? She dabbled in everything and found out God lived in her duodenum or some crap?

She's a child of the 80s. This is what the Boomers produced.; 10/2/10, 3:39 PM
The Crack Emcee said...: Let's see:

She started off as a witch (fundamentalist) a Buddhist (fundamentalist) and even one of those despicable Hari-Hari fingerbell fools (also fundamentalist) only to be labeled "crazy" once she adopted (fundamentalist) Christianity?

I'm confused.; 10/2/10, 3:52 PM
ndspinelli said...: jr565'

Firstly,

You have to chill.

Secondly, I wasn't aware sausage and veal are meat..thanks for the heads up!!

Thirdly, this bimbo would still be stupid if she mentioned the aforementioned carne, she would just not be such a tasteless, classless, Americano.

Finally, is pork really the other white meat?; 10/2/10, 5:39 PM
jaed said...: I admit I'm confused too.

However, if the crazy witch will stand for fiscal sanity, governmental accountability, and reining the Feds back within some semblance of their constitutional limits, then the crazy witch has my support. It doesn't matter to me whether she disapproves of masturbation, or turned Bill Maher into a newt when she was in high school.

At this point, I could not care less about big tents, Senatorial dignitas, or making Democrats think Republicans are superior people - see what impressive senators they have! I don't care. If a politician will push for some sanity in Washington, they can be as flaky as they want and I still won't care.; 10/2/10, 5:40 PM
Anonymous said...: Even if O'Donnell were a flawless political conservative/libertarian who would do everything I agree with, I doubt she would win in Delaware. The fact that she's a loon makes the event less likely.

I am not saying O'Donnell shouldn't win. I am saying she is not going to win. Please parse this distinction carefully.; 10/2/10, 6:25 PM
Big Mike said...: @Seven, I hope you're wrong because - as I pointed out upthread - the other candidate is also loony, and more dangerous besides.

At any rate, it was up to Mike Castle to win his primary and he failed. So there's no assurance that he'd have won in the general if he couldn't exert himself in the primary. The last-minute negative campaign against O'Donnell backfired on him, and rightly so.; 10/2/10, 7:25 PM
Big Mike said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 10/2/10, 7:26 PM
Synova said...: Not speaking O'Donnell and her campaign at all, but just in general terms...

I've come to the conclusion that the worst thing we can do is attempt to figure out who other people will vote for and then vote according to *our* prejudices about *their* behavior.

Everyone second-guesses everyone else who is second-guessing everyone back again and no one votes for who they really want.

And how many times do we get told how some conservative is too far right for far left people to vote for... as if they would vote for a moderate, or even let the moderate claim the center ground, anyway.

It's mind games and the worst thing is they are self-inflicted.

It's a different thing that voting for some supposed ideological purity even if the guy or gal is an idiot, or offensive, or a loon. It's just, vote for who you like the best, which may not be someone perfect.

Just don't vote for what is imagined inside other people's heads. It's almost a promise that a person gets that wrong. We at least have a chance inside of our own heads.; 10/2/10, 10:52 PM
Jakester said...: This woman is priceless, No one has to speculate about or tattle on her. There is a great record of her making idiotic statements over the years; 10/3/10, 12:02 PM
roesch-voltaire said...: That crazy witch will end up defending the very rich of Wall Street and not the middle class folks who think she is one of them because well she hasn't held a job, or managed money well in how many years?; 10/3/10, 12:34 PM
roesch-voltaire said...: That crazy witch will end up defending the very rich of Wall Street and not the middle class folks who think she is one of them because well she hasn't held a job, or managed money well in how many years?; 10/3/10, 12:35 PM