|
I read Jim Geraghty's column [The Campaign Spot]
on NRO, and have noticed his one man effort to boost
Mike Castle's (R DE) campaign. But Rodge, what's
wrong with that? At first blush, nothing. It's how he's doing it, and
who he's attacking in the process. Not Democrat Chris Coons, but Tea
Party challenger Christine O’Donnell. Here's a few recent examples:
|
|
| “ |
The
options for Delaware Republicans on September 14 are nominating
Christine O’Donnell or Mike Castle to be their Senate nominee.
O’Donnell, if nominated, will have (cough) an uphill climb in a state
where registered Democrats outnumber registered Republicans roughly
329,000 to 179,000.
Castle has consistently been corrupt led all polls and his voting history suggests
he will vote with conservatives 52 percent of the time or so. If
Democrat Chris Coons is elected and votes in a pattern similar to
Delaware’s other senator, he will vote the conservative position 12
percent of the time; if he emulates current Democratic senator Ted
Kaufman, he will vote the conservative position 4 percent of the time.
Over his 17 complete years in the U.S. House of Representatives, Castle
has voted the conservative position, as defined by the American
Conservative Union, about 52 percent of the time. In 2009, ACU scored
Castle at 56. So how did he get that rating from the group last year?
|
” |
Oh goody. Votes with
conservatives 52 percent of the time, or so. We're in Lincoln
Chafee-Olympia Snowe- Susan Collins territory here. While we
desperately try to drive the Nazi's out of Paris, Geraghty's (and
others like him) solution is to replace them with a Vichy
gummint.
Geraghty has not the faintest clue about what's driving the anger in
this country. None. Christine O’Donnell for Senate.
The Wall Street Journal in an editorial today [The Delaware Senate primary is a test of political pragmatism]
rides with Geraghty. O’Donnell has lost twice before? BFD; then is not now. Besides, I'm quits with political pragmatism; this is war, baby!
|
|
