Posted on 09/17/2010 4:18:33 AM PDT by ejdrapes
By Charles Krauthammer Tuesday in Delaware was a bad day not only for Republicans but also for conservatives. Tea Partyer Christine O'Donnell scored a stunning victory over establishment Republican Mike Castle. Stunning but pyrrhic. The very people who have most alerted the country to the perils of President Obama's social democratic agenda may have just made it impossible for Republicans to retake the Senate and definitively stop that agenda Bill Buckley -- no Mike Castle he -- had a rule: Support the most conservative candidate who is electable. A timeless rule of sober politics, and particularly timely now. This is no ordinary time. And this is no ordinary Democratic administration. It is highly ideological and ambitious. It is determined to use whatever historical window it is granted to change the country structurally, irreversibly. It has already done so with Obamacare and has equally lofty ambitions for energy, education, immigration, taxation, industrial policy and the composition of the Supreme Court. That's what makes the eleventh-hour endorsements of O'Donnell by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) and Sarah Palin so reckless and irresponsible. Of course Mike Castle is a liberal Republican. What do you expect from Delaware? A DeMint? Castle voted against Obamacare and the stimulus. Yes, he voted for cap-and-trade. That's batting .667. You'd rather have a Democrat who bats .000 and who might give the Democrats the 50th vote to control the Senate? Castle wasn't only electable. He was unbeatable. Why do you think Beau Biden, long groomed to inherit his father's seat, flinched from running? Because Castle, who had already won statewide races a dozen times, scared him off. Democrats had already given up on the race.The Buckley rule
Friday, September 17, 2010
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Evidently, we can also expect an O'Donnell, Chuckles.
Let’s stop bowing down to the likes of Buckley and Krauthammer. Conservaties didn’t make that much progress because of Buckley, we made it because of Reagan. Krauthammer likes to hear himself talk and is satisfied with a piece of bread instead of the whole loaf. Bam thought enough of him to invite him to dinner.
With all due respect to your service and long time on Free Republic, you need to get with the program. Your way has failed time and time again. This isn’t my opinion. It’s proven fact. We are where we are because we elected people like Specter and Jeffords because the so called wise heads told us that was the only way to hold a majority.
Even recent history proves you wrong. We had enough senators to filibuster Kagan. If our 41 were faithful conservatives, they could have held the line. Instead, we got Kagan.
Again, we’ve tried it Krauthammer’s way for decades (geesh, Castle was in political office for over FOUR decades). That way leads to failure. I suppose you could argue that it might work this time, but history shows you’re wrong.
And, even if you’re right, I hope you understand that means we’re lost, that there’s no restoring America. If the only way we can get a Republican majority is to elect a bunch of Mike Castles, we are truly screwed as a nation.
The “electable” strategy has worked so well with Snowe and Collins..
“Electable” conservative is to espouse that one can can pick up a turd by the clean end..
So, if your goal is winning, regardless of policy outcome, why not just vote for whoever is ahead in the polls for the general election?
There are many democrats that are far more conservative than Mike Castle.
What I really read from your post is that you care more about winning elections than winning policy battles; you care more about having your party in the majority, than your philosophy being advanced and conservatives governing.
Beside, it is just not accurate. Our greatest victories are when Republicans go to the right - 1980, 1984, and 1994. Our biggest losses come when we try to be moderate - Bush ‘92, Dole/Kemp ‘96, McCain ‘08 - and ‘00 and ‘04 were squeakers. Go to American Thinker and read the top article today...it addresses this exact point.
I wonder if Sour Kraut is an old-fashioned, Freudian-trained psychiatrist. Having dealt with some, they are the coldest and most rigid of the medical professions. Also, if he is Freudian-trained, he thinks O’Donnell and Palin are suffering from penis envy.
(Hey, did I just hit on something????)
Sometime you can have a Pyrrhic victory. Sometime the devastating result after that “victory” is devastating but not catastrophic.
In these times, with Obama in the White House, any win for him is catastrophic for the rest of us.
Krauthammer is exactly right. Castle might have been a thorn to prick the Republican majority, but it would be a Republican majority, with Republicans controlling the agenda.
If this seat is the determining seat, and it falls to the Democrats because of this victory you are celebrating, these shouts of joy may turn to tears very quickly.
I hope O’Donnell can win. And if she does, I will be happy and humbled. What will you be if she loses and Obama gets more chances to destroy the Nation?
Very strange comment.
Krauthammer was very much a trained and practicing psychiatrist and he was and is against Obama Care. He implies as much in this opinion when stating Castle's "batting" average.
And if his taking the seat had made Mitch McConnell majority leader, then he wouldn’t have any more opportunities to vote for lousy legislation.
>>I still don’t get why politicans like Castle, who are more liberal than some ‘Rat senators, insist on being Republicans.<<
I’m starting to wonder if the enemy plant theory is actually at play here.
HearMe: “I hope O’Donnell can win. And if she does, I will be happy and humbled. What will you be if she loses and Obama gets more chances to destroy the Nation?”
We only require 41 conservative senators to filibuster Obama’s agenda. There aren’t enough seats up for election this cycle to gain a clear conservative majority. Let’s say we achieved a Republican majority with Mike Castle being the 51st vote. Do you honestly believe he would have backed us up? Haven’t you grown tired of Jeffords, Specter, and Gang of 14 Republican majorities? That’s hardly winning, my FRiend.
On balance people like Spector did more good then harm because a Liberal Republican is any day better then a Liberal Democrat.
Would Clarence Thomas be on the Supreme Court today if not for Spector's defense and support?
Harry called him his pet...good reason not to vote for the Rino...I pray they continue the support and she wins. We need her to win.
It sure seems like true conservatives are OK with people like Krauthammer and Rove as long as they stay at least arms length from real power.
This would explain why Sarah is so hated. She wields real power with a LOT of people and they HATE that. And the GOP tried to ignore the other conservative candidates and REALLY don't like O'Donnell because if the pubbies do take the Senate she will have a very powerful position due to her controlling vote.
Conservatives are second class citizens in their minds and we are in the process of fixing that. That upsets them a lot.
It’s not enough to filibuster, don’t you want to abolish Obama Care, for one example.
Yes, he is not one of us but he is one of THEM.
LLS
I am all for backing her....Just trying to figure out what is wrong with Republican leaders for supporting her opponent.He is another Democrat suck up.
HearMe: “On balance people like Spector did more good then harm because a Liberal Republican is any day better then a Liberal Democrat.”
Unbelievable. You honestly believe Arlen Specter was, on balance, good for conservatism? Yeah, he really rolled back big government. What a guy, and loyal, too!
Given there will be NO difference between Coon’s and Castle’s vote (the marxist Coons might even be more conservative), exactly how would Castle stymie Obama’s plans?
He wasn’t going to vote to repeal Obamacare. He wasn’t going to pick Obamacare apart, replace it, or fail to fund it.
The ONLY thing we’d get with Castle, is a Republican majority blamed for supporting Obamacare and a blurring of the lines between the parties.
Look at 1994. The House passed every one of the measures in the Contract with America. ...and the Republican controlled Senate fumbled just about all of them. Result: everybody said there was no difference between the parties.
With people like Castle, they are right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.