On the heels of Joe Miller’s stunning upset of Lisa Murkowski in Alaska, a previously obscure primary in the state of Delaware has incited passionate disagreement and unpalatable mudslinging — and not just in the predictable ruling class versus country class way we’ve come to expect from an unrepentant GOP establishment that won’t go gently into much-needed reform. To be fair, Republican elites have grown accustomed to conservative capitulation to the concept of “electability” over the years. Not even the stunning momentum and staying power of the Tea Party movement seems to have resonated with many of them, at least not when the battleground happens to be a ”safe” Northeastern state.
Nicknamed “Small Wonder” it will be no small feat in Delaware if Tea Party-backed, upstart challenger Christine O’Donnell prevails against 30-year RINO incumbent Mike Castle on September 14. In addition to Tea Party Express, O’Donnell has been endorsed by such conservative heavyweights as Mark Levin, Michelle Malkin, Tammy Bruce, Jim DeMint, and Michele Bachmann. Prominent righty bloggers like Dan Riehl of Riehl World View and Melissa Clothier of Liberty Pundits have also backed O’Donnell’s candidacy.
But the divisions this race has exposed on the right side of the aisle are telling, more so for their sheer vindictiveness than anything else. It’s not really a surprise that establishment-embracing publications like National Review and The Weekly Standard would partake in the “electability” rationalization, in spite of the fact that — among other things — Castle voted for Cap and Trade in 2009; the $26 billion Edujobs/BigGovJobs bailout just weeks ago; and the TARP bailout in 2008, as Michelle Malkin notes in a must-read column.
None of Castle’s supporters seem to have an answer as to why it took him until July 30 to sign onto the repeal of ObamaCare, though Mark Levin wonders if the relentless pressure from Christine O’Donnell had anything to with his motivation. Had he not been facing a challenger in the primary, would he have opposed Obamacare at all? And why, Levin asks, does his opposition come with a caveat, i.e. he’d consider repeal if we had a different president? With two years to go in the Obama term, this stance seems mighty contradictory to me.
But the most disturbing aspect of this entire primary spectacle is the concerted effort by O’Donnell’s detractors on the right to tar her as some kind of mentally unbalanced loon. William A. Jacobsen discusses this phenomenon in a post entitled Nuts and Sluts in Delaware:
The nuts part of the attack is being used against Christine O’Donnell in Delaware by the local Republican establishment, and also by two leading conservative magazines, The Weekly Standard and National Review. If O’Donnell is so nuts, why did the Delaware Republican Party nominate her to run against Joe Biden just two years ago?
If O’Donnell wins tomorrow, you can be sure that the Democrats will seize on the nuts attack from Republicans, and take it to the next step by sexualizing O’Donnell (it already has started).
By signing on to the nuts defense directed at conservative women, the Republican establishment has adopted the most pernicious line of Democratic Party attack.
As if condescension for O’Donnell’s financial status wasn’t bad enough (how dare an everyday Jane who’s not a multimillionaire — thanks to years at the public dole — run for office?!), many on the right have now taken a page out of the Alinsky playbook and given the left plenty of fodder to marginalize her, should she win on Tuesday.
And what’s with the defeatist attitude anyway?
It seems many alleged conservatives are miffed that O’Donnell’s primary challenge might succeed, because in their minds, it’s a foregone conclusion she’ll lose in the general. Not so fast, urges The Other McCain, polls are not necessarily predictive. While I agree, I’d also point out that even if Democrat Coons were to beat her, I’d rather have an avowed liberal making bad voting decisions than an alleged Republican. Let them own the debacle. If this is what it takes for the GOP to finally get it — even after Joe Miller, Rand Paul and Sharron Angle — it’s worth the sacrifice.
The GOP conveniently forgets that the reason for their thumpin’ in 2006 and 2008 was because they’d abandoned all fiscal principles to the point where it was nearly impossible to distinguish a Republican from a Democrat. To paraphrase conservative Republican candidate for US Senate in Florida, Marco Rubio, Americans deserve bold, clear choices, not wishy-washy sides of the same big-government coin. (It’s no coincidence that the NRSC threw him under the bus in May, 2009 only to wind up with egg on their faces when anointed RINO Charlie Crist bolted from the party, either).
In a year when anything can happen, I suspect Americans who happen to live in Delaware feel the same way, and they deserve an opportunity to select their candidate in their primary. Win or lose in the general election, the organized attempt by the Delaware GOP and some prominent righties to impugn Christine O’Donnell’s character has been a distasteful reminder of why more everyday Janes and Joes don’t even bother to run for office.
It is my fondest wish to follow-up this post with a victory celebration after the votes are cast tomorrow. Not only will it be great to have a real conservative in an important senate race, it might be kind of fun to witness the reaction of O’Donnell’s enemies. Ultimately and rightfully though, the choice belongs to registered Republican voters in the Small Wonder state.
Pingback: Tweets that mention The Battle of Delaware | Parcbench -- Topsy.com
Pingback: The Battle of Delaware « Daria Anne DiGiovanni, Inc.