So the Tea Party Tsunami hits Delaware... Now What?
Earlier in the year, I remember trying to find Christine O'Donnell's website. I wanted to contact O'Donnell to see if she was definitely intending to run for United States Senate.
I couldn't find a current website. I found a former site, which an O'Donnell critic had commandeered. I found old press accounts. But no current site.
So imagining Christine O'Donnell as a serious Republican candidate, let alone the Republican Senate nominee, seemed to be in the realm of fantasy.
So what happened?
Perhaps because I don't spend much time hanging out with Delaware "establishment" types - certainly not socially --
once O'Donnell DID enter the Senate G.O.P. race, I never considered it impossible for her to win, just unlikely.
Indeed, rage was building against "politics as usual" and the upstate-dominated, Delaware G.O.P. establishment. That was long before factions of the Tea Party movement decided to invest their money and resources in O'Donnell.
But the other significant factor which has been lost in much of the national media coverage: Today's Delaware Republican Party - and I'm referring here to rank-and-file voters - is vastly different from the Delaware G.O.P. of a decade or certainly two decades ago.
Rather like a comet shedding its very essence as it nears the sun, the upstate Delaware G.O.P. has been shedding voters, who have re-registered as independents, or took the plunge to register as "D's".
To be sure, some Delaware Republicans have re-registered Democrat only to vote in a particular election. This happened in 2008, when a contingent of upstate Republicans shifted to the D's to vote in the Democratic Presidential and Gubernatorial primaries, particularly for Jack Markell.
You can bet many INTENDED to swing back to the G.O.P., but never got around to it.
(I asked Governor Markell about that yesterday just after he voted. He conceded he HAD thought about that. In a close race, could that cost Castle the nomination? In the end, these defections do not fully explain Christine O'Donnell's victory, but they certainly didn't help!
But over several election cycles, the 'regular' Delaware G.O.P. suffered this slow erosion, as surely as a rechargeable battery slowly loses its juice after many recharges.)
Exhibit 'A' for this phenomenon? Republican U.S. Senate candidate Jan Ting, who - you'll recall - handily beat Mike Protack and Christine O'Donnell in a three-way primary.
A Temple law professor and a symbol of diversity within the old Delaware G.O.P. (Chinese-American), Ting was once a reliable player in Alapocas / Brandywine Hundred Republican politics. What is he today? A Democrat.
Think about that. The Republican establishment-anointed standard-bearer became a "D".
That tells you volumes. It confirmed the suspicions of more traditional, "true believer" Republicans that their party leadership repeatedly sided with dangerously liberal candidates in the name of supposed pragmatism, only to fall to ignoble defeat. And it represented a high profile example of the very erosion of 'moderates' which cost Mike Castle the nomination.
Further evidence of the intraparty abyss: When I mentioned (to loyal Castle voters) the Tea Party commercials suggesting Castle might be more liberal than Chris Coons on some issues, some laughed it off. A few suggested that's what made Castle ATTRACTIVE to them.
As I type these words, I'm hearing longtime G.O.P. national committeewoman Priscilla Rakestraw say on our airwaves how unthinkable it was to fathom a Castle loss.
Maybe that was part of the problem. Two different realities, two different world views, recalling the religious wars of the Middle Ages.
Indeed, it is difficult to imagine the current Delaware G.O.P. leadership presiding over a party in which the standard-bearers at the top of the ballot represent such anathema.
If Castle HAD eked out a victory, but Urquhart had also won his primary, it was possible to imagine the Delaware G.O.P. licking its wounds and closing ranks. But not with this.
I said near the top of this post that I never thought it impossible for Christine O'Donnell to win the G.O.P. nomination, given the erosion in the upstate party's voting base.
But, unless Democrats, independents, and 'moderate' Republicans all sit on their hands (extremely unlikely), I do believe it virtually impossible for O'Donnell to win in November. But note: "Virtually impossible" is not the same as impossible.
O'Donnell's detractors shouldn't underestimate her. She's become a much more polished candidate. If you throw the kitchen-sink at her (as the Castle Campaign and the Republican establishment did), O'Donnell will accuse you of the "politics of destruction".
That phrase - borrowed from the Clintons, particularly Hillary Rodham Clinton - suggests while O'Donnell will not betray her followers by trying to shift her ideological views, she WILL make a subtle play for the votes of women beyond her base. If the anti-O'Donnell forces pile on, she'll play victim. You watch.
And, O'Donnell has already spoken favorably of Hillary Rodham Clinton in the context of female solidarity and empowerment. See this clip on You Tube, originally from CNN...
Note O'Donnell here does not necessarily embrace Secretary Clinton's ideology, but the theme of common sisterhood. A deft move.
You can find numerous examples in recent Delaware political history of female solidarity: Republican women crossing over to vote for Ruth Ann Minner. Perhaps the extra kick which propelled Karen Weldin Stewart into the state Insurance Commissioner's office. You heard subtle references to the Old Boys' Club trying to bring down a sister.
And, a new CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR/TIPP poll finds a feminine base to the Tea Party movement, and growing acceptance, despite the overall polarization...
Despite the above, conventional wisdom would hold such an anti-Tea Party wave - at least in Delaware - will carry ex-Lieutenant-Governor John Carney to a comfortable victory over Republican Glen Urquhart in that U.S. House race for Castle's seat.
But since the 'conventional wisdom' has been so often wrong, let me try this: Carney, a likable enough guy with deep Claymont roots, still suffers from a fairly wooden delivery. You can bet Urquhart - whom I call "the bulldog" - will pounce on Carney, declare him a symbol of incumbency and "politics as usual", and tie him to Ruth Ann Minner.
Scuttlebutt: Conventional wisdom held the Castle Campaign and establishment Republicans had to produce a high turn-out to overcome the Christine O'Donnell insurgency. They thought they were succeeding. But by 3 or 4 p.m., some in the Castle high command feared TOO HIGH a turn-out, that perhaps they had inadvertently prodded anti-establishment voters. (Yes, in politics, there IS such a thing as too high a turn-out.)
Anticlimax: Congressman Castle will not endorse Christine O'Donnell. He will not mount a write-in campaign.
Update: Public Policy Polling has just released another section of its weekend polling, this time about the general election race...
Because of the lower turn-out, which means fewer interviews with voters, it's very difficult for one reporter to fully grasp trends in a Primary election. But I did think one candidate was going down to defeat: Sheriff Michael Walsh. Wilmington's oldtime white ethnics were voting for the sheriff, but almost everywhere else, the Trinidad Navarro fever was palatable.
I never got a handle on the race for the Democratic nomination for State Auditor: I bumped into a lot of Matlusky voters, but it just didn't seem to add up.
And if a neophyte candidate for office in Delaware ever wants to go over what NOT to do when running for political office, just review Velda Jones-Potter's campaign. A disaster from start to finish.
But I consider Republican State Senator Colin Bonini to be the favorite over Democratic nominee, Chip Flowers this November. Bonini is an example of a staunch conservative who, nonetheless, has remained in the good graces of the party establishment, as nearly as I can tell.
Characteristically, Senator Bonini thinks the party can mend its wounds, and thinks the upheaval will help the Delaware G.O.P., at least eventually.
As the 'establishment' Delaware G.O.P. tries to stop the hemorrhaging, it can take comfort in Bonini's position -- and the defeat of Mike Protack for the G.O.P. nomination for a seat on New Castle County Council.
WASHINGTON POST columnist E.J. Dionne offers an intriguing column about Congressman Castle and the "death of moderate Republicanism"...
While I voted for Ms O'Donnell, I was surprised at the margin of her victory. And until the Tea Party enabled her to have extensive media exposure, I do not think she would have won. I, for one, had missed how far Mr. Castle had drifted to the left. Until the ads began airing, I could have voted for him. It can be assumed that Mike considered it safe to give Mr. Obama overwhelming support in the days when the President was riding high. But when it became obvious his expensive programs were failing and bankrupting the nation, the voters turned not only against Mr. Obama personally, but also against those who gave him a blank check. The media exposure of Mike's voting record doomed his campaign. He could no longer claim to be fiscally conservative if he had supported the Obama schemes. In two short years, he managed to ruin his record of being a fiscal conservative.
Looking at the vote by county, Ms O'Donnell received 65% of the vote in conservative Sussex and 64% in conservative-leaning Kent. But she also received 42% in NCC, which I had not expected. From Newark down, she scored heavily against Mr. Castle, showing how out of touch our congressman had become.
Heavy emphasis on our Senate primary by the national talkers did not hurt. I had two radios going Monday and Tuesday so I could listen to both Rick and Rush. While Rick talked objectively about the campaign, Rush was going overboard in his attacks on Castle. For me, Cap & Trade was the killer, but for the national hosts, Castle gave them enough ammo to launch a full scale attack.
Wed, Sep 15, 2010 1:31pm
Excellent analysis. I agree that thinking coons is a shoe in is a sure-fire way for Dems to lose this one.
Low-info voters base their votes on who they like, and who seems like a winner. I think this primary shows that a huge number of voters are low-info voters.
Therefore, O'Donnell can lump Coons in with Castle and Carper and run against the incumbent (again). He'll need to be on guard for that and go on the attack.
I agree about O'Donnell playing the victim card (it is all she has). But on the other hand, if Coons takes the high road and assumes a weakling looking "poor me" defensive posture after O'Donnell's inevitable attacks on his character - he is doomed.
Wed, Sep 15, 2010 1:43pm
Well done analysis Allan!
You understand why “true believer” Republicans did not vote for Castle yesterday.
You summed it up best when you said, “…their party leadership repeatedly sided with dangerously liberal candidates in the name of supposed pragmatism, only to fall to ignoble defeat.”
…your example of Ting is another perfect example of our reasoning for not supporting the Delaware establishment candidates. Why vote for a R who does everything a D would do?
I see Castle will not support O’Donnell and the GOP is saying they will not support her either. So, do you think they will change their minds (and survive) or will they simply become completely irrelevant in Delaware politics. Wake up GOP the Tea Party is real and we are excited about November!
And, I am not so sure Coons is the shoe-in he is supposed to be...after all he has called himself the "bearded Marxist". The beard is gone, but what is his ideology?
O'Donnell didn't win in the right sense of the word, but the Koch brothers did in the political games they play. The Young folk voted because of her age and looks, and others, because she said what they wanted to hear, but not what she means. Another Palin in the respect that she is over-confident, knows how to fool the people, plays the press, and works the political system to her advantage.
Wed, Sep 15, 2010 3:05pm
I listened to both WDEL's and WILM's extensive election coverage last night and was disappointed that the moderate GOP voters apparently stayed home. If I remember correctly I heard someone last night while listening to WDEL saying that about 31% of the eligible GOP voters turned out for the election yesterday. So the highly motivated Tea Party Republicans showed up and the moderates for the most part sat home. Hopefully this is a hard learned lesson that every vote does count.
Allan attached the PPP poll that shows what many of us have been saying, that the Tea Party in Delaware may have won the battle of the Primary, but will lose the War of the 2010 Election. That poll showed around 34% of the eligible voters in Delaware are Republican and something like 47% are Democrat. Also the poll also showed that the majority of eligible voters in Delaware are not swayed by anything Sarah Palin says, also most said Christine O'Donnell isn't fit to hold office (they aren't even discussing her political views, but that she herself isn't fit to hold office no matter what her views are). As the pollster said in his report, Delaware Republicans took an easy win for the Senate seat and gave it to the Democrats.
Apparently both the national GOP and the Delaware GOP have said they will not give O'Donnell any money, so I guess the Tea Party folks, both in Delaware and nationally will have to put your money where your mouth is and pony up your hard earned cash to finance her campaign, and hope she actually uses it for the campaign and not slip it into her pocket. Based on her past record, I can't help but think of what PT Barnum or maybe it was WC Fields has been credited with saying, "There's a sucker born every minute, never smarten up a chump". Hopefully the people of Delaware will not become suckers and vote for this Sarah Palin wannabe.
Wed, Sep 15, 2010 3:36pm
The 2010 Primary provided a very valuable "teachable moment" for our children.
The lessons learned:
1. Negative campaigning does NOT work, in spite of what consultants might tell you. Castle and Tom Ross launched vicious personal attacks on O'Donnell's personal life and finances (with not a millisecond devoted to stating Castle's position on the issues). The voters sent a message they are fed up with personal attacks.
2. The media (again) showed its liberal bias. The News Journal ran a bunch of negative articles, focusing on O'Donnell's personal life. As the attack news articles increased, it was clear the liberal media was genuinely SCARED that a conservative might win the race.
3. Conservatives can AND will win elections. The liberal pundits and "analysts" want you to believe otherwise, but it's clear O'Donnell will defeat Coons, and Coons is now the underdog.
4. Delawareans are conservative (in spite of liberal attempts into making you think otherwise). Using everyday Delawareans as a frame of reference, Castle is a "liberal" not a "moderate." O'Donnell is actually the "moderate" in relation to the vast majority of Delaware voters.
5. At the end of the day, Mike Castle showed he had no class. While it is customary for the loser of a primary to call for unity and endorse the primary winner, both Castle and GOP Chair Tom Ross refused to throw their support behind the candidate who was the clear choice of Republicans. Like a spoiled petulant three-year-old child who didn't get his ice cream, Castle was a sore loser, and not gracious in defeat. What an embarassing and disgraceful way for to end his political career.
One final message to our friends in the liberal news media: The more you try to slant the news in the next seven weeks, the harder we're going to work for Glen and Christine.
It's Tea Time!
Wed, Sep 15, 2010 4:26pm
Funny how every bit of news that disagrees with the Right "shows the liberal media bias". It's the self-fulfilling prophecy of denial. "You're in denial." "No I'm not." No matter what you say, the former person is convinced they're right.
Isn't it possible, just possible, that the News Journal's coverage of O'Donnell's personal life was not so much liberal as accurate? Is there any version of her personal life they could have shown you to make you believe they weren't pushing a liberal agenda?
And trust me, it pains me to be sticking up for the News Urinal. But just because you don't like the news, doesn't mean it's not true.
Wed, Sep 15, 2010 4:31pm
Well Tea Time, you've got your talking points down real good. You folks blow over the fact that demographically Delaware is a moderate leaning left state. Oh the "evil" liberal media, but what about the conservative media (Limbaugh and the stable of Fox talkers aren't biased??? The fact is, most media has a slant. I listen to both Limbaugh, sometimes Jensen (on WDEL(, also Al Messitti on WDEL and NPR to hear both sides. Unfortunately most Americans do not listen to both lib or conservative media, they pick one and that becomes their "gospel".
Conservatives can win, and yes even win in Delaware, but the fire breathing type that Sarah Palin is, won't sell here, but you folks have made your bed now you've got to try to sell Delaware your pig in a poke.
O'Donnell is no sort of moderate, she's just slightly left of Attila the Hun or what used to be known as a member of the John Birch Society.
I listened to Castle's speech last night on WDEL and he was very gracious. I don't blame him at all for not endorsing your candidate. He has credibility and she doesn't.
Elections are all about each side presenting their point of view. Even though I totally disagree with yours I defend your right to express it. Hope you feel the same way towards the rest of us. May the best person win in November, which for my money was Mike Castle, but now is Chris Coons.
Wed, Sep 15, 2010 5:41pm
I'm very happy to let this be a referendum on Obama, which Allan has effectively tip-toed away from throughout his tendentiously reasoned analysis of the Delaware Republican party. If Delaware voters want to ratify the disastrous choice they made two yeas ago, and double down with Coons and Cap and Trade, so be it. O'Donnell offered a choice to reject all that, which Castle didn't. He was Obama's pooch and would come running when he was whistled for.
Wed, Sep 15, 2010 6:20pm
I am part of the Republican "establishment" I am an elected official and I serve as Vice-Chairman of the Christiana Millcreek Region. I worked for Rollins and Castle because I felt they had the best chance of defeating Democrats in November. I supported them in spite of the fact that I am a conservative. Between now and election day I will be working hard to elect O'Donnell and Urquhart. I encourage all of my fellow "establishment" Republicans to do the same.
Wed, Sep 15, 2010 7:14pm
Shawn, the point isn't whether it's "accurate" or inaccurate but whether the coverage is biased. The News Journal wrote dozens of negative stories attempting to dig up dirt about O'Donnell's personal life. How many negative stories did the News Journal write about Castle's personal life? How many attack stories did the News Journal do about something from Chris Coons' family?
In addition to the myriad of personal attack stories from the newspaper, the majority of Allan Loudell's livelines were interviews with people who were spreading vicious gossip about O'Donnell's finances. How many livelines did Allan do about rumors that Castle has had sexual affairs with other men? (these rumors, by the way, have floated around Delaware for more than 20 years--but the News Journal and the other media haven't done any stories on this!)
Even the use of terms such as "moderate" are designed to influence public opinion --and is not objective journalism. From the perspective of most Delawareans (as Tuesday's results prove), O'Donnell is the "moderate" and Castle and Coons are the liberal radicals.
Wed, Sep 15, 2010 7:32pm
Isn't it possible that the media haven't run any stories of Castle's sexual escapades because they researched them and found no factual basis to them? Just unsubstantiated rumors by people trying to discredit him? Yet there's plenty of paperwork to show O'Donnell's financial issues. Follow the paper trail. It's always possible Castle just hides it better. But there's a mountain of lawsuits, liens and issues showing O'Donnell's "serious character problems". I'm not saying Castle's perfect... but for some people, no matter how deeply you dig, they really don't have any skeletons in the closet.
And to agree with Mike, O'Donnell is far and away not moderate. She has the backing of the Tea Party, and the Tea Party makes no qualms about being conservative "True Believer" haters of moderates and liberals. True Believers in the conservative movement don't refer to themselves as moderates, and go out of their way to not be seen as moderate. Referring to O'Donnell as a moderate is just her campaign's attempt to make her more palletable to non-Tea-Party-ers. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck... she's probably a quack.
Wed, Sep 15, 2010 8:12pm
One final quote, and I'll retire for the night:
"Government is best, which governs the least."
-Thomas Jefferson (conservative right-wing wacko)
Wed, Sep 15, 2010 10:36pm
I believe most would agree with Thomas Jefferson point, but the world is a very different place than it was in 1776. There are many good things government does for each one of us as US citizens. Food safety, military defense, product safety, pharmaceutical product safety, labor laws that protect workers, child labor laws, infrastructure (highways, dams, bridges, water manes, sewage, police, fire, libraries, mental hospitals, funding research for medical cures, our currency, school lunches for kids through no fault of their own are in families who can not afford to give them breakfast or lunch, social security (a government program that has worked as designed since 1935 - but now needs some tweeking after 75 years, only because people are not having as many children who become tax payers to support the system for those getting Social Security - a side note, if America had not aborted the 40+ million babies since 1972, we'd have far more tax payers supporting the system today and Social Security would have many more years left before needing tweeking). So sure the least amount of government needed is preferable, but needs today are different than 234 years ago so government has to adapt to meet those needs. The Tea Party appears to want to roll back the clock to 1776 or maybe 1931 just before FDR's election in the fall of 1932. Government that small won't work today.
However, having said that, sure there is waste and abuse in government, also programs that have out lived their usefulness that need to be done away with, but that's not what we hear from Tea Party folks. I heard a Tea Partyer the other day on WDEL tell Al Messitti that the Tea Party wants to eliminate all social programs. Al asked him what about help for the homeless person or family. The TP person said, let them go home or live in a shelter. Al said, what if they don't have a home or family, and the shelters are full. The TP person said, that's their problem they'll find something. I'm blessed to have a job and a home, and I have no problem with our government taking some of the tax dollars we all "donate" to help these people. This isn't India or some other third world sewer, this is America.
Thu, Sep 16, 2010 9:26am
Well said, Mike.
Thu, Sep 16, 2010 10:48am
"This isn't India or some other third world sewer, this is America."
That is a really nasty and condescending crack. No wonder much of the world hates the US.
Keep in mind that the US is the only developed nation without universal health care. It trails in educational achievement, life expectancy, infant mortality and other quality of life measures. The US also has more of its population behind bars and a higher incidence of violent crime. And it's the only "first world" nation to retain the death penalty (look at who else still practices it).
Before you call other countries "sewers" look to the beam in your own eye.
And while you all comment on the tea-baggers fiscal agenda, don't forget Christine is head of the fundamentalist-fascist group STAR. She may want to stop government from regulating banks and boardrooms but she wants instead to regulate your bedroom. Why isn't the media talking about that? She wants to roll back the clock to 1692 (not 1776)?
Thu, Sep 16, 2010 1:27pm
Life in those third world countries is pretty sad, but I probably could have chosen my words better than to call the third world a sewer, but I don't see anyone leaving here to emigrate in the third world, because they are not great places to live. We have our problems here to be sure, but in spite of that, this is still one of the best places to live, our poor are wealthy compared to most of the people in the third world, but again, I apologize for my poor choice of wording.
Bill you and I do agree though that Christine should not become our Senator in Washington.
Thu, Sep 16, 2010 4:49pm
Heck, I wouldn't even want her to be a senator in Dover.
I wonder how many people fed up with taxes and waste in government and drawn to the Tea Party because of that really are aware of what STAR's agenda is.
We have all been told since early childhood how well off we are compared to the rest of the world. I don't buy it and I urge you to question that assumption. I've seen people living in squalor as share croppers in the Mississippi Delta or as subsistence hunter-gathers in the Alaska bush. A broader and more apt comparison is the working poor in the US, who live with little or no safety net compared to the underclass (and working class) in the European Union. Even the middle class here worries about the cost of getting sick, paying off student loans, defaulting on their mortgage and being a heartbeat away from unemployment. And they put up with it because we've all been told everybody else is even worse off. We've also been taught to believe, like that caller you quoted, that if something bad happens it's your own !@#$ fault.
Thu, Sep 16, 2010 5:57pm
Bill, I agree, Christine shouldn't be a senator in Dover, or any other legislative body, post, or even dog catcher.
There is an interesting photo book that was put out by the United Nations a few years ago, that shows in photos the middle class in 190 nations. Other than Japan, Europe, Brazil, Canada, and the US, the rest of the world's middleclass live in total poverty. It was a real eye opener. We in America have so much to be thankful to God for as he has truly blessed us. That is one of the great things about our nation too, is we have the freedom of religion, so that we can practice our faith and worship our god as we believe; or not practice a faith or worship any god. In many of those third world countries, especially in the middle east, that right of religious freedom is not there and it can cost you your life to practice your faith if you don't practice their "state" religion.
Thu, Sep 16, 2010 8:43pm
Mike you keep wanting to compare the US to non-developed, non-industrialized, third world countries, many of which are ruled by monarchs, elites or dictators.
You say other than Japan, Europe, Canada... that is exactly who we should be comparing ourselves to. Other "first world" countries, developed, industrialized, Western, members of the G-20. People like us.
Freedom of religion does not seem to apply so much these days if you call the god of Abraham "Allah." The US has never gone too long without subjecting some "outside" sect to persecution. And religious insiders keep wanting to insist that their prayers and songs be included in public events or institutions which have nothing to do with the exercise of religion. There is still a big push for school prayer and many tea-baggers are a part of that.
Interesting that during a war, all sides are sure god is on their side.
As I mentioned before, what we have here is a Mexican stand-off among the various sects with none strong enough to dominate. Listen to the religious right carefully and what they really want is a theocracy.
I am astonished by the NATURE of the attacks on Christine, even apart from the viciousness. They are not only silly but likely to ATTRACT Democrat and Independent voters.
“A lie is halfway around the world before the truth gets its boots on.” -- Shakespeare.
As an attorney, I wrote Christine O’Donnell’s 2005 lawsuit, while we searched for a Delaware attorney. She was illegally dismissed by her employer 24 minutes after mentioning that she had spoken to the EEOC.
Now critics complain that Christine claimed to be already enrolled in a Princeton Master Degree program. Nonsense!
One of several grounds for the lawsuit was that her employer PREVENTED her from attending Princeton. She had turned down a $125,000 per year job in Washington to accept that position at $65,000 per year with allowances for time to pursue a Master’s Degree and also handle private clients.
Among other concerns, she sued because her employer prevented her from going to Princeton. One does not sue because everything goes according to plan. So how does this get twisted into Christine claiming she was already enrolled in Princeton, when her complaint was she was prevented from doing so? It would be nice if critics actually read the suit and other documents before commenting on them.
The lawsuit clearly states that Christine had to drop out of a Princeton class she was attending. She was filling in prerequisites while applying to the formal Masters program. It is common to take prerequisites or individual courses while formally applying.
Fri, Sep 17, 2010 6:15pm
You apparently didn't read what I wrote very well.
I'm not comparing the US to the Third World, I was simply showing based on the liberal UN (they definitely are not America's cheerleaders) that indeed, we in the Western Civilizations, which includes the US live far better than the Third World and how blessed we've been. That is Not a slam or shot at the Third World,. but it is a fact.
My guess is, you're not willing to relocate to the Third World anymore than the rest of us are, because the living conditions ARE like living in a sewer. So drop the sanctimonious nonsense.
That UN book was a real eye-opener. We really do live very high on the hog as compared to most of the world.
We, as a nation, are struggling to even understand Muslim thinking, especially as it might appear that the radical hate American, kill the infidel American type Muslin's are the one's in control of their religion.
We, as a nation, aren't evil, because many Americans (the polls show a healthy majority) do not want the proposed Muslim community center that close to ground zero.
I don't believe you'll see a Cathedral at ground zero of Hiroshima or Nagasaki. I don't think you'll see a Shinto Shrine at Pearl Harbor either. People are funny that way.
You fail to point out that there are already a number of Muslims worship centers near to ground zero that were there PRIOR to the 9/11 attacks. No one has bombed, desecrated, or demanded their removal. Funny, you missed that detail in your zeal to paint all Americans as Isalmaphobes.
You also failed to mention that there is a Jewish Synagogue that was already proposed for that community, but has still not been approved, gee no out rage over that?? Seems sort of one sided, if you ask me.
What makes this situation a bit more sticky is they've done everything legally that NYC required, but IF their intent is to foster good will and bring the various faiths together, this doesn't seem to be the way to reach out as this location is upsetting many people. So given that, if they truly wanted to bridge a relationship with others, then they might want to pick another location, but they won't and that will only contribute to the growing suspicion that the Muslim's see that high rise building as their monument of their victory on 9/11. Like it or not, that is how most Americans view that new high rise building. That is not going to bridge any sort of good relationships with most Americans.
There are hundreds of Muslim worship centers all over America, it's just this one location that has upset folks. We, as a people, are far more tolerant of the Muslims than they are of Christians or Jews.
I don't hear any outrage over the persecutions of Christians and Jews in Muslim countries coming from you either. Maybe you should open your eyes and see what really is going on. On this we'll have to agree to disagree.
Fri, Sep 17, 2010 6:25pm
Mr. Moseley, your post was interesting. If what you are saying is correct, then you'd serve Christine O'Donnell's purpose, of trying to win the election to the Senate, by going public, possibly at some media event with her to prove all of us do not understand the situation.
Possibly, having an interview with Allan Loudell of WDEL would be a good place to start. I'm sure he'd give you a fair and reasonable interview (WDEL can be heard throughout most of Delaware), and you could be doing Ms. O'Donnell a huge service.
I'm interested in knowing the truth. I agree with some of what she says, but there is no way I can vote for someone who appears to be as incompetent as she appears due to these numerous issues. The janitor, who services my office has similar views as Christine, but he's not qualified to be a Senator anymore than I am and I have far more education than he does. So just saying the right things isn't shouldn't be enough. What sort of a person you are, how you live your life, etc, etc, should also be a part of picking the best person to serve each of us in the government. You may be able to shed some real light on these issues which might make a real difference in the out come of the November election in Delaware.
Add your comment: Attention: In an attempt to promote a level of civility and personal
responsibility in blog discussions, we now require you to be a member of
the WDEL Members Only Group in order to post a comment. Your Members
Only Group username and password are required to process your post.
You can join the WDEL Members Only Group for free by clicking here.
If you are already a member but have forgotten your username or password, please
Please register your post with your WDEL Members Only Group username and password below.