Jim Geraghty And The Beltway Boyz Should Stop Being So Hypocritical

I genuinely like Jim Geraghty and admire much of his work, but politics is hardball and Jim is a big boy. Sorry, Jimbo, but if you won't call out Mike Castle for his refusal to debate Christine O'Donnell, you don't have a principled leg to stand on in terms of criticizing anyone for agreeing to debate without cameras, or refusing to debate at all. And another thing below for our hypocritical beltway punditocracy on the Right.

Oh, this screams confidence: The chairman of the House Budget Committee, incumbent Democrat John Spratt of South Carolina, is perfectly willing to debate… as long as there are no cameras.

I've no desire to again run her down by name, but when I exposed the troubling history of the GOP establishment pick in Florida 24, not one of these beltway pundits said a word. It made Redstate and the Florida media, but, I'm sure they just they missed it, somehow.

That establishment pick had years of 911 calls and accused the opposition of monitoring her home and office communications, and possibly worse. Her problems far exceeded the rumor and innuendo circling around O'Donnell. But Matt Lewis didn't get his panties in such a bunch he probably can't even sit down to pee. Mark Hemingway didn't question her sanity at the Examiner. And I don't recall Jim saying anything much at all. Oh, but that Christine O'Donnell! Wow! We have to stop her in her tracks!

But that establishment GOP candidate was well connected to high-level establishment Republicans. And I heard about it from some within ten minutes of my post going up. No doubt our Beltway boyz would have too, had they said a word. So, I'm wondering, is all this anti-O'Donnell crap really about principle? Or, is it that you know your phone won't ring and you won't lose your spot at the GOP establishment free lunch counter, guys?

What you're doing to a Tea Party candidate, given your connections, stinks to high heaven and looks extremely hypocritical from here.

Comments

[Dan Collins]

You are hereby charged with aggravated cluebattery.

[Pasadena Phil]

"Or, is it that you know your phone won't ring and you won't lose your spot at the GOP establishment free lunch counter, guys?"

IMHO, as we have been watching the top layers of the punditry onion peeling, the next layer always seems to jump at the opportunity to get sucked into the same trap. It is so tempting to take seemingly easier short cut of accommodating the whims of the elites in exchange for access while offering themselves as a more "enlightened" intermediary than the last layer. But in truth, it's all about gaining and holding on to access to power.

So we keep peeling the onion looking for that illusive spine. They should just practice journalism and let the chips fall where they may. Working to get those chips to pile up close to the truth offers a better future than scattering chips all over the "suck-up" landscape.

[Rick]

I dunno...Geraghty rather gets right to the overriding point:

"....But the terms “not as conservative as I would like” and “Democrat” are not synonyms, no matter how much we pound the table or how loudly we insist it is so.

O’Donnell fans complain about Castle by pointing to his record. We know what kind of a legislator Castle will be, warts and all, because of his record. With Christine O’Donnell, all we have are promises. We can’t evaluate her on her record in elected office because she has no record. O’Donnell seems determined to begin her political career by winning a U.S. Senate seat; she has never served in a local board of education, town or city council, state legislature, etc. Her next general election victory will be her first."

And "Democrats outnumber registered Republicans roughly 329,000 to 179,000." Castle has done very well to win his Rep. set all these years in this situation. O'Donnell...just a community organizer on the side of the angels. We see that doesn't tend to end well.

Cordially...

[Sandy]

Rick- The fact that Democrats outnumber Republicans, in DE, by 329,000 to 179,000, speaks to me of why he has done so well in DE, all these years. He has been pleasing the Democrat voters in voting with Democrat legislation. Those that claim there isn't a dime's worth of difference in the parties are right on target with Castle in DE, and the Democrats. It is because of people like him that that sentiment has formed. When Castle votes with the Democrats, he is pushing Democrat legislation nationally. Yes, the area's voters choose their candidates, but, their votes affect all of us. When my state's two Senators, Warner and Webb, vote for Reid's new "Energy" legislation, in the lame duck session, it will affect you also.

With O'Donnell, offering only promises to vote conservatively, she is already a mile ahead of Castle. He is a known quantity. I'd take promises, over a known traitor to the party, any day. If it is just fear of the unknown, many would still be using lava soap, watching old John Wayne movies, and still dancing the jitterbug.

I'm of the belief that if Castle wins the primary, I will hope the Democrat running against him wins the general. It is a seat to let go, and not the "hill to die on" for the Republicans with a Senator Castle. There are many more Democrat Senators up for re-election in 2012. We can make our gains there to take the Senate. I'd think the Democrats of DE would want the real deal, not a Democrat in Republican clothing.

[Rick]

Sandy,

Friendly disagreement--yesterday I argued that the problematic Ms. O'Donnell wasn't a hill worth dying on, given the prospect of seizing Senate committee chairman gavels.

I'll stick with the NRO "elitists," to this site host's chagrin (if he notices & cares): http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/245831/rally-castle-daniel-foster

I believe there is more danger to liberty in allowing such scoundrels as Schumer and Durbin and Leahy to have majority power than there is in suffering Castle's likely wobbles.

Cordially...