NRSC -- No Plans To Fund O'Donnell

[jillian]

The R's never really "controlled" the Senate when they had a majority, to be honest...

The squishies control during one or two seat majorities... The leftist extremists control when they have a big majority...

that's not true. the dems didn't use the filibuster to create a de-facto majority like the r's do.

and, frankly, the r's did a much better job of keeping their people in line than the dems do.

 

[Dr.House]

O'Donnell won't lack support and the RNC might live to regret this

Pretty much my take. The RNC is saying basically 'f u' to voters of winner. Not a good place to be and doesn't bode well for their actions next year.

I've thought all along that the tea parties may be the end of the GOP. Though Dems should not take comfort in that.

she has 20-something percent support in delaware and $20,000 dollars for her campaign.

i don't take comfort from the teaparty loons destroying the GOP, I liked the smart GOP'ers as a balance. Now it's all about keeping the nutters as far as possible from anything they can break.

Interesting... You want squishy R's for balance while supporting extreme leftists like 0bama/Kerry/Pelosi/Reid...

And now you mock conservatives wanting conservative representation....

Very interesting...

 

[The Rabbi]

The R's never really "controlled" the Senate when they had a majority, to be honest...

The squishies control during one or two seat majorities... The leftist extremists control when they have a big majority...

that's not true. the dems didn't use the filibuster to create a de-facto majority like the r's do.

and, frankly, the r's did a much better job of keeping their people in line than the dems do.

You're fantasizing again. Either that or your memory doesn't extend beyond 2 years.
Does the term "judicial appointment" mean anything to you?
Geez, a little honesty from you even once a month or so would be nice. But you are a total hack. Someone rejoicing in Rangel's victory is the very definition of hack.

 

[Dr.House]

The R's never really "controlled" the Senate when they had a majority, to be honest...

The squishies control during one or two seat majorities... The leftist extremists control when they have a big majority...

that's not true. the dems didn't use the filibuster to create a de-facto majority like the r's do.

The D's were very fond of Phil A. Buster... It's a very important tool for the minority and I support any side using it (except for judicial noms)....

and, frankly, the r's did a much better job of keeping their people in line than the dems do.

The "Gang of 14" ruled the roost... For the most part, McCain and his posse decided what made it thru and what didn't...

Now the country is seeing the complete disaster that an extreme left can do to it...

That mistake is going to be fixed and hopefully we won't go down that disasterous road again....

 

[Dr.House]

if obama were the 'extremist' the loons like to pretend he is, gitmo would be closed; we'd have a single-payor health care system; we'd be completely out of iraq and afghanistan; and he wouldn't have let the lovely folks at BP drill offshore.

Jillian...

These are the things that disappoint you about 0bama, so what you're saying is that he's not extremist enough...


Yikes...

 

[jillian]

if obama were the 'extremist' the loons like to pretend he is, gitmo would be closed; we'd have a single-payor health care system; we'd be completely out of iraq and afghanistan; and he wouldn't have let the lovely folks at BP drill offshore.

Jillian...

These are the things that disappoint you about 0bama, so what you're saying is that he's not extremist enough...


Yikes...

they are the things he played ball with the right on. but the right still calls him extremist.

do they disappoint me? some of it... not all. depends on the issue.

it's more that i think schoolyard bullies have to be kicked in the teeth or they treat you with disrespect.

 

[The Rabbi]

if obama were the 'extremist' the loons like to pretend he is, gitmo would be closed; we'd have a single-payor health care system; we'd be completely out of iraq and afghanistan; and he wouldn't have let the lovely folks at BP drill offshore.

Jillian...

These are the things that disappoint you about 0bama, so what you're saying is that he's not extremist enough...


Yikes...

they are the things he played ball with the right on. but the right still calls him extremist.

do they disappoint me? some of it... not all. depends on the issue.

it's more that i think schoolyard bullies have to be kicked in the teeth or they treat you with disrespect.

You're fantasizing again.
He didn't "play ball" with anyone on the right. There was no need to as the Dems controlled Congress. When he gave his speech "taking control" of healthcare, he never laid out whether he would insist on single payer or not.
He signed an exec order his first day closing Gitmo. The Dums in Congress have refused to go along. Are they right wing extremists too?
The Dums had every opportunity for 2 years to cut off funding for the war in Iraq. They could have ended it in one day. Yet they didnt. And in the end, Obama has followed Bush's script because it was the only reasonable course.
Afghanistan was the "the good war" the one we should have been fighting all along. Obama ran on that very meme. Why would you expect he would suddenly change?
Oh yeah, you live in a fantasy world where Republicans are racists and Democrats can do no wrong.

 

[Annie]

I'd say that taking advice from partisans as yourself would be an exercise in stupidity. I'm amazed at the time liberal partisans spend advising the other party partisans, seems there are better ways to spend your time like working for your own candidates?

you're right, hon. you should choose insane and subliterate extremists and racists to represent the right. at least it's honest.

how 'bout that palladino, eh?

I don't know that much about NY politics, hell Chicago is goofy enough. What are your thoughts?

 

[Dr.House]

if obama were the 'extremist' the loons like to pretend he is, gitmo would be closed; we'd have a single-payor health care system; we'd be completely out of iraq and afghanistan; and he wouldn't have let the lovely folks at BP drill offshore.

Jillian...

These are the things that disappoint you about 0bama, so what you're saying is that he's not extremist enough...


Yikes...

they are the things he played ball with the right on. but the right still calls him extremist.

do they disappoint me? some of it... not all. depends on the issue.

it's more that i think schoolyard bullies have to be kicked in the teeth or they treat you with disrespect.

Played ball with the right? He has a pure majority in the House and Senate... It's not the RIGHT that kept him from being as extremist as you'd like - it was the moderate D's who he couldn't convince...

The right is currently powerless....

 

[Dr.Traveler]

You know I like you, Jillian, but I'm not sure I'd be taking pride a Rangel win...

As for Castle/O'Donnell, I'm not convinced she will win, in fact I'm guessing she won't. Castle would have been a shoo-in. If control comes down to one senator, Republicans/conservatives will be kicking themselves for not recognizing the need for backing a candidate who could win over the need to "send a message." Any message conservatives are trying to send will be lost amidst the laughter over their short sightedness in Delaware.

Its the same as it always is: You win elections in the Middle. Reject the middle, lose the election.

If the Tea Party wants to take a stand on principles, let them. Just don't be surprised at the consequences of that action.

 

[The Rabbi]

Jillian...

These are the things that disappoint you about 0bama, so what you're saying is that he's not extremist enough...


Yikes...

they are the things he played ball with the right on. but the right still calls him extremist.

do they disappoint me? some of it... not all. depends on the issue.

it's more that i think schoolyard bullies have to be kicked in the teeth or they treat you with disrespect.

Played ball with the right? He has a pure majority in the House and Senate... It's not the RIGHT that kept him from being as extremist as you'd like - it was the moderate D's who he couldn't convince...

The right is currently powerless....

Facts take a back seat in the mind of smelly troll Jillian, who has never successfully supported a single argument she's made.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

they are the things he played ball with the right on. but the right still calls him extremist.

do they disappoint me? some of it... not all. depends on the issue.

it's more that i think schoolyard bullies have to be kicked in the teeth or they treat you with disrespect.

Played ball with the right? He has a pure majority in the House and Senate... It's not the RIGHT that kept him from being as extremist as you'd like - it was the moderate D's who he couldn't convince...

The right is currently powerless....

Facts take a back seat in the mind of smelly troll Jillian, who has never successfully supported a single argument she's made.

You've noticed that too huh? And she calls herself a lawyer... that's a hoot!

 

[ScreamingEagle]

You know I like you, Jillian, but I'm not sure I'd be taking pride a Rangel win...

As for Castle/O'Donnell, I'm not convinced she will win, in fact I'm guessing she won't. Castle would have been a shoo-in. If control comes down to one senator, Republicans/conservatives will be kicking themselves for not recognizing the need for backing a candidate who could win over the need to "send a message." Any message conservatives are trying to send will be lost amidst the laughter over their short sightedness in Delaware.

Its the same as it always is: You win elections in the Middle. Reject the middle, lose the election.

If the Tea Party wants to take a stand on principles, let them. Just don't be surprised at the consequences of that action.

How do you "win" when you are losing on principles....and losing your country....?

It's about time people stood on principles.....how do you compromise on the Constitution or good morals by "moving to the middle"...? When you do that you are only sacrificing your principles...

The middle has become a mess.....moving steadily to the left as compromised people usually do....it's time to reverse that direction by standing on American principles and that is what the Tea Party is doing.....RINOs need not apply....

 

[Trajan]

NRSC: No Plans to Fund O’Donnell
By Danny Yadron

The National Republican Senatorial Committee does not plan to spend money on its Delaware Senate nominee, Christine O’Donnell, an NRSC official said tonight.

O’Donnell, who defeated Republican stalwart Rep. Mike Castle in the state’s GOP Senate primary, surged in recent weeks amid donations from tea party groups and an endorsement from Sarah Palin. But she trails her general election opponent, Democrat Chris Coons, in most polls.

The official noted that if her position improves, the committee might reconsider its allocation of scarce resources.

Both parties’ campaign committees typically fund races they consider winnable. According to an NRSC tally, its Democratic counterpart has reserved TV time for ads in Missouri, Kentucky and Colorado, but not in Ohio, Arkansas and Indiana.

Still, the group’s decision not to fund O’Donnell will likely grab headlines since Castle had such strong backing from party leaders.

NRSC: No Plans to Fund O’Donnell - Washington Wire - WSJ

yeah, dumping the moderate Castle was a great idea.

oh... and they just said on the news it looks like rangel won his primary in NYC

you betcha!

and????

Are you really concerned the republican party and how it fairs?



One party appears to have had enough with its machine politicians and the games they play. This was about more than just the seat.

Thats what Rove and others don't want to get, they get it, but that doesn't appeal to the machine tendencies that they have lived by all their lives, screw the voters just grab power.

So they won't pick up Delaware...I give them credit anyway ( and the fat lady maybe tuning her voice but she has not yet sung////sang? ) .

At least they are making and taking stand, this is how movements and alternatives are born. They are tired of career pol. and Castle was not a rep./con anyway, hes just another Olympia or Susan ...

Now I agree that if by some wild chance he was the one they needed to win the senate and that means taking over the committee chairs etc, then perhaps it was short sighted, but I don't think they were going to get there, even with Castle, its just to heavy a lift this cycle, it may well happen next time though.




The other party has nothing going for it, nada zip, ....they allowed the faaaar out career leadership, that is so way out there on the number line of political right left and middle to run the show, they will hamstring their own president for the remainder of his term.... it will leave cannon fodder as in blue dog and squishy dems strewn all over the battlefield as they lose one side of the Capital bldg....ideas? spent, gone, vaporized.

And add to that this is a re-redistricting year, ( every decade after the census) ala a Gerrymander year and the record number of governorships the reps may get...well,it may be a very bad decade for dems. Nice job Nancy and Harry.



Rangel? yes a mighty and glorious achievement...let me say congratulations. You must be proud.

 

[Avatar4321]

Yeah, They have no plans to fund her.

Which is why the internet is a buzz with people saying they are going to donate to her campaign to spite them.

Whether she will win or lose, I don't know. But I think it's silly to count someone out before the election. After all, Obama was the underdog at one point.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

You know I like you, Jillian, but I'm not sure I'd be taking pride a Rangel win...

As for Castle/O'Donnell, I'm not convinced she will win, in fact I'm guessing she won't. Castle would have been a shoo-in. If control comes down to one senator, Republicans/conservatives will be kicking themselves for not recognizing the need for backing a candidate who could win over the need to "send a message." Any message conservatives are trying to send will be lost amidst the laughter over their short sightedness in Delaware.

Its the same as it always is: You win elections in the Middle. Reject the middle, lose the election.

If the Tea Party wants to take a stand on principles, let them. Just don't be surprised at the consequences of that action.

How do you "win" when you are losing on principles....and losing your country....?

It's about time people stood on principles.....how do you compromise on the Constitution or good morals by "moving to the middle"...? When you do that you are only sacrificing your principles...

The middle has become a mess.....moving steadily to the left as compromised people usually do....it's time to reverse that direction by standing on American principles and that is what the Tea Party is doing.....RINOs need not apply....

All well and good. Stand on your principles. Just remember, if you can't win the election you don't get to put your principles in action.

The real way to change things is to find a way to reach out to the middle, educate them on what you stand for, and convince them to come to you rather than going to them. But I haven't seen that happening on either end of the spectrum in years. Both Liberals and Conservatives seem to have an absolute hatred of moderates and independents and a complete unwillingness to even try to explain their views to them. Both ends seem to have an all or nothing attitude, i.e. you either agree with me 100% or you're a dirty stinking Lib/Con.

The GOP, and yes, the Tea Party, needs to understand that part of what made Reagan so successful is that Reagan had the unique ability to reach out to those that may not agree with him and convince them of his views, and he understood that sometimes to win big battles, you have to concede small ones. The modern crop of Cons (and on the left Libs) think compromise is a 4 letter word, that 100% victory is the only option, and that if I have to explain their plan, you're too stupid to matter.

 

[Trajan]

You know I like you, Jillian, but I'm not sure I'd be taking pride a Rangel win...

As for Castle/O'Donnell, I'm not convinced she will win, in fact I'm guessing she won't. Castle would have been a shoo-in. If control comes down to one senator, Republicans/conservatives will be kicking themselves for not recognizing the need for backing a candidate who could win over the need to "send a message." Any message conservatives are trying to send will be lost amidst the laughter over their short sightedness in Delaware.

Not sure what good a 1 seat majority is. If you can not count on them all to stick to the plan. I rather have them send the message and not win the senate this time. Than end up with a super thin majority with a handful of Liberal Republicans who render you unable to do anything with it.

they need 41 to stop cloture when they need to , 60 of course is great but, I agree not yet, let the dems bleed some more.

I think the reps would have been better off with just enough seats in the house to block anything with the inevitable few aisle crossers. Let them keep the majority they have had for 4 years one more cycle...... they made the bed, let them sleep in it.

Next cycle the dems from iffy states that voted for obama care will be on the hot seat , obama care and all of its horrid textual fuc U's are not going way, the mandate challenge will be hitting the Supreme court about that time etc....if it wins and the mandate is killed, obama care is DOA as the mandate is an absolute to find other crap they pi.

If it wins people will be uber pissed off (and that includes the new must have swing block, Independents.

 

[Dr.House]

NRSC: No Plans to Fund O’Donnell
By Danny Yadron

The National Republican Senatorial Committee does not plan to spend money on its Delaware Senate nominee, Christine O’Donnell, an NRSC official said tonight.

O’Donnell, who defeated Republican stalwart Rep. Mike Castle in the state’s GOP Senate primary, surged in recent weeks amid donations from tea party groups and an endorsement from Sarah Palin. But she trails her general election opponent, Democrat Chris Coons, in most polls.

The official noted that if her position improves, the committee might reconsider its allocation of scarce resources.

Both parties’ campaign committees typically fund races they consider winnable. According to an NRSC tally, its Democratic counterpart has reserved TV time for ads in Missouri, Kentucky and Colorado, but not in Ohio, Arkansas and Indiana.

Still, the group’s decision not to fund O’Donnell will likely grab headlines since Castle had such strong backing from party leaders.

NRSC: No Plans to Fund O’Donnell - Washington Wire - WSJ

yeah, dumping the moderate Castle was a great idea.

oh... and they just said on the news it looks like rangel won his primary in NYC

you betcha!

Aparently your blog got it wrong....

NRSC NRSC Chairman Cornyn?s Statement On Delaware Senate Race

“Let there be no mistake: The National Republican Senatorial Committee – and I personally as the committee’s chairman – strongly stand by all of our Republican nominees, including Christine O’Donnell in Delaware.

“I reached out to Christine this morning, and as I have conveyed to all of our nominees, I offered her my personal congratulations and let her know that she has our support. This support includes a check for $42,000 – the maximum allowable donation that we have provided to all of our nominees – which the NRSC will send to her campaign today.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Its the same as it always is: You win elections in the Middle. Reject the middle, lose the election.

If the Tea Party wants to take a stand on principles, let them. Just don't be surprised at the consequences of that action.

How do you "win" when you are losing on principles....and losing your country....?

It's about time people stood on principles.....how do you compromise on the Constitution or good morals by "moving to the middle"...? When you do that you are only sacrificing your principles...

The middle has become a mess.....moving steadily to the left as compromised people usually do....it's time to reverse that direction by standing on American principles and that is what the Tea Party is doing.....RINOs need not apply....

All well and good. Stand on your principles. Just remember, if you can't win the election you don't get to put your principles in action.

The real way to change things is to find a way to reach out to the middle, educate them on what you stand for, and convince them to come to you rather than going to them. But I haven't seen that happening on either end of the spectrum in years. Both Liberals and Conservatives seem to have an absolute hatred of moderates and independents and a complete unwillingness to even try to explain their views to them. Both ends seem to have an all or nothing attitude, i.e. you either agree with me 100% or you're a dirty stinking Lib/Con.

The GOP, and yes, the Tea Party, needs to understand that part of what made Reagan so successful is that Reagan had the unique ability to reach out to those that may not agree with him and convince them of his views, and he understood that sometimes to win big battles, you have to concede small ones. The modern crop of Cons (and on the left Libs) think compromise is a 4 letter word, that 100% victory is the only option, and that if I have to explain their plan, you're too stupid to matter.

Compromising basic principles to win elections has been the mode of the Party for a long time now....just look at all the RINOs in office.....and where has that gotten us....?

I'm sure the "modern crop of Cons" aka the Tea Party candidates are not above small compromises to win big battles like Reagan did....Reagan is the Republican conservative hero for pete's sake....but FIRST you have to get REAL conservatives like Reagan back into power....and eject RINOs like Castle, Scozzofava, Specter, Snow, Graham, etc.

Looks like the NRSC changed its mind about supporting O'Donnell...guess they are getting the message...the People really do have the power to crush Washington politics as usual.....what you are witnessing is the destruction of so-called "moderate" Republicanism....

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Looks like the NRSC changed its mind about supporting O'Donnell at least minimally....guess they are getting the message...the People really do have the power to crush Washington politics as usual.....what you are witnessing is the destruction of so-called "moderate" Republicanism....

I'm not surprised the GOP backed down and ponied up the cash.

My point is: If you want to kick out the RINO's, go ahead. I actually support the idea of holding your candidates responsible and short of a third party bid this is the only way to do that.

The problem is this: If you burn the bridges with moderates, you yourself will get burned. Several Tea Party candidates will probably win this year because the DNC is just doing a better job pissing off moderates. But when re-election time comes, if you're not forging in roads into the blocks of moderates and independents, you won't get to keep those gains.

The GOP needs to find a spokesperson, soon, who doesn't alienate moderates. Palin isn't that spokesperson, nor are the folks on the radio. The Tea Party has some valid points, but if it can't articulate those points, if their more fringe stands become their principal talking points, a tea party revolution will have a very short life.