Posted on 11/03/2010 8:08:40 AM PDT by exit82
Fellow Freepers,
I want to humbly thank you for the support you gave to Christine O'Donnell here in Delaware.
So many of you gave money, prayers and moral support as we here tried to break the Democrat hold on the good people of Delaware.
Today, you will hear stories about Christine--about what a poor candidate she was, how Mike Castle was the better choice and a guaranteed win in DE for the GOP, and that she ran a poor campaign.
Believe NONE of it. I had the distinct pleasure of meeting and talking with Christine numerous times during this campaign as Mrs.exit82 and I attended various campaign events.
I heard with my own ears what she stood for, what she would do in the Senate, especially in the lame duck session. I saw her interact with all kinds of people, even those opposed to her. I saw her stand up for the unborn, for the Constitution, for fiscal sanity, for repealing Obamacare, for upholding conservative principles.
I also know that Mike Castle would NOT have won Delaware. The Democrats would not have elected a faux Democrat when they could have voted for a real one in Coons. Obama and Biden would never have come here to help Mike Castle.
As far as running a poor campaign, I don't think so. She had a little more than eight weeks to ramp up an organization, from a shoe-string in the primary, all in the face of no help from her own party in the beginning, and the media onslaught against her.
After all, why discuss issues when we can discuss dabbling in witchcraft 25 years ago, whether she paid her bills, whether she believes in evolution or not.
In the end, it was not enough. The braindead people in Northern Delaware, who had their property taxes raised by Coons three times, over 50%, just couldn't resist pulling the "D" lever one more time.
Christine O'Donnell has guts. She took the hits and did her best. Her defeat of Mike Castle changed Delaware politics forever.
Anyway, no doubt she will be analyzed and criticized and joked about ad infinitum.
However, to me, she is me. And I am proud of her. She helped change the landscape across the country by sticking to her principles.
The purpose of this post is just to say "thank you" to all you Freepers that helped in any way to get her elected. You buoyed our efforts, knowing there were folks all over pulling for us.
Freepers are the best people on the planet. I have been one since late 1998, and I have seen that over and over.
Words are inadequate, but I hope you all know how much I, and we here in Delaware, appreciate all of YOUR efforts on behalf of our little state.
This was one battle, not the war.Our country is worth fighting for, and I sincerely hope Christine will once again be in the fight for all of us.
Thank you, Freepers. You are the best.
“I can’t think of any recent decisions I find reprehensible off the top of my head.”
Roe v. Wade, 1973.
She may have lost the election, but single-handedly exposed Karl Rove for the ass clown he is, and in doing so played a key role in what's going to be a major house-cleaning at the GOP.
God bless her.
How about the only conservative in the race? Would being honest minus a condenscending attitude and elitst conciet work for you?
True. So she lost, not the republican establishment. She should stop blaming others; It is an uncoservative thing to do.
That must be very satisfying (to some extent).
She IS cutely conservative. I see her as our Katie Couric!
How did you survive last night's "Concern Troll" purge?
Perhaps if you behave, you can be FR's new "Murray's Mom." You've not got enough style to be the new "Dane," and you're too coherent to be the new "Willie Green."
I don't know that she is blaming anyone. I am. I'm blaming all the elitist, Country Club Republicans, all our fair-weather friends and a dishonest media that has decided to play in the game wearing a referee's uniform.
We can't do much about the media but we can do something about our own team.
All the people bitching now were free to get involved with the primary process or discover the ideal candidate. All the people bitching now were free to campaign for O'Donnell or other conservatives.
Instead the establishment threw up mega-obstacles. They supported Murkowski in Alaska and Crist in Florida and they came right out of the box damning O'Donnell. I consider them the scum of the earth, lower than a dog that would throw a ball game or spy for the enemy during war time.
Please let Sen. Cornyn know this Delawarean felt disappointed by the lukewarm support from NRSC. And thank you for your support of CO’D. In case Texas decides to file a primary opponent to Cornyn, you will have my support.
We all knew it would ‘need a miracle’ for Team Christine to pull this out, but I have no doubt the GOP primary voters made the right choice.
Thank you for your support, and yes, we do need more like her.
She is not a Hahvahd or Yaley grad—just came from normal folks like us.
She was in the arena and fought hard. No one can take that away from her.
Roe v. Wade, 1973.
Surely, you jest.
The question asked of her said "recently".
37 plus years ago is NOT recent.
Thanks for playing. See Johnnie for your consolation prize.
Amen, Joe, God bless her.
She is a solid person, and yet people, even here, cannot simply acknowledge the odds she fought against.
Having lived in NJ and DE, I know the stronghold of insanity of Dem loyalty that exists in this part of the Northeast.
Really? Well hopefully you will not be seeking elected office citing the Constitution as your creed any time soon.
How about Kelo vs New London 2005?
She is a solid person, and yet people, even here, cannot simply acknowledge the odds she fought against.
Having lived in NJ and DE, I know the stronghold of insanity of Dem loyalty that exists in this part of the Northeast.
Amen from NJ.
How about Kelo vs New London 2005?
I mentioned Kelo. Hopefully you will not have to take a reading comprehension test anytime soon.
So to support the Constitution I have to memorize 200 years of Supreme Court decisions? Maybe I should also have to memorize quotes from the Federalist Papers or "Common Sense." Who voted you the arbiter of who is and who is not allowed to run for office? May I please, please be allowed to vote at least? Or am I barred from that too?
>>> Thank you for your support, and yes, we do need more like her.
She did say other citizen politicians (heavy emphasis) should not be hesitant to step up, or feel afraid for the attacks on their person or on their family at the Tea Party Express rally in Wilmington.
I think we will soon know how many other brave souls will heed the call.
200 years is not recent. Federalist Papers and Common Sense would help. Knowing the Amendments would help also, and being able to make a coherent constitutional argument.
Bless her heart, but COD was a brick.
She was hand picked by Bill Mahr to be his on air punching bag because of her propensity to say outlandish things.
She is a perennial (rejected) candidate with dubious qualifications for high elected office.
Good on her for being the most conservative person in the race, but she had a long way to go before being ready for prime time.
You are the one who sets up arbitrary test questions and elects yourself to judge MY qualifactions as a supporter of the Constitution based on your stupid requirements.
I simply reject you being the boss of me or having the slightest authority, intelligence or wisdom to judge me or my worthyness for office or for any other position.
I also reject your judgement about COD. Those who can but do not, must give way to those who can't but try.
Strawmen again. You said something about not being able to name a recent SCOTUS decision you disagreed with, and I hoped that you would not seek office saying the Constitution was your creed; not because I was setting myself up as an authority or a judge or stating that it was a requirement.
Only because you would look like a fool when someone asked about a recent SCOTUS decision that contradicted your view of the Constitution (your supposed credo and governing philosophy - as well it should be and kudos to her for saying it) and you whiffed it............
And even a 38 year old example would be better than nothing, if they asked “more recent?” say that this was a big one, and within your own lifetime should be recent enough for Constitutional issues.
But you handed out a booby prize for such a suggestion.
I see also that you posted this thread, obviously you are a bit emotionally invested. When some time passes hopefully you will see more clearly that COD had problems well beyond being asked presumably unfair or too difficult questions about the Constitution.
I make my disappointment with Cornball/NRSC known to his office(s) quite often. The last time I called to voice a concern his staffer told me that Cornball wasn’t up for re-election until ‘14 so they basically they don’t give a flip.
My point is exactly that you do not mock your own team. If your future depended on the outcome of the contest you would cheer them on and not mock them. You must not understand this standard team ethic or the point I am trying to make in the least.
Strawmen again. You said something about not being able to name a recent SCOTUS decision you disagreed with, and I hoped that you would not seek office saying the Constitution was your creed; not because I was setting myself up as an authority or a judge or stating that it was a requirement.
Obviously you are setting yourself up as a judge of who's qualified to run. I will guarandamntee you that if I got to ask you questions in front of a large audience and wanted to embarrass you I could. That, too, was my point.
Only because you would look like a fool when someone asked about a recent SCOTUS decision that contradicted your view of the Constitution (your supposed credo and governing philosophy - as well it should be and kudos to her for saying it) and you whiffed it............
In how many debates over the years have candidates been asked about recent Supreme Court decisions? Is that in the SAT pre-test or something? Don't you get it? They will ask question after question until they find one to embarrass the candidate they want to ruin. To the other they will ask softball questions. The question about recent decisions is arbitrary. They could have easily asked "what are the most pivotal decisions" or who is the ambassador to Yemin.
And I may or may not have wiffed it because I would have challenged the relevance of such questions over the relevance of my guiding philosophy. If I think slavery was wrong, is it important for me to be able to recite the case history? -- Only to the petty who are playing gotcha. Besides, to really discuss any Supreme Court case honestly requires you have some idea of the arguments on either side and both the majority and minority opinions. Few of us have time to do that including, apparently, the President, based on his stupid comments during the State of the Union speech regarding the Citizens United case that caused Alito to mouth "not true." I didn't see the media pointing out how stupid their chosen one was.
And even a 38 year old example would be better than nothing, if they asked “more recent?” say that this was a big one, and within your own lifetime should be recent enough for Constitutional issues.
True. But maybe you wouldn't be that quick on your feet. It's easy to throw stones. And throw stones the media and pundits would had COD mentioned Roe. That's exactly the trap that was being set for COD just like when she was asked about evolution and other topics intended to make her seem like a backwards moron including the "separation" question, which she got essentially correct despite the snickering by the law students and media.
But you handed out a booby prize for such a suggestion.
Wasn't me. I didn't care one way or another.
I see also that you posted this thread, obviously you are a bit emotionally invested. When some time passes hopefully you will see more clearly that COD had problems well beyond being asked presumably unfair or too difficult questions about the Constitution.
No I did not post this thread. I am invested in two things, freedom and justice. I'm positive that there could have been a better candidate than COD, than John McCain, than Bob Dole or even Obama himself. There can always be a better candidate. There could always be more ammunition, more money, more wisdom. I have only one point here. Criticizing COD in hind-site is unjust. If the point were to learn for next time then fine. But that's not the point. The point is mean pettiness and lack of any understanding whatsoever of teamwork. And, of course, the derision of those who mock from the sidelines.
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.