Election Wins Can Stop Lame-Duck Threat

The National Review ^ | 7/22/10 | Phil Kerpen

[SonofReagan]

Senate Democrats who think they can use a lame-duck session to force the country into a final, decisive lurch to the left may be in for a big surprise: newly elected senators ready to take their seats and derail major policy changes before the new Congress convenes

[Gondring]

Yes, we can count on Mike Castle to . . . oh, nevermind.

[Nextrush]

Interestingly enough, Christine O’Donnell gets to be in Washington immediately after the election when she wins because she is replacing Biden who resigned to be VP. That’s the law in Delaware.

The same goes for Mark Kirk in Illinois who if he wins will replace Obama. Kirk has said he won’t be supporting any new laws being pushed in a lame duck session.

[Happy Rain]

If only the Rove,Krauthammer,Steele etc. GOP elite would stop undermining her campaign out of sheer sour grapes petulance.

Their RINO lost and they want their “I told you so” even if we lose the nation.
They loath the Tea Party as much if not more than the Democrats.

[jmaroneps37]

I agree. The few remaining sane Democrats ( not including Pelosi and her hard core Marxists) will be too scared to do anything but what conservatives tell them to.

The questions will become: How many will switch?

Then how many will get dumped in the 2012 primaries?

[Da Mav]

Whether she wins or loses, we won’t have to worry about Castle being the deciding vote of who controls the Senate.

It’s very easy to imagine a scenario in which Castle threatens to pull a Specter if the Republicans don’t agree to Cap and Tax and other ‘moderate’ positions. And the Republicans cave in exchange for control of the Senate. And despite the denials we’ll be right back where we were 2 years ago.

Don’t tell me Castle wouldn’t pull such a stunt — after all he’s refusing to support the party nominee in his own state.

I’d love to see the Repubs take the Senate. But not at any cost. The worst case scenario is that we end up able to block anything we want. That sounds better to me than a RINO forced compromise on key legislation.

And of course we’ve still got a shot at the gold. If the Republican establishment would quit undermining it.

[Graybeard58]

Kirk has said he won’t be supporting any new laws being pushed in a lame duck session.

Nothing Kirk says can be believed.

I'm voting for Mike Labno, the most conservative name on the ballot.

[reefdiver]

I was just thinking on NOV 3 - zer0 could be in LAME DUCK status.

that would go great with my coffee

[Gondring]

Interestingly enough, Christine O’Donnell gets to be in Washington immediately after the election when she wins because she is replacing Biden who resigned to be VP. That’s the law in Delaware.

Actually, the law requires one to win the election first.

[Caipirabob]

I’d love to see the Repubs take the Senate. But not at any cost.

Agreed - which is why I will never vote for john mccain ever again.

[grumpygresh]

This is crucial to votes on cap and tax, VAT and a host of other pernicious Democrat initiatives.
So let’s look at one crucial race: WVA senate. This is an open seat so there is NO incumbent. Both candidates are pro-2nd amendment but Democrat Manchin has the NRA endorsement over Republican Raese. And now Manchin has moved up in the polls after a great new ad in which he touts his NRA endorsement while shooting his rifle at the cap and trade bill.
If Manchin wins, he probably will vote against cap and trade, but will he hold up on other key issues? Probably not. The Dems will insist that he can have the cap and trade vote but to show fidelity to the Dem leadership he needs to give support them some other obnoxious Leftist legislation.

The other point is about the damage the NRA is doing to the conservative movement especially in this election cycle. The House is up for grabs and the NRA is supporting Democrats over Republicans in key races when there is no significant difference on gun rights. Sure, NRA members claim it’s all about incumbents but what about WVA? And what about when senator Manchin votes on SCOTUS nominees? Well, when is the last time a Dem Senator voted against a Dem president’s SCOTUS nominee? And how many of 0bama’s SCOTUS nominees will be pro gun rights?

The NRA claims to be the strongest gun rights organization. But, I just cannot understand this endorsement of Manchin. The NRA claims it’s all about the 2nd amendment and they will support gun rights candidates on both sides. Well fine, they have every right to do so. But then, the NRA can NEVER claim to care about the entire Constitution or claim to support conservativism
A vote for a Democrat is a vote for Democrat leadership which is always a vote against the Constitution and against conservatism. What we need is constitutional, conservative Republicans (NB: NOT rinos)
Today, you cannot be an NRA member and still claim to be a conservative no matter who you say you are. Ditch your NRA membership for another gun rights groups. It should be easier than changing you religion.