The fact that you wrote this sentence, really sums up my entire argument.
When speaking about a Republican Senate candidate, you say "So, she dabbled in witchcraft. So what?", and you don't see the problem in that statement.
Here's the bottom line - O'Donnell can be better than Castle, FAR better than Coons, and still be a peculiar, strange or even nutty person.
She has absolutely no record of personal achievement, other than being a guest on MTV and ABC talk shows. She has started no businesses. She has managed no businesses, or even have a record of any discernable mid-management experience in any business. She has not held prior office of any kind. She not a remarkable military leader. She has published no scholarly works, or possessed any other kind of notable acedemic achievement.
And in spite of all that, she's the person to hang your hat on. It's simply amazing.
So many other quality Republican candidates out there who need help - and have a likelihood of winning - and yet it's this very odd woman who's being sainted.
So far on this thread, you have referred to the conservative Republican nominee and Tea Party Candidate in Delaware, Christine O’Donnell as a “Crackpot” (Post 235); a “mess” (post 294); an “idiot” and a “nut” (post 305) and a “peculiar strange and nutty person” (post 325)
In slamming a Tea Party conservative who is the duly elected GOP nominee for the U.S. Senate, haven’t you overstayed your welcome on this thread if not on Free Republic? You are promoting the interests of the Democrats.
There is no problem in the statement becasue the operative word is in the past—”dabbled”
Not dabbles.
Not promotes.
Not engages in.
Your indictment of her supposed “non-accomplishments” is similarly faulty. So, she’s just like Obama then, who had none your so-called list of what is an accomplishment.
Except that she actually is natural born, which Obama is not.
She can ACTUALLY BE eligible to be the President.
At least she had stayed off of unemployment for the last 20 years.
She meets all of the Consitutional requirements to run for the Senate. Don’t like that—blame James Madison, et al.
The real question is why YOU spend so much time trashing what you essentially think is a non-accomplished fruitcake?