The gist of Rush's discussion today is that the GOP establishment wants establishment candidates, even where they are RINO's, because it's a status thing. I happen to think it's also because, in the case of O'Donnell and Angle, it's because more establishment-type candidates would have required less resources to win, but, that's the practical side of the thing. Rush references this post by the Chicago Boyz which tries to explain the Left's paranoia over Sarah Palin. I recommend their blog and Rush's analysis as well.
Regarding conservative vs. establishment (i.e. RINO) candidates, Rush says, "a Senate full of Mike Castles is not gonna get us anywhere. It's gonna get a bunch of Republicans their chairmanships on the committee but it's not going to do anything to reverse Obamaism."
Furthermore, Rush references one of my favorite blogs, Legal Insurrection, regarding conservative women and the Left's attacks on them specifically, Bill Jacobson says "The 'nuts and sluts' defense is a common employment law tactic whenever a female employee brings a claim. It doesn't matter what the claim is, the defense -- after the usual legal mumbo jumbo -- will be something like this: 'She's nuts. And by the way, pssst, she may be a slut.' That is the mode of attack Democrats use against conservative women.
As for me, my thought is that this year is going to be special and a wave election (I've said it before). Personally, I'd rather see a marginal candidate, but a real conservative (O'Donnell), get a shot, than a known RINO (Castle). It's a tough call, and I can see how The Weekly Standard, the National Review, and the GOP establishment want to be pragmatic and take the RINO bird-in-hand and concentrate resources elsewhere.
But, if not this year, then when? Some of the best replies and food for thought are on the Legal Insurrection post. I recommend you read those in addition to Jacobson's excellent post.
Furthermore, Rush references one of my favorite blogs, Legal Insurrection, regarding conservative women and the Left's attacks on them specifically, Bill Jacobson says "The 'nuts and sluts' defense is a common employment law tactic whenever a female employee brings a claim. It doesn't matter what the claim is, the defense -- after the usual legal mumbo jumbo -- will be something like this: 'She's nuts. And by the way, pssst, she may be a slut.' That is the mode of attack Democrats use against conservative women.
As for me, my thought is that this year is going to be special and a wave election (I've said it before). Personally, I'd rather see a marginal candidate, but a real conservative (O'Donnell), get a shot, than a known RINO (Castle). It's a tough call, and I can see how The Weekly Standard, the National Review, and the GOP establishment want to be pragmatic and take the RINO bird-in-hand and concentrate resources elsewhere.
But, if not this year, then when? Some of the best replies and food for thought are on the Legal Insurrection post. I recommend you read those in addition to Jacobson's excellent post.
No comments:
Post a Comment