By Sam Foster
Thank You, Dan Riehl for daring to go where the minds of Republicans and Tea Party Conservatives have been trained since the elections; primarily, what Conservatives want Republicans to understand about 2010.
While a Republican, a corporatist, or a governmentalist might describe Castle as potentially a good Senator, no honest, serious thinking Conservative ever would. That does not mean that O'Donnell was an ideal candidate. But it is imperative that the conservative movement learn from 2010, come to understand why we lost where we did, and reject the conventional Republican wisdom that only serves to undermine our cause. Surrendering to liberalism, while claiming victory as a Republican, is a defeat for conservatism. And it is precisely those types of defeats Republicans have been fostering for too long, damaging our movement and, ultimately, their own brand in the process.
Donald Douglas at American Power stepped into the fray while detailing the crossfire:
Folks can quibble about all of this, and I'm betting Dan and the others are not tweeting each other sweet nothings this morning, but after seven years of RINO government in California, I can tell you that successful fake Republicans are no better than genuine socialist commie Democrats. Sure, a vote here or there might be reassuring for GOP insiders, but every compromise helps the left in the end, on bullshit cap-and-trade, on budgetary bloat, on appeasement in international affairs, and so forth and so on. Just look where pragmatic conservatives line up. It if were me, I wouldn't come close to Frum Forum RINOs with a ten-foot pole --- and you can make that 100 if the name Alex Knepper gets thrown in there for some "pragmatic" icing on the cake!
On the other side of the coin: Here is the key from Jimmie at The Sundries Shack:
Let’s be clear here. The Tea Party was an unalloyed good for conservatism and, so far as I can see, it will continue to be so. However, with increased power must come at least as much increased wisdom. Tea Parties bring a great amount of energy, stubbornness, and willingness to go toe-to-toe with progressives and, Lord knows, the GOP needs all of those things. However, the GOP has a wealth of political experience, technical know-how, and money the Tea Parties sorely lack. If we conservatives ever hope to remain in the majority for more than an election or two, we are going have to figure out how to marry the outsiders with the establishment without blunting the strengths of either one. If we can do that, then perhaps we can figure out how to capitalize on the wins of candidates like outsiders Marco Rubio and Ron Johnson and insiders like Dan Coates and Rob Portman to grow a majority. That will not happen so long as we continue to snipe over a candidate who carried more baggage into her Senate race than Lovey and Thurston Howell III going on a three-hour tour. It certainly will not happen so long as Riehl, and folks like him, continue to throw crotch-punches at the most innocent provocation.
So why am I putting this eyesore of political banter up for reading? Because, it is important to understand the lesson of DE and learn it well.
In truth, there are far better races to squabble about who’s at fault and what lessons should be learned. NY-23 comes to mind. We are transfixed on the DE Senate race, because O’Donnell had baggage and some would pretend as if voting for Cap and Trade isn’t baggage. This is precisely where Jimmie loses me.
Castle gets a reprieve from some, because Cap and Trade never turned into an executive reality. Let’s turn back the clock. Cap and Trade was a close vote and Republicans could have killed it, save Mike Castle and seven other Republicans. What if Obama had the opportunity to sign it into law and Mike Castle stood as a full-blown accomplice. Am I now allowed to hold him accountable, or must I vote Castle should the 2016 Presidency come down to Castle and O’Donnell?
Fiscal conservatism is what is winning the political argument in 2010. How do we then put Mike Castle on the poster? The idea is unfathomable. It runs contrary to the argument we are making before the people. We would be sacrificing our own proposed solution for America on the alter of senatorial power. We are for limited government and I’m not afraid to be what we are, anywhere.
Stand for nothing and you’ll represent nothing.
No one ought to be losing sleep over Mike Castle. Dislike O’Donnell? Fine! But, at least don’t tell me that pulling the lever for an R is more important than running a candidate that represents the message. Otherwise, what is the point of the Republican Party? I’m for not checking my brains at the door. I remember where Mike Castle stands and it’s not the same shore that the nation needs to land on, so forgive me if I’m one of the guys on the SS Republican trying to launch off of Castle’s shore.