Shame on you Chris Coons. You challenge O’Donnell to numerous liberal debates, you participate in the University of Delaware’s debate with CNN but you back out of Delaware’s very own historically black university? Bad move.

Mike Castle has done it again!  He snubs ABC Philly, Channel 6 and he refuses to debate Ms. O’Donnell. This time around though he made a risky move that could cost him dearly; it could make him “political toast”.

Now, all of Delaware will know that Castle does not care about Delaware.

Ms. O’Donnell still was given a platform though which I hope she will accept. The taped piece will air the Delaware Republicans Federal Candidates debate on Sunday September 5th at 11:30 am with all candidates who accepted the invitation including Glen Urquhart and Michele Rollins.

Apparently, Ginger Gibson at the News Journal and TW at DP are  at again ranting and raving about their latest new “find” on Christine O’Donnell.  Their gossip is of course never-ending —

Yeah so…the Constitutionalist Party nominated Christine O’Donnell to be their candidate. I say props to the girl. I mean, is it a crime for a Republican or a Democrat to announce that they are a constitutionalist? Is it really such a horror to put the constitution first over a party. I thought that Republicans and Democrats are sworn in to uphold the constitution.  Isn’t that the most supreme law of the land?

For the  Gibson / Castle / Coons cult of followers, I thought I would quote the platform of the Constitutionalist Party:

We declare the platform of the Constitution Party to be predicated on the principles of

The Declaration of Independence,
The Constitution of the United States and
The Bill of Rights

According to the original intent of the Founding Fathers, these founding documents are the foundation of our Liberty and the Supreme Law of the Land.

The sole purpose of government, as stated in the Declaration of Independence, is to secure our unalienable rights given us by our Creator. When Government grows beyond this scope, it is usurpation, and liberty is compromised

We believe the major issues we face today are best solved by a renewed allegiance to the original intent of these founding documents.

Now, I would hope every candidate regardless of party would support the Constitutionalist platform. To come against the Constitutionalists is completely UN-AMERICAN and a disgrace to our country.

It should be to so surprise that Christine supports the platforms of the Constitutionalists. She has consistently said she is a Constitutionalist Republican. If Castle can be a radical left wing supposed centrist Republican who has voted consistently against the 1st and 2nd amendments and with the democrats, then why in the world can’t Christine claim to believe in the Constitution and still vote with the Republicans?

It seems a bit wicked, really of Ginger Gibson and TW to frown upon Christine and the Constitutionalists. It otherwise wouldn’t have been such a big deal.

Hell yeah!!!!!!

Christine got approximately the same number of votes as the McCain-Palin ticket (~35%) and this gives her name recognition and the base to run this race and win.  It would be like if Palin or Hillary ran all over again.I am confident that one of them would win. The odds are certainly there for this Palin-Bachmann-Hillary Dynamo, Christine O’Donnell.

Here’s what Steve Maloney has to say: “In 2008, against Joe Biden, who spent $5 million, Christine got 140,509 votes, 35,000 more than anyone had polled against Biden. Can she get 20,000 to win the GOP Primary? I believe she will get as many as 24,000. We are reaching out to every Delaware voter and not just Republicans, although they’re the key to 9/14”.

Besides only needing  20,000 votes to win the Primary, Christine has the support base, the momentum, the tenacity, and even last month’s polling that blew everyone out of the water showing Christine ahead in the General polls against Coons  (by single digits) with Castle’s numbers dropping.  This proves that Christine is worth a shot and worth fighting for.

This blog is in response to John S, commenting on the Other McCain Blog. I have seen other comments such as these on other blogs so I seek to address this question.

Why would a closet radical, obama leaning, aisle changer, over-spender Mike Castle DECLINE a sophisticated forum with the darling Ms. O’Donnell, a political talking head who is a seasoned debater?

Some say that Castle is playing his cards straight by not debating her.

Some say that such a debate would legitimise Christine (You’d think??!! Of course she is legitimate. With or without a debate)

Others, say he is just PLAIN SCARED.

My guess is all of the above. Christine is already a viable candidate. Castle would look like an asshole against her and he knows it. But when it comes to Castle playing a “King,” “Queen,” or “Jack,” Christine has an “Ace”. That’s all I have to say.

We’ll see if he so dares to debate her on ABC.  If he doesn’t, wow what an idiot. Bad move King of King RINO’s

My fellow blogger Tennessee Walker from Delaware Politics claims that Ms. O’Donnell opposes Delaware’s Lax Corporation Laws based off an email blast sent from the O’Donnell campaign.  He makes the assumption that Christine O’Donnell is attacking Del. Corporation laws itself for being “lax”.  TW remarks, “This position is shared by Chuck Shumer of New York and other Liberal Politicians”.

I have read this email blast in its entirety, and TW only highlights ONE quote (originating from the American Spectator)  that was captured in the email blast.

Because of its lax regulations and corporate governance laws, more than 50 percent of all publicly traded companies in the United States, including 63 percent of Fortune 500 companies have made Delaware their “legal” home,according to the state’s website. The same is true with the banking industry.

First, looking at this quote alone, it simply is a matter of fact. The regulations ARE lax so that 63% of Fortune 500 companies CAN call Delaware home.   Honestly, I don’t see what’s wrong with calling the regulations “lax”? The term “lax” here is not derogatory. Obviously it is assumed by TW to be negative.

I doubt that Christine is opposed to the lax regulation. She doesn’t say one way or the other by quoting this quote. It’s a State issue.

BUT THE MAJOR STORYLINE HERE:

TW is taking this blast out of context and cherry picking. Any educated person can get the gist of the main idea in just the email blast heading itself:  “Reid to push for climate change in lame duck session. Castle could vote for Cap & Trade again!” Of course no one would know what the nature of the email blast was about with just using ONE quote – a quote that had nothing to do with the key point. Never once did TW bring up Cap and Tax or what Cap and Tax had to do with the banking industry.

The point was that Castle is likely to vote for Cap & Trade not only because of his prior vote for it, but be because he is being courted by the banking industry, whom he treats very favourably with due respect to making Delaware their home.

“Why is this a problem?”  the blast says:

According to the National Center for Public Policy Research’s Tom Borelli says, [this legislation] would lead to “the creation of the largest commodity market in the world.”  The Commodities Futures TradingCommission estimates a $2-trillion futures market would be created. This would be larger than the futures market for oil and gas.

There is nothing wrong with making Deleware home for the banking industry especially since 20% of the revenue does come from these corporations. However, there is obviously a vested interest here for Castle to vote on Cap and Trade to benefit the pocket of the banking industry, and Castle’s own campaign pocket at the expense of Delawareans themselves.

I quote from the email blast:

“Three of Castle’s top five contributors have been from the banking industry — MBNA Corp (acquired by Bank of America in 2006), Bank of America and Morgan Stanley. And 10 of his top 20 contributors were banking firms.”

It’s a no brainer for those who are competent in reading comprehension.

The Conservative Tea Party Paper even quotes the American Spectator article because, unlike TW, they got the gist of O’donnell’s email blast and they go further to explain the dangers…

The American Spectator reports: “One of the key storylines…would be the swearing in of the winner of the special election.” The winner will be sworn in immediately. “… And if cap-and-trade comes up during the session, there’s a historical precedent showing how Castle would vote.”

His continued support for this job-stripping cap and tax energy bill would dangerously burden the standard of living for all Delawareans and Americans.  His vote for cap-and-trade would raise the costs of energy by an estimated $2,000 per family.

By 2030, low-income families in Delaware (with an average income of $12,945) will spend up to 19.2% of their income on energy under Cap and Trade.  By 2035 Delaware residents will see their electricity prices rise by $1,064.41 per household.  Estimates are that cap-and-tax would cost thousands of jobs in Delaware by 2012.

So there folks, you have it….another twisted stunt to misrepresent the case for Christine O’Donnell for US Senate.

Please see my response below to “George C” and the DRR (the DRR of which has repeatedly refused my comments on their blog to distort and present his/her side)

Unfortunately, the Delaware Republican Record closed the comment section, George C, on your little post stating that my blog comes from the campaign. I’ve actually tried posting there about 5 times put the blogger will not allow me to respond. Now it is completely not possible. So I am responding here since you mentioned Delaware Politics in your post.

First I already have a disclaimer on my by blog stating that I am an independent blogger separate from the campaign. Second, I explained in one of my blogs that I have known her for quite sometime. Third, she or the campaign had no idea about the blog. I’m not 100% sure that the news got to her. It caused quite a buzz on the internet. I’m also not sure if she or the campaign know whose writing it.

I am for certain a conservative Democrat and I voted for Hillary in the primary[I didn’t vote in the general]. I support social welfare programs for disadvantaged children, seniors and those living in extreme poverty. I believe in climate change and that there should be subsidies to allow for a competition for alternative energy. I am opposed to abortion though except in the case of rape or incest. I believe in gay adoption but do not support civil unions. I would also like to say that I have deep Republican roots…as my family are all Republican, but I shifted away ideologically. My views may or may not represent that of Christine’s but I will say that I know Christine. We [Christine and I] may agree to disagree.

Why I support Christine?

I vote based on character and leadership. I vote on who will do the best job. Because I have known her for so long, I know for certain that she will do the best job. As with Christine, I do not see eye to eye with every Democrat, but I think Hillary would have put this country in a much better place than Obama. Obama is a radical extremest Democrat who has jeopardised this nation.

I fear that Castle will continue to vote with him [Radical Extremist Obama] even subtly in amendments. He has voted with Obama 6 out of 10 times this administration. I think Castle has put himself under the radar for too long when he votes and that is dishonest. On my blog I simply highlight that dishonesty, particularly where he has spoken out of both sides of his mouth and aisle cross…such as with the Bush Tax Cuts (which I do support).

George C I hope that this clarifies your concerns. I will be sure to add a blog about what I have just said here since the DRR has refused my comments repeatedly.