O’Donnell Situation Smokes Out Republican Frauds
September 27, 2010
By Christopher G. Adamo, www.chrisadamo.com
Whether or not Delaware Republican Christine O’Donnell wins her bid for the United States Senate in November, her primary victory has already achieved more than could have been accomplished by any dozen new GOP senators. For the first time in decades, voters are being presented with unassailable examples of the difference between conservatism and the treacherous reality of “business as usual” in the Republican Party. And, given such a choice, real conservatism is unquestionably advancing.
Admittedly, O’Donnell faces an uphill battle in the general election. This is not so much because of the caliber of her Democrat opponent, Chris Coons. A left-wing extremist, he proudly characterized himself in college as a “bearded Marxist” (He has since given up the beard). Nor are his prospects significantly bolstered by the ringing endorsement he received from none other than Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D.-NV) who affectionately described Coons as his “pet.” The infuriating reality is that O’Donnell must overcome the opposition and attacks coming at her, post primary, from within a philosophically bankrupt Republican establishment.
Prior to the Delaware primary, all that the Republican elites in Washington could dream about was the inevitability of liberal Republican Mike Castle winning in Delaware, thus garnering sufficient seats in the Senate to give Republicans the majority, with it all of the accompanying committee chairmanships. Of course this was supposed to automatically redound to the ultimate good of the American people, despite the fact that even a few “Castle Republicans” (who are indistinguishable from Specter Republicans) would render impotent any GOP efforts to move the agenda significantly to the right. But everyone with an “R” by their name would nevertheless enjoy the benefits of “majority” status.
Since O’Donnell’s September 14 win over Castle, the same cadre of Republican “experts” are caterwauling that she is “unelectable,” ostensibly rendering the prospects of a Republican Senate majority as impossible. Considering the broad scope of their disingenuousness, it is difficult to know which flagrant lie should be dispelled first, so these come in no particular order.
The notion of a candidate being deemed “unelectable” is itself proof of the insidious existence of a political aristocracy, which intends self-perpetuation through the selective elimination of its opposition apart from any activity at the ballot box. At this stage of the Delaware political process, the only Republican Senate candidate who has proven to actually be “unelectable” is Mike Castle, since his failure to pass muster in the party primary eliminated any chance of his presence on the general election ballot. O’Donnell, in contrast, won the primary, and is continually trending upward in the polls on a daily basis, despite being derided from both sides of the political aisle.
Hedging the entire effort merely on the basis that the same “experts” who never foresaw her getting this far now confidently claim she will never overcome Coons would be the height of cowardice and defeatism, and in fact represents the mindset that in the past has relegated Washington Republicans to permanent minority status, regardless of their actual numbers in the Congress.
Equally deceptive is the notion that gaining a Senate majority, thoroughly watered-down though it may be, would somehow put the brakes on the Obama agenda. The actual numerical objectives that matter in the Senate and House tell a very different story. First, it is essential to gain a majority in the House of Representatives, which is looking ever more likely in the current political climate. However, if that milestone is achieved, the only improvement of any consequence that possibly could occur before 2012 would be to achieve a veto-proof two-thirds majority in not one, but both houses of Congress.
Short of that, the Congress may be able to prevent Barack Obama from accelerating his destruction of the country, but no real effort to repair the damage would escape his veto pen. And this scenario presumes that congressional Republicans vote in unity, which historically has been a stretch. So ultimately, all of the fear-mongering of O’Donnell’s opponents who supposedly reside on the right, when logically scrutinized, is proven to be built on a myth.
This leads to perhaps the greatest good to come from her Senate run, which has been to remove the facade of “conservatism” from those who have long masqueraded as such, while ultimately aiding and abetting the advancement of liberalism in America. This side effect alone could ultimately transcend anything that happens in November.
As the Republican “elites” pine for a Senate made up of the likes of Castle and Specter, they unwittingly reveal their disdain and contempt for the heartfelt concerns of those who truly abide on the political right. Perhaps they are unable to comprehend the fact that such a body would never forcefully address the outrages committed against this great nation during the past twenty months (or more likely being indifferent to the national catastrophe that has ensued), they have shown that their ultimate loyalty is to an exclusive “clique” that is dedicated to preserving the status quo.
From Republican “strategist” Mike Murphy, to the perennially dubious Karl Rove, to reputed icon of conservative punditry Charles Krauthammer, the inner circle of Republican “nobility” has exhibited far more willingness to attack and demean O’Donnell, a real conservative, than a demonstrable traitor to such principles in the person of Mike Castle. Likewise, they have castigated Sarah Palin, Senator Jim DeMint (R.-SC), and ultimately all of conservative America for failing to accede to their superior understanding and intellect.
Their tawdry gloating over what they contend to be O’Donnell’s impending loss appears a bit premature. It exposes their desire to secure their status as the smartest members of the political fraternity, irrespective of any dire consequences that might redound to the nation. But more significantly, they hope to prove the universal futility of such efforts, thus driving the decisive nail in the coffin of this ill-conceived uprising from the peasantry.
Would that these people had been able to muster even a fraction of this degree of passion in confronting and opposing the likes of Barack Obama during the past several years. They might have spared the country the nightmare of his ascendancy. But now we know that this was never their interest or intention.