A couple of Christine O’Donnell fans didn’t like yesterday’s post on the radio interview.
My mistake, fellas. You’re right. It was a terrific interview. A candidate who doesn’t like the questions she’s being asked should always tell the host that there are rumors he’s taking bribes from the other campaign. When she says she won two out of three counties, no one should acknowledge that she lost both, one by 14 percentage points. Conservatism is best served when we all close our eyes and pretend we don’t see a false statement by a candidate we prefer!
Now, I’m not going to tout Mike Castle as anything other than what he is. He has a lifetime ACU rating of 52.49. That’s pretty darn “meh” for conservatives. But the moderation of the other guy isn’t sufficient reason to give a thumbs-up to a candidate who makes blatantly, easily verified false statements on the trail, nor to countenance her attacks on those who have the audacity to bring her the bad news.
I’m listening to the audio of Mark Levin, who in O’Donnell’s defense, declared, “If she’s a moral, ethical person who follows the law, I don’t care about the rest of this stuff.” Looking at that Weekly Standard interview . . .
Asked about a financial disclosure showing that O’Donnell only had $5,800 of earned income last year, O’Donnell told me that she actually made more but didn’t have to and wouldn’t disclose how much. “The only thing they can use against me is that I’m not a multi-millionaire,” said O’Donnell.
It says on the Senate financial disclosure report that O’Donnell filed and signed, ”Any individual who knowingly and willingly falsifies, or who knowingly and willfully fails to file this report may be subject to civil and criminal sanctions. See 5 U.S.C. app 4, 104, and 18 U.S.C. 1001.” The only listed exceptions are for amounts less than $200 and spousal income, although the employer of the spouse must be listed. (O’Donnell is not married.)
It’s fascinating that Levin and others lament the “backstabbing” among conservatives. I wonder how they would characterize the O’Donnell campaign’s response to Rasmussen polls showing her losing to the Democrat quite badly:
There haven’t been any recent public polls on the Castle v. O’Donnell primary, though an August 5 Rasmussen poll showed Castle leading Chris Coons, the Democrat, 49 percent to 37 percent, while O’Donnell was trailing Coons 36 percent to 46 percent.
O’Donnell’s campaign manager Matt Moran thinks that this poll isn’t accurate, calling it “more of a push poll.”
“Scott Rasmussen has to pay his bills,” says Moran. “We understand that the RNC and NRSC have long tentacles.”
I see. You’re suggesting RNC and NRSC pressure prompted Scott Rasmussen to change his results. If O’Donnell is losing, it must mean the numbers have been fudged.
Doesn’t Rasmussen, who has a bang-up record, get enough grief from liberals who don’t like his results? Doesn’t he deserve better for polling every interesting statewide race and for using a likely-voter screen that will inevitably lead to liberals screaming his results couldn’t possibly be true and, obviously, a pollster who offers results they don’t like must have no integrity? Who’s the backstabber here?
UPDATE: I would note that O’Donnell fans raging at me probably can’t find the words to express their views about Red State’s Erick Erickson departing the O’Donnell bandwagon.
I would note that I disagree strongly with vast swaths of Erick’s post, including . . .
I’d rather see the Democrat get elected than see Mike Castle get elected. Seriously, I know many of you disagree with me, but if the majority depends on Mike Castle, to hell with the majority.
And most particularly . . .
“I would rather die a thousand times over via crushing by an anaconda while being torn limb from limb by a jaguar than see Mike Castle in the Senate.”
Seriously, Erick, the Senate has Al Franken for the next four years. Mike Castle won’t be so bad. Put the anaconda away.
ANOTHER UPDATE: Mark Levin responds. He has some kind words in there, and so I’m grateful; I’d note that if Mike Castle strikes you as too close to a Dede Scozzafava–level intolerability, that’s fine. Every candidate has to earn your vote; no candidate is owed it.
I also love:
Geraghty all but finds O’Donnell guilty of perjury given her radio interview and financial disclosure report. I guess that means Joe Biden is headed to prison for campaign violations since campaign reports are also filed under penalty of perjury.
Well . . . yeah, in a perfect world!