Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Sarah Palin advisers prepped Christine O'Donnell for debate

By some reckonings, Christine O'Donnell had a bit of a rocky time at her Delaware Senate debate with Dem Chris Coons last night. She wouldn't say whether she believe in evolution, described Coons as a Marxist, and appeared to stumble over her answer on discretionary funding.

And yet, as Dana Milbank notes, in comparison to recent revelations about her and the national caricature that is the result, her performance was clearly an improvement.

If that's so, there are two people she has to thank for that, and they're both Sarah Palin advisers: Randy Scheunemann and Michael Goldfarb. They were the ones who took on the job of prepping O'Donnell for the debate, Goldfarb confirms.

Palin, in a conversation with O'Donnell, recommended the two men to her, and the O'Donnell campaign reached out to them to enlist their help, Goldfarb says. They spent the day with her yesterday in Wilmington getting her ready.

Goldfarb insists he was happy with her performance, claiming that Coons and the moderators had ganged up on her. "She came off as the far more likeable candidate," Goldfarb said. "Coons just kept his head down to the extent he could. My view was that it was three on one, and she held her own."

Goldfarb also rejected claims that O'Donnell botched her answer on Afghanistan, when she said that "we were fighting the Soviets over there in Afghanistan in the '80s and '90s" and that "we did not finish the job."

"Her point was that we left and that was a huge problem," he said. "Her point that we were there fighting the Soviets, that's also fundamentally true. The CIA was in Afghanistan. We were arming, equipping, training."

Still, it's hard to imagine a more daunting task than prepping O'Donnell for a high-profile, high-stakes debate. But Goldfarb insists that wasn't the case at all: "She's extremely impressive -- she's not a career politican."

No, she certainly isn't.

By Greg Sargent  | October 14, 2010; 1:24 PM ET
Categories:  2010 elections, Senate Dems, Senate Republicans  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: NRSC admits responsiblity for `hicky' language
Next: Yes, voters do care about secret cash funding elections!

Comments

WHAT is the new name of this blog : TRASH THE TEA PARTY AT EVERY POSSIBLE POINT


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 14, 2010 1:29 PM | Report abuse

Reality Check.

All you need to know about Christine O'Donnell is:

She said that she would have revealed where some Jewish people were hiding, rather than tell a lie to the Nazis.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 14, 2010 1:32 PM | Report abuse

All you need to know about Liar-still:

What Ms. O'Donnell actually said ...

O’DONNELL: "A lie, whether it be a lie or an exaggeration, is disrespect to whoever you’re exaggerating or lying to, because it’s not respecting reality.

MAHER: Quite the opposite, it can be respect.

IZZARD: What if someone comes to you in the middle of the Second World War and says, ‘do you have any Jewish people in your house?’ and you do have them. That would be a lie. That would be disrespectful to Hitler.

O’DONNELL: I believe if I were in that situation, God would provide a way to do the right thing righteously. I believe that!

MAHER: God is not there. Hitler’s there and you’re there.

O’DONNELL: You never have to practice deception. God always provides a way out."

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 1:37 PM | Report abuse

Dana Milbank is terrible at his job.

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | October 14, 2010 1:40 PM | Report abuse

O'Donnell refused to say that she would lie to the Nazis, to save the lives of some Jewish people.

The Woman is both crazy and evil.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 14, 2010 1:44 PM | Report abuse

"TRASH THE TEA PARTY AT EVERY POSSIBLE POINT"

For the sake of the USA someone's got to do it!

:)

Posted by: akaoddjob | October 14, 2010 1:45 PM | Report abuse

O'Donnell said that she would not try to deceive The Nazis, even if it would save the lives of some Jewish people.

She is a very dangerous person.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 14, 2010 1:46 PM | Report abuse

Part of the problem is that even if Ms. O'Donnell isn't a career politician, the people "prepping" her for the debate are long-time Washington lobbyists, so the idea that the Tea Party is against Washington, DC is clearly false. If Ms. O'Donnell does go to the Senate, we can expect that Mr. Scheunemann and Mr. Goldfarb will still be "advising" her and giving her their spin on world politics, so she will be beholden to them and their clients will benefit. The best way to avoid being beholden to people is to be intelligent enough to read, discuss and stay informed on issues, and Ms. O'Donnell has not shown much evidence of that.

Posted by: MinnyMa | October 14, 2010 1:49 PM | Report abuse

Wonder if O'Donnell will be McCain's VP choice in 2012?

Oh, and when is the Maverick going to bless us all with his announcement of running? I can't wait to see him on MTP endlessly.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | October 14, 2010 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Jake

What is your take on this mortgage mess?


If the mortgages were never signed over between the banks properly - what happens?


For instance, the court might rule that the mortgage note may pass without signatures - because there is payments history which is performance.


HOWEVER, the lien is different - it is usually a separate document - and thus the performance of the payments is not there.

ALSO - the Trust laws prevent the mortgage portfolios from accepting assets after a certain amount of time

- those same Trust laws also prevent the portfolios from taking non-performing assets.


So - if the mortgages ARE NOT PERMITTED BY LAW to be accepted into the portfolios - they are hanging out there - what happens ?

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 14, 2010 1:52 PM | Report abuse

"Goldfarb also rejected claims that O'Donnell botched her answer on Afghanistan, when she said that "we were fighting the Soviets over there in Afghanistan in the '80s and '90s" and that "we did not finish the job." "Her point was that we left and that was a huge problem," he said. "Her point that we were there fighting the Soviets, that's also fundamentally true. The CIA was in Afghanistan. We were arming, equipping, training.""

I saw this part. O'Donnell didn't have the faintest idea what she was talking about. It was memorized gibberish. O'Donnell is an ignorant idiot and the GOP should be ashamed running her as its candidate

"Goldfarb insists he was happy with her performance, claiming that Coons and the moderators had ganged up on her. "She came off as the far more likeable candidate," Goldfarb said. "Coons just kept his head down to the extent he could. My view was that it was three on one, and she held her own."

Playing the victim is what today's Conservatives are all about. Oh, and disclaiming responsibility. Because being a Conservative means NEVER having to say your sorry about anything. Just blame everyone else because your Senate candidate is a moron.

Posted by: wbgonne | October 14, 2010 1:53 PM | Report abuse

mikefromArlington:

Joe Biden stated yesterday that Obama has asked him to run as his VP in 2012!

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse

IZZARD: What if someone comes to you in the middle of the Second World War and says, ‘do you have any Jewish people in your house?’ and you do have them. That would be a lie. That would be disrespectful to Hitler.

O’DONNELL: I believe if I were in that situation, God would provide a way to do the right thing righteously. I believe that!

MAHER: God is not there. Hitler’s there and you’re there.

O’DONNELL: You never have to practice deception. God always provides a way out."

...................

Listen to the ravings of this O'Donnell lunatic.

Six Million Jewish people were murdered by The Nazis, and this O'Donnell Loon says "God always provides a way out".

Posted by: Liam-still | October 14, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse

How sad for the Democrats that they have sunk to this level. what amounts to news now is that a candidate for senate had the nerve to prep for an important debate.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | October 14, 2010 1:55 PM | Report abuse

@wbgonne: "Playing the victim is what today's Conservatives are all about. Oh, and disclaiming responsibility. Because being a Conservative means NEVER having to say your sorry about anything. Just blame everyone else because your Senate candidate is a moron."

Yes, but really, when you think about, that's actually all your fault.

:)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 14, 2010 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Christine O'Donnell must not have joined the Oxford Union during her impressive stint at the University of Oxford.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 14, 2010 1:57 PM | Report abuse

SaveTheRainforest:

That was never my area of the law.

wbgonne:

O'Donnell did better than Coons.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Wonder if O'Donnell will be McCain's VP choice in 2012?

Oh, and when is the Maverick going to bless us all with his announcement of running? I can't wait to see him on MTP endlessly.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | October 14, 2010 1:51 PM

~~~~~~

Word on the grapevine says Palin refused McCain this time, which left McCain in search of a new VP.

Don't worry though, rumor is he has made his choice: Snookie from Jersey Shore. She is just as smart as Palin and younger!

Posted by: PaciolisRevenge | October 14, 2010 1:58 PM | Report abuse

"God always provides a way out" Christine O'Donnell.

Then why didn't your God provide one for Anne Franks. Someone, just like you, told the Nazis where she was hiding, and they killed her.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 14, 2010 1:59 PM | Report abuse

@Liam-Still: "O'Donnell said that she would not try to deceive The Nazis, even if it would save the lives of some Jewish people."

But she is willing to lie about her academic credentials.

That's priorities for you.

Posted by: QuiteAlarmed | October 14, 2010 2:00 PM | Report abuse

O'Donnell didn't fart when she got nervous during the debate therefore she won according to republicans.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | October 14, 2010 2:02 PM | Report abuse

@SaveTheRainforest

Reporting on who prepped O'Donnell for the debate is hardly trashing the TP.

Besides, no one has to go out of their way to trash the Tea Party, they just do it naturally on their own.

Posted by: kmy042 | October 14, 2010 2:02 PM | Report abuse

MinnyMa:

Here in Connecticut, the Republican running for Senate is wealthy enough to limit campaign donations to $100. Wouldn't that be a BETTER solution to avoid being beholden to special interests? I really doubt that these two advisors are going to unduly influence Ms. O'Donnell if she is able to win.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 2:02 PM | Report abuse

Last night, Christine O'Donnell boasted about not being "an elite" like her opponent, because she had not attended an Ivy League School.

This is the same woman, who sued her Conservative Non-Profit employer for more than six million dollars, because she claimed they interrupted her plans to attend Princeton.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 14, 2010 2:03 PM | Report abuse

ah yes. Never mind the dreadful state of the economy. Never mind the mounting debt. Never mind the fact that the world is getting more dangerous.

never mind any of that.

Pay attention to Ms O'Donnell.

do this for the sake of the liberals and Democrats. Because if you don't you're likely to discover that they have nothing to offer and that their actions have actually made things much, much worse.

so do the Democrat party a favor and ignore the real issues.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | October 14, 2010 2:04 PM | Report abuse

McCain channeling Scheunemann: Today, we are all Georgians.

You have to wonder where these peoples loyalty lies at times.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | October 14, 2010 2:05 PM | Report abuse

QuiteAlarmed:

Ms. O'Donnell didn't lie about her academic credentials. You probably knew that though ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 2:05 PM | Report abuse

Jake

Fantastic answer - apparently correct in every respect.


Let me ask you this - scenario - the Mortgage Portfolio Trusts are able to tell the big banks that the banks are liable for the bad mortgages - AND the banks have to take back the bad mortgages.


So the banks become insolvent


____________________________________

The other question is this: Can a lien become separated from the note?


A mortgage is two parts - a note and a lien.


Does the lien ALWAYS need a signature endorsement to be transferred from bank to bank to bank?


A note COULD probably be transferred WITHOUT the signature endorsement because there is the performance of the payments to support the evidence of the transfer.


What is your reaction to that reasoning? Good, bad, reasonable?


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 14, 2010 2:11 PM | Report abuse

So that prep worked panned out real good for Christine.... The 'debate' turned into one, big interview by Katie Couric... Just as dumb - just as clueless - just as outwardly moronic as the original..

That Supreme Court discussion was almost identical... even the words!

I just don't understand WHY the American people are acting like lumps of crazy-dough and actually paying attention to people like O'Donnell, Angle, Paladino, Ken Buck, etc... the list is endless.. the extreme lack of knowledge on ANY SUBJECT is staggering...

Posted by: rbaldwin2 | October 14, 2010 2:11 PM | Report abuse

Knock on the door.

Christine O'Donnell opens it.

Nazis standings there.

Nazi Officer: Do you know where there are any Jewish People in hiding.

Christine O'Donnell: I would never want to engage in deception, so let me show you where there are some Jewish people hiding.

She takes them to where some Jewish people are being concealed by some real christians, and every one in the house is ordered out.

Christine O'Donnell tells both the Jewish people, and those that were protecting them; Don't worry; "God always provides a way out".

Posted by: Liam-still | October 14, 2010 2:14 PM | Report abuse

She claims she's not an "elite", yet she sure loved having the Oxford imprimateur on her resume. Typical TeaOP: "we hate the thing until it benefits us".

True about the Tea Party being nothing but a low-rent front for *real* money.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | October 14, 2010 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Ms. O'Donnell isn't a career politician, but she is a career candidate. She never made it to politician because the good people of Delaware know she is categorically unqualified for any public office.

The real story about her is that over the years that she has been a career candidate, she has grossly misappropriated campaign funds.

This race should not be getting national attention. It's only in the news because of the wacky, ridiculous statements Ms. O'Donnell has made over the years. She has become a political sideshow, just like her mentor, Ms. Palin.

These women seek public office simply to gain attention and to make money. O'Donnell knows she will not win this race. She's in it for the fame and money. She and Palin are two of a kind.

Posted by: elscott | October 14, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Poor Joke, still defending the moronic, ignorant teabaggger COD. Sad to see these old guys with their embarassing crushes on young teabaggger candidates.

Posted by: Observer691 | October 14, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Did anyone else even watch the Palin-Biden or O'Donnell-Coons debate? I did, and I thought that both ladies more than held their own. I've never experienced sexism, being a man of course, but I think that I am beginning to sense what it would feel like.

At least Dana Milbank writes: "She was, inevitably, not as bad as the cartoonish image that has emerged in recent weeks. And her opponent, Democrat Chris Coons, was dull and substantive, making himself an easy mark. He kept using the word 'frankly' and complaining about how little time he had to refute O'Donnell's statements."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/13/AR2010101308120.html

I certainly hope that she wins!

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 2:19 PM | Report abuse

Ms. O'Donnell didn't lie about her academic credentials. You probably knew that though ; )

~~~~~~

Wow, you must have giggled when you wrote that. Either you are willfully ignorant or reality impaired. Whichever it is, that comment puts you in the same category as SaveTheRainForest/Classic777.

Posted by: PaciolisRevenge | October 14, 2010 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Sorry, Joke, but there was no Palin-Biden "debate." The debate ended as soon as Palin announced she would not answer the questions put to her.

Senile Joke and his crushes. Sad.

Posted by: Observer691 | October 14, 2010 2:22 PM | Report abuse

skip-

Damn straight we are paying attention to O'Donnell. She is *your* candidate for one of 100 seats in the US Senate, is a shyster, fraud and has the intellectual heft of a box of hair.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | October 14, 2010 2:24 PM | Report abuse

You have got to be kidding. How about Obama ?
57 states
Comin"s"ky Park
corpsman pronunciation
can't say his name without a teleprompter

No, no. I have been practicing...I bowled a 129. It's like -- it was like Special Olympics, or something

"I didn't want to get into a Nancy Reagan thing about doing any seances."

UPS and FedEx are doing just fine, right? It's the Post Office that's always having problems."

Let me know if you need more.

"It's not that liberals aren't smart, it's just that so much of what they know isn't so" -Ronald Reagan

Posted by: sparad | October 14, 2010 2:24 PM | Report abuse

"She's extremely impressive -- she's not a career politican."


____________________-


Yea, but she has been running around on Bill Maher - representing a Conservative position.

And she has run for office several times -


So, you want to call her a "career activist" - and what becomes the difference - are you a politician ONLY if you win an election? Where is the line


If she is pushing her issues - she is a poltician.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 14, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

"Likely voters in battleground districts see extremists as having a more dominant influence over the Democratic Party than they do over the GOP.

"... The Hill 2010 Midterm Election Poll... found that 44 percent of likely voters say the Democratic Party is more dominated by its extreme elements, whereas 37 percent say it’s the Republican Party that is more dominated by extremists.

"... More than one in every five Democrats (22 percent) in The Hill’s survey said their party was more dominated than the GOP by extreme views. The equivalent figure among Republicans is 11 percent.

"... The survey also showed that a majority of Democratic voters want their representatives in Congress to work harder to achieve compromise with Republicans.

"Fifty-eight percent of Democrats said they would urge the lawmaker they supported to “look for compromises across the aisle”; only 35 percent would rather urge their representatives to “stay firm on their principles."

http://thehill.com/house-polls/thehill-poll-week-2/124177-the-hill-poll-swing-district-voters-more-likely-to-see-dems-as-dominated-by-extremists-

Posted by: sbj3 | October 14, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Gee, Greg, a smarmy comment at the end of your post, how professional.

Posted by: grayjohnston | October 14, 2010 2:26 PM | Report abuse

O'Donnell is right. If she informs Nazis of the location of hidden Jews, she avoids repercussions from the Nazis if the Jews are ever discovered. God is clearly looking out for her.

As for the Jews? Well, they are going to hell anyways. They're Jewish.

But I can see the same strategy between Palin and O'Donnell. Basically, try and look cute and hope that makes up for the lack of knowledge.

It's not the worst strategy given what the advisers had to work with. People who like O'Donnell or Palin don't like them because of their grasp of the issues. They like them because they can spout the party lines with a nice wink and a smile. It's only a few weeks until the election. O'Donnell is never going to appear sophisticated or qualified. Just go with what she's got and pray that it carries her through.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 14, 2010 2:26 PM | Report abuse

Gimme "dull and substantive" any day.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | October 14, 2010 2:26 PM | Report abuse

ROFLMAO...that's like Stevie Wonder teaching you to drive.

LOL, I'm still laughing at her saying we were fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 80's and 90's during the cold war and that I guess we are back over there to finish the job because we didn't finish it before. But, now we're fighting the...wait..who are we fighting now to finish the job according to Christine? ROFLMAO

Oh and the spin job by the Palin camp was equally hilarious. "Her point was that we left and that was a huge problem," he said. "Her point that we were there fighting the Soviets, that's also fundamentally true. The CIA was in Afghanistan. We were arming, equipping, training." HUH???!!! ROFL

Posted by: denise4925 | October 14, 2010 2:29 PM | Report abuse

O'Donnell clearly did better in the debate than anyone thought she would.

However...she was on the defensive nearly the entire time. And that is for good reason. Her knowledge seems to be only as deep as her talking points. When she had to go below the talking points, she collapsed and muttered she'd put it on her web site.

On the evolution question, where she tried mightily to get off the hotseat, she obviously evaded the answer (an answer that was obvious).

On Afghanistan, she made errors that included citing the wrong country and claiming the U.S. was fighting the Soviets there. By this time, I was pretty convinced she imagined uniformed U.S. troops marching on the Soviets directly.

When asked about the mandate in insurance, she was backed into a corner because clearly she had not thought out the implications on the ground with uninsured people. Then she accused Wolf Blitzer of using scare tactics (back to the talking points).

There was an obvious image left in the eyes of the audience--that is, three adults facing an aging ingenue who was scared, evasive, defensive and out of her league.

But... she has guts. I guess in her line of work, guts is a necessary ingredient.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 14, 2010 2:29 PM | Report abuse

This past weekend I passed through the National Archives and glanced at our founding fathers documents that laid the foundation for our country.

Then I thought of Palin, Buck, O'Donnell, Angle, Inhofe, Vitter and some of the other hero's of the Republican party and thought to myself how disappointed our founding fathers would be at what passes as a statesman today.

How has a national party gone so far off the deep end at defending individuals that wear ignorance like some sort of badge on their shoulder.

The more ignorant, the more Republican partisans line up behind them. What a disappointment.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | October 14, 2010 2:30 PM | Report abuse

Poor sbj3 -- another sap with a crush on COD.

I'd call COD a career failed politician. Does that work for you? And I'm looking forward to her running again in 2012, so she can extract more $$ from the wallets of you poor deluded saps.

Posted by: Observer691 | October 14, 2010 2:30 PM | Report abuse

I like O'Donnell and Palin because America needs MORE conservatives in D.C., not less.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Coons must have used all the self control he has just to not come out and laugh in her face. Guys like Milbank are nitwits who seem to think that just because O'Donnell didn't drool or pick her nose that she somehow "held her own." They were saying the same about the winking and smirking Moose Lady when she debated Biden in 08.
The MSM are utterly spineless in their inability to call a spade a spade.

Posted by: filmnoia | October 14, 2010 2:31 PM | Report abuse

This past weekend I passed through the National Archives and glanced at our founding fathers documents that laid the foundation for our country.

Then I thought of Palin, Buck, O'Donnell, Angle, Inhofe, Vitter and some of the other hero's of the Republican party and thought to myself how disappointed our founding fathers would be at what passes as a statesman today.

How has a national party gone so far off the deep end at defending individuals that wear ignorance like some sort of badge on their shoulder.

The more ignorant, the more Republican partisans line up behind them. What a disappointment.
Posted by: mikefromArlington | October 14, 2010 2:30 PM | Report abuse

Well said, Mike. Sad though.

Posted by: wbgonne | October 14, 2010 2:32 PM | Report abuse

Joe Miller announces he will make himself available to any media sources (except Fox entertainment). If this were some liberal group with say Obama leading the charge after he had lost the election we would think something sinister was up. The squirrel eater from Alaska continues to pepper the matrix with evangelical Birchers.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld1 | October 14, 2010 2:32 PM | Report abuse

@observer: "Poor sbj3 -- another sap with a crush on COD."

What are you talking about?

Posted by: sbj3 | October 14, 2010 2:33 PM | Report abuse

O'Donnell is so Pro-Life that she would force a woman, who had been impregnated by a rapist, to carry the child to term.

On the other hand, this phony "pro-lifer" would not even tell a lie, to keep Nazis from discovering, and murdering an entire Jewish family.

This is the sort of candidate that Sarah Palin has thrown her full support behind.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 14, 2010 2:34 PM | Report abuse

oooops... meant NOT

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld1 | October 14, 2010 2:34 PM | Report abuse

Jake

I watched a good portion of the debate - I thought Christine O'Donnell did very well.

First - the camera angles from the back - I have never seen that before in a debate and I thought it was highly sexist to do that with Christine O'Donnell - a younger woman than most candidates.

Next - Christine O'Donnell did what she has to do - she looked good on camera - and showed that she can clearly handle the issues.

The question on the court cases was unfair - since one case has been in the news - and clearly she may agree with it - when Coons was asked to name another case, he couldn't either. So that was NOT a negative for O'Donnell.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 14, 2010 2:35 PM | Report abuse

yeah Chuck, exactly my point. It is so much easier to jaw jack about a candidate than to defend the lousy economy your leaders have brought us.

Exactly Chuck.

You go boy.

And the tone of this blog post is really amusing. Just imagine, a candidate prepping for an important appearance. what will happen next? Will she seek advice about how to spend her advertising dollars? How ghastly will that be?

Rock on Democrats.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | October 14, 2010 2:37 PM | Report abuse

The teabagggers with their little puppy dog crushes on COD set the bar really low for her so they can declare how great she did because she didn't fly in on a broom.

Posted by: Observer691 | October 14, 2010 2:37 PM | Report abuse

O'Donnell is right. When the US surrendered by resuming participation in the Olympic games, the Ruskies won! I think that's what she meant.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 14, 2010 2:37 PM | Report abuse

But... she has guts. I guess in her line of work, guts is a necessary ingredient.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 14, 2010 2:29 PM

....................

"You've got spunk. I hate spunk". Lou Grant

Posted by: Liam-still | October 14, 2010 2:38 PM | Report abuse

She's what 20 points behind in the polls? Why is she putting herself through this torture? She's clearly out of her league, but I guess since that didn't stop Sarah, then I guess she feels she can do it too.

You can tell Palin advisers helped her with the debate, because she couldn't answer the same question Palin couldn't answer in her interview with Katy Couric. You know, which Sup Ct. decision do you disagree with? "Uhhh, well name one and..." "No, I'm asking you" Well, I'll put it on my website, I promise."

OMG, ROFLMAO. You can't make this stuff up.

Posted by: denise4925 | October 14, 2010 2:38 PM | Report abuse

Expect even more low-class personal attacks from CODfish in the remaining two debates.

Posted by: Observer691 | October 14, 2010 2:39 PM | Report abuse

Let's compare Christine O'Donnell to another Republican lady, Meg Whitman. Does anyone think these two ladies are in the same league intellectually? Does anyone think that Meg Whitman would not know the answer to any question that the interviewers could ask? Meg Whitman has never been in government, but obviously she has done her homework.

While I'm not a voter for Mrs. Whitman, I don't make the mistake of underestimating her intelligence, or underestimating her knowledge of California governmental history.

Christine O'Donnell is no Meg Whitman.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 14, 2010 2:40 PM | Report abuse

SaveTheRainforest:

Your reasoning seems sound (but keep in mind what they say about "free legal advice" being worth what you paid for it).

denise4925:

Try reading a history book someday, if you really don't know that the CIA was helping the Mujahideen (maybe something more your speed would be "Charlie Wilson's War" starring Tom Hanks ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 2:41 PM | Report abuse

denise: you could do a split screen showing Palin and COD answering the question in the exact same manner. Hilarious.

Posted by: Observer691 | October 14, 2010 2:41 PM | Report abuse

I prefer sensible conservatives like Dole, Baker, Ford, Vandenburgh,Taft,Ike. Not some teabagging bimbos who could not make their way through college.

I like O'Donnell and Palin because America needs MORE conservatives in D.C., not less.

Posted by: JakeD2

Posted by: MerrillFrank | October 14, 2010 2:43 PM | Report abuse

@JakeD2: "I like O'Donnell and Palin because America needs MORE conservatives in D.C., not less."

This I see why you like Palin. Not so sure about O'Donnell. Who is a poseur. And potentially a reality-show-wannabe sociopath. Potentially.

That being said, you know who I like? Ruth McClung.

http://www.ruth4az.com/

She could potentially actually beat Raul Grijalva in a district as gerrymandered to be favorable to Democrats as ever such a district has been. And Grijalva deserves to lose, for urging a boycott of his own state, during an economic crisis, because he disagreed with the recently passed immigration law.

I also like David Harmer in San Francisco. Sean Duffy in Wisconsin. Sean Bielat (who kills terrorists and bills robots) against Barney Frank. Jacob Turk against Emanuel Cleaver. Matt Doheny in NY 23. Rob Steele in Michigan.

All good candidates with real shots at winning. Some are longshots, but they are all possible. And they are pretty good candidates, which is why the lefty blogosphere is focusing on O'Donnell.

Just sayin'.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 14, 2010 2:44 PM | Report abuse

@JakeD2: She lied. Repeatedly.

www.politico.com/news/stories/0910/41750.html

www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/citing-mental-anguish-christine-odonnell-sought-69-million-gender-discrimination-lawsuit-again?nopager

voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/09/closing_the_book_on_christ.html

tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/09/claremont-institute-tells-tpm-odonnells-2001-resume-listed-oxford-university.php

Posted by: QuiteAlarmed | October 14, 2010 2:44 PM | Report abuse

Jake and ALL

I think Christine O'Donnell has one thing going for her - this seat was formally held by Joe Biden who has said alot of wacky things over the years.


So how is anything that O'Donnell has said really that bad compared to Biden


I think it was a good idea for O'Donnell to characterize Bill Maher as a late night comedy show - she should repeat that.


Saturday Night Live references highlight how this race has become a circus - that only helps Christine O'Donnell - because it blames the media, not her.


So overall, I think Christine O'Donnell still has a chance - she has to get within 7 points by election day - same with Linda McMahan - these candidates will pick up 7 points on election day- so if they are within that margin, they will win.


This year could be more of a sweep than we think.


The idea that the democrats are going to call people "nuts" and that will instantly make them lose - that isn't going to work anymore.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 14, 2010 2:45 PM | Report abuse

When asked which recent Supreme Court decision you disagree with; Christine O'Donnell should have replied; God will provide you with an answer to that question.

God is her rabbit hole.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 14, 2010 2:45 PM | Report abuse

I join with those who have opined that the Repubs should be ashamed for fielding candidates like O'Donnell. That will not bother Mitch McConnell. He will embrace a yellow dog if it means support for Majority Leader of the Senate

Posted by: lifestory | October 14, 2010 2:47 PM | Report abuse

What exactly about Palin or O'Donnell makes them conservative? That they have delusional levels of religious devotion? I've never heard either one of them utter a policy that would lead to deficit reduction.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 14, 2010 2:47 PM | Report abuse

So she was coached, BFD. I'm no TPer but if I were running for office and someone offered assistance to me in preparing for a debate, I'd take it. She's seems to be a nut-case but getting some help is hardly a flaw. Does Milbank think that she's the only one who gets coaching? He really is a doofus if he actually believes that. And what purpose does he think all of the Congressional staff serve - they prep their bosses all the time.

Posted by: fortenbaugh | October 14, 2010 2:47 PM | Report abuse

SaveTheRainforest:

Hopefully : )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 2:47 PM | Report abuse

Nice try Kevin -- David Harmer wants to abolish all public education. Great candidate.

Once that becomes common knowledge, he'll be well-deserved toast.

Posted by: Observer691 | October 14, 2010 2:48 PM | Report abuse

Jake

Alot of expensive legal advice is NOT worth what you pay for it.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 14, 2010 2:48 PM | Report abuse

@12Bar: "Let's compare Christine O'Donnell to another Republican lady, Meg Whitman. Does anyone think these two ladies are in the same league intellectually?"

Not even close. Or O'Donell and McMahon. Or--and I know even left-of-center folks may disagree with me, here, but it's true--Palin and O'Donnell. If I had to vote in Delaware, I would likely write in "Bart Simpson".

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 14, 2010 2:49 PM | Report abuse

12Bar


If you are an atheist, the answer is obvious.


If you believe in God, the answer is not obvious.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 14, 2010 2:51 PM | Report abuse

"she's not a career politican."

She has been running for elected office in Deleware for the last 20 years.

What exactly is here "career"? Professional knucklehead?

Where do they find these people - and why do they want to elect them all to the Senate?

Posted by: gooch733 | October 14, 2010 2:51 PM | Report abuse

@fortenbaugh,

There is nothing wrong with being coached. You are right, they are all coached. I think the actual point was that, even after being coached, she was not informed enough to get through 90 minutes of questions without numerous stumbles. However, I thought she did better than I expected. She didn't stumble on EVERY answer.

She should have used Meg Whitman's resources. However, I'll bet that Meg spent weeks reading, absorbing and discussing in order to get the background she has. That doesn't come from a couple of guys spending a day with you.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 14, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

@Observer: "Nice try Kevin -- David Harmer wants to abolish all public education. Great candidate."

Well, I didn't say he was a shoe-in. Just that he's got a shot.

Plus, he's not running on abolishing public education. It's not on his campaign website and it's not part of anything he's saying on the campaign trail. It's a position he took in an Op-Ed in 2000. So, we'll see if that alone ruins his campaign. It is, admittedly, an uphill climb. But, as of now, I wouldn't mind seeing him take the prize.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 14, 2010 2:53 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin was The Welfare Socialist Queen of Alaska.

Alaska received back far more dollars from Washington than it send there. On top of that; Sarah Palin then took billions from the Oil Companies, each year, and distributed it to the residents of Alaska, even thought they do not have a state income tax to pay.

Doesn't that make her Hugo Chavez Palin, The Socialist Governor Of Alaska?


Posted by: Liam-still | October 14, 2010 2:54 PM | Report abuse

QuiteAlarmed:

Ms. O'Donnell never lied in her lawsuit or about her education -- she was forced to dismiss her otherwise meritorious complaint because she just didn't have the money anymore to pay attorneys fees -- but she did actually STUDY at Princeton, Oxford and Claremont, and she never claimed to have graduated from there. Do you know who else went to Oxford but didn't graduate? BILL CLINTON.

Look, Americans are struggling and she understands those struggles, because she also faced difficult times, but in the end, she persevered. It took her over ten years to pay off her tuition bill. As a result, her college diploma was delayed. As FOX News, the Wilmington News Journal, and numerous other media sources [including the Politico link you provided] have confirmed, she does have a degree from Fairleigh Dickinson University and she is a very proud alumna.

Any more alleged "lies"?

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 2:56 PM | Report abuse

Nice try Kevin -- David Harmer wants to abolish all public education. Great candidate.

Once that becomes common knowledge, he'll be well-deserved toast.

Posted by: Observer691 | October 14, 2010 2:48 PM | Report abuse

As Greg has pointed out repeatedly there is quite literally NOTHING that would disqualify a GOP candidate for high elective office. This is the necessary end of the Radical Right's long campaign to undermine government because it provides the only viable check on Big Business. Since government is stupid, say the Conservatives, why can't stupid people run the government.

Posted by: wbgonne | October 14, 2010 2:58 PM | Report abuse

SaveTheRainforest:

That it true too : )

gooch733:

What was Bill Clinton's career?

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 3:00 PM | Report abuse

"Goldfarb also rejected claims that O'Donnell botched her answer on Afghanistan, when she said that "we were fighting the Soviets over there in Afghanistan in the '80s and '90s" and that "we did not finish the job."


Looking back, it's shame we didn't let the Soviets finish the job! LOL

Posted by: 54465446 | October 14, 2010 3:00 PM | Report abuse

Jake will be muttering for years "she didn't lie...she DID NOT lie...she was AT Oxford...how is that a lie?"

Ignore him, his brain has an adoration switch for O'Donnell and Palin. It is jammed full "On" and no one, and nothing, can unjam it.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 14, 2010 3:01 PM | Report abuse

If I had to vote in Delaware, I would likely write in "Bart Simpson".

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 14, 2010 2:49 PM

..................

Bart is the Christine O'Donnell of the Simpson family.

I would vote for Lisa.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 14, 2010 3:03 PM | Report abuse

Jake,

You are incredibly funny. If Christine O'Donnell really had a "meritorious" $6.9 million lawsuit, she should have been able to find any number of lawyers eager to take it on a contingent fee basis.

A sense a disturbance in The Farce.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 14, 2010 3:03 PM | Report abuse

If there was any doubt Koch was behind the astro-turf organizing against Obama, this should put an end to that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0JjQxPJOAfg

h/t exiledonline

Posted by: mikefromArlington | October 14, 2010 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Jake

I would say that the big banks are forging documents for a REASON.

The REASON has become clear - the New York Trust law PREVENTS the trusts from accepting the non-performing mortgages.


So, the big banks have discovered this - and they have more lawyers than you can imagine - do you really think that if there was a simple paperwork fix that they would not do it ? - on foreclosures involving hundreds of thousands of dollars?


The truth is the banks have to take back the bad mortgages - there was fraud originally and the banks have little chance getting the courts to retro-actively force the mortgage portfolios to take bad loans (which were supposed to be good - and on which the paperwork was never done )


So the result is the banks are insolvent.


Which means the US GOVERNMENT will end up owning the bad mortgages - and IRONICALLY, those same portfolios will have claims against the banks which will be insolvent.


The big banks/bankrupt banks will have to exercise the foreclosure rights - as they are sorted out.

These rights will be complex, because other banks may also be in bankruptcy and the liens STILL have to be transferred via signature endorsement.


Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 14, 2010 3:06 PM | Report abuse

"O’DONNELL: You never have to practice deception. God always provides a way out."
----
Tell that to the six million Jews who were killed in the holocaust.

Posted by: JRM2 | October 14, 2010 3:06 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw1:

Even ambulance chasers turn down cases that eventually win.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 3:07 PM | Report abuse

jaked2 wrote:

"Do you know who else went to Oxford but didn't graduate? BILL CLINTON.

Look, Americans are struggling and she understands those struggles, because she also faced difficult times, but in the end, she persevered. It took her over ten years to pay off her tuition bill. As a result, her college diploma was delayed. As FOX News, the Wilmington News Journal, and numerous other media sources [including the Politico link you provided] have confirmed, she does have a degree from Fairleigh Dickinson University and she is a very proud alumna."

NICE, but hardly the truth. Bill Clinton actually attended Oxford University (not that it's worth much) O'Donnell only took a class in the buildings rented out to someone else. Just like swimming in the country club pool in the summer, doesn't make me a member.

No it wasn't her diploma that was delayed for financial reason, she never actually finished her course work until this year. All easily verfiable on line.

Posted by: 54465446 | October 14, 2010 3:07 PM | Report abuse

Since government is stupid, say the Conservatives, why can't stupid people run the government.
-------------------------
@wbgonne,

Or, "if stupidity got us into this, why can't stupidity get us out?" Who said that anyway?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 14, 2010 3:07 PM | Report abuse

What does is say about the mentality of the viewer that saw the debate and found O'Donnell to be compelling in any way possible?
How delusional are these supporters that they would be willing to vote for her even though she hasn’t a clue as to what is going on in the world?
It’s a shame that in a country like America embarrassments like her (and other pseudos like Palin/ Paul/ Angle etc have gotten this far already).
It speaks very poorly of their supporters’ capacity to understand the real issues the country is facing.

Posted by: Moosem750 | October 14, 2010 3:08 PM | Report abuse

Fairleigh Dickinson University is not that bad of a college - let's be honest here -


It really is not right to trash that degree.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 14, 2010 3:12 PM | Report abuse

Why is O'Do even running for Senator, since she claims that God takes care of everything, and she does not even have to do anything at all.

God is her rabbit hole, when ever she gets cornered with a question she does not want to give a straight answer to.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 14, 2010 3:14 PM | Report abuse

STRF:

You needn't worry. This will be resolved in the banks favor sometime in the new year with a, regrettably, Republican Congress. It will happen for the same reason that there aren't tens of thousands of mortgage salesmen, appraisers and real estate agents currently in prison for fraud. When something this big happens, especially to people with money, you know it will be made to go away.

Posted by: 54465446 | October 14, 2010 3:14 PM | Report abuse

54465446:

What in my quote is "hardly the truth"? YOU know more about her finances than she does?

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 3:17 PM | Report abuse

OT:

RE: Foreclosures...

Check out the chart at the link below:

Foreclosure auctions hit record as document crisis unfolds

http://money.cnn.com/2010/10/14/real_estate/RealtyTrac_foreclosure/

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 14, 2010 3:17 PM | Report abuse

When something this big happens, especially to people with money, you know it will be made to go away.
--------------------------------
Truer words have never been spoken.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 14, 2010 3:18 PM | Report abuse

@minnyma "The best way to avoid being beholden to people is to be intelligent enough to read, discuss and stay informed on issues, and Ms. O'Donnell has not shown much evidence of that."

Exactly minnyma which is what is so horrible about Palin as well. It was bad enough when Palin was first snatched from obscurity and revealed her lack of knowledge...but almost two years later she still can't even hold an open press conference because she is really nothing more than a bimbo for old white R's.

Hope to see more of your posts minnyma

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 14, 2010 3:20 PM | Report abuse

jakeD2 wrote:

"What in my quote is "hardly the truth"? YOU know more about her finances than she does?"

Sorry I'm not answering any more questions from you.

Posted by: 54465446 | October 14, 2010 3:21 PM | Report abuse

The law is a net that has been woven to catch gnats, while letting Hornets and Wasps escape. Jonathan Swift.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 14, 2010 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Jake will be muttering for years "she didn't lie...she DID NOT lie...she was AT Oxford...how is that a lie?"

Ignore him, his brain has an adoration switch for O'Donnell and Palin. It is jammed full "On" and no one, and nothing, can unjam it.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 14, 2010 3:01 PM |
==========================

He was like that before C.O.D. and Mooselini came along.

Search TPMDC for "JakeD". (You'll only find references to JakeD from other commenters, JakeD got himself deleted from TPM long ago.)
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | October 14, 2010 3:23 PM | Report abuse

When something this big happens, especially to people with money, you know it will be made to go away.

The law is a net that has been woven to catch gnats, while letting Hornets and Wasps escape. Jonathan Swift.
-----------------------------------
Words from two wise men. Connect the dots, folks.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 14, 2010 3:26 PM | Report abuse

All, a new poll demolishes pundit claims that there's no way the secret cash issue matters to voters:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/10/yes_voters_do_care_about.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 14, 2010 3:27 PM | Report abuse

For the poll meisters here, this is interesting. From "the hill"

"The polling firm Penn, Schoen and Berland conducted the survey, contacting 4,047 likely voters by phone between Oct. 2 and Oct. 7. The margin of error for this sample is 1.5 percent.

More than one in every five Democrats (22 percent) in The Hill’s survey said their party was more dominated than the GOP by extreme views. The equivalent figure among Republicans is 11 percent.

Results for independent voters reflected the larger sample. Forty-three percent of likely independent voters said the Democratic Party is more dominated by its extreme elements, compared to 37 percent who thought the GOP had fallen under the sway of extreme views.

The figures by party do come with one caveat: Because the voter sampling size is smaller, the margin of error by party is 4.5 percent."

soo while the liberals here are doing their pavlovian drooling at the sound "odonnell" the American public is viewing the Democrat party as dominated by extremists.

What say you liberals?

Posted by: skipsailing28 | October 14, 2010 3:29 PM | Report abuse

rukidding wrote:

"because she is really nothing more than a bimbo for old white R's."

Look I would NEVER under any circumstance vote for Palin. However I respect how she made her career. She had absolutely no advantages in life, money, power, influence, nothing. Everything she has, she got on her own. She was obviously a bad choice for Veep, but that was McCain's fault not hers.

Compare that with Hillary who has never achieved ANYTHING in life on her own and turned out to be exactly what she said she wasn't some little Tammy Wynette!

Posted by: 54465446 | October 14, 2010 3:30 PM | Report abuse

What if former Soviet agents had prepped the bearded Marxist before the debate?


This whole posting is an attempt to place a negative onto Christine O'Donell by saying that she was prepped by the same people as Sarah Palin.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 14, 2010 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Of course, deception is ok when she says she got a certificate from the University of Oxford.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 14, 2010 3:31 PM | Report abuse

@12bar...your earlier post struck a chord with me. A significant % of R's and especially the T(hey're)E(mbarrassing)A(merica) Party!!!
They've come to believe their own lunacy...e.g.
"career politician". NO single profession is TOTALLY devoid of quality individuals. I'm certainly not here to defend politicians but ALL of them are not disgusting rats. SOME pursue their careers out of a sense of public service. Of course in the R world and especially the tea world public service...that is serving your friends and neighbors is a BAD thing!

It's not that all people on the right or all R's are shameful ignoramuses. Let's examine a current group of R's...as you pointed out 12Bar..Meg Whitman..toss in Carly Fiorina..and Linda McMahon. I do not agree with any of these ladies and while I could make snarky comments about how Carly was fired and Linda got her job through her marriage(yeah Kevin you could say the same thing about Hillary)...all three (and Hillary) are obviously educated, and articulate enough to defend their positions.

Then look at Palin, COD, Bachmann..these are three vacuous airheads who are so ill equipped to address issues that they can't even face an open press conference and have to stick to the scripted stooges like Sean Hannity and the other entertainers on Faux News.

Chris Coons ran a county during some very difficult times...his county has a SURPLUS...his county is one of 30 out of 3,000 with a triple A bond rating from all the major agencies...he KNOWS what he is doing. And yet idiots like Joke are so mind numbingly ignorant that they compare a mere wannabe...a woman who literally has NO ACCOMPLISHMENTS...other than being very, very cute and saying enough stupid stuff that Maher had her on his show for laughs to a person with REAL achievements and a BRAIN.

Anybody who watches Coons campaign and then sees COD and compares the two is just an idiot...yeah..IMHO and the opinion of anybody not blinded by partisan prejudice..or in the case of Joke a cement head who is truly a concrete thinker. He has yet to say the first wise word or provide us with the first original insight.

In words from that famous movie all I can say is..."Run Jake..run" And remember Jake, stupid is as stupid does and your posts make stoooopid look like rocket science.

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 14, 2010 3:37 PM | Report abuse

Fine, those who claim to KNOW that Ms. O'Donnell's diploma wasn't delayed for financial reason, until YOU can prove it, there's no way to claim what she said is a "lie". Good luck with that.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 3:38 PM | Report abuse

Greg wrote:

"All, a new poll demolishes pundit claims that there's no way the secret cash issue matters to voters:"

I respect your opinion but you're way off base on this. Read the questions that are asked. They're of the "If your spouse was having an affiar would you want to know about it?" variety. Well of course the answer is yes. Who would say , no thanks I would rather not be told anything.

That poll has little to do with how people will vote, however. I like your column or I wouldn't be here, but you will have a really tough time with the results in a few weeks. The pooch got screwed when Obama tackled health care for about 15 months and let financial regulation go. Had he done it the other way around, he would still be a very popular president.

Posted by: 54465446 | October 14, 2010 3:42 PM | Report abuse

She lied to the court when claimed that her employer had prevented her from attending Princeton in pursuit of a Masters Degree. She did not have a college degree then, so she was never even enrolled in Princeton, because she was not eligible to pursue a Masters Degree.

The Woman is a habitual liar, and nothing but a High Stakes Grifter.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 14, 2010 3:42 PM | Report abuse

SaveTheRainforest:

Your reasoning seems sound (but keep in mind what they say about "free legal advice" being worth what you paid for it).

denise4925:

Try reading a history book someday, if you really don't know that the CIA was helping the Mujahideen (maybe something more your speed would be "Charlie Wilson's War" starring Tom Hanks ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 2:41 PM | Report abuse

**************************************************************************************

I think it's COD you should be telling to pick up a history book. The US was not in Afghanistan fighting the Soviets. The CIA is not an armed force of the US. Maybe you should pick up a history book and find out what the CIA's role is. And, according to her, we didn't finish the job, so we had to go back over there. And fight who, Jake? The Soviets? Does she know what year it is? Maybe you could write her a letter and tell her why the US went to Afghanistan in 2001. Ask her if she's ever heard of 911 and Osama Bin Laden? Then ask her what those two things have in common with the US and Afghanistan and whether there's still a Soviet Union and if not, does she still we are back over there to finish the job against the Soviets in some fantasy war we were fighting against them in Afghanistan in the 80's and 90's.

Posted by: denise4925 | October 14, 2010 3:43 PM | Report abuse

denise: you could do a split screen showing Palin and COD answering the question in the exact same manner. Hilarious.

Posted by: Observer691 | October 14, 2010 2:41 PM | Report abuse
******************************************************************************************

LOL Observer, that's a great idea for an SNL skit. I'm looking forward to this Saturday night for that very same thing.

Posted by: denise4925 | October 14, 2010 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Jake wants us all to believe that he's running a courtroom here, and "he's 'd judge".

This is the courtroom of public opinion, where everyone knows what a lie is, everyone knows that Ms O'D lied through her teeth with her entire educational resume. And everyone knows why she lied--it's because she didn't even have an undergraduate degree until recently. She had to compete in Washington World where multiple degrees are the norm. So, she lied. Duh! It would be easier for her, and make her look better, if she just admitted it.

Good luck with that judge bit, jake. Look around your courtroom--ain't nobody there but you and the STRF.

The verdict is already in.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 14, 2010 3:48 PM | Report abuse

jaked2:


"Scott Giglio, assistant director of public relations at the Madison, N.J., university, told POLITICO the Tea Party Express-backed Senate hopeful was officially awarded her bachelor of arts degree in English literature on Wednesday. Citing privacy reasons, Giglio could not explain the reasoning behind the timing, but O’Donnell’s campaign manager said Friday the candidate met a final course requirement this summer.

“She’s gone through the process to receive her degree, that’s not the story. She fulfilled the last course requirement this summer. It was just a general elective course,” said O’Donnell campaign manager Matt Moran.

But that contradicts previous explanations O’Donnell has given about her education history.

Her 2006 Senate campaign website described her as a “graduate of Fairleigh Dickinson University.” In March of this year, she told the Delaware News Journal that FDU was withholding her diploma because she had not yet paid off her student loans. “I finished the coursework,” O’Donnell told the newspaper."

Jake don't get so mad. I'm just reflecting back to you the things you say to me!

Posted by: 54465446 | October 14, 2010 3:48 PM | Report abuse

Palin advisers prepped O'Donnell for debate
=================================
Like it went so well the last time!

Well, it wasn't too bad. 'Coz Sarah made up the discrepancies with a wink and a twitch here and there. You could almost sense the "Ooooooh" from the middle aged white male audience through the TV!

But Chastine did none of that! It was a disappointment!

Posted by: kishorgala | October 14, 2010 3:50 PM | Report abuse

to 54465446

The foreclosure problem is huge. the bank documentation issue is only one side of it. In addition we have a situation where the actual value of real estate is at this point unknown.

As Victor Davis Hanson pointed out today, people are angry and depressed when the believe that there is no way out of debt. When a huge portion of the home owners who are making payments see the value of their largest asset destroyed by foreclosure sheriff sales next door they are naturally unhappy.

We were told that investment in RE was sure fire. And that turned out to be wrong. And what forces created this problem? In the opinion of many, including myself, we Americans are paying the price for an unholy alliance between banks and our government.

the price of the failed social engineering that was CRA and other well intentioned but essentially faulty efforts will be paid by the American taxpayer. No one else is left. the value of our homes will be crushed so that even a sale of the house won't relieve the debt. I own a home that I cannot sell for 15% of my mortgage value. A house two doors down for me sold for 5,000. There are three out right abandonned houses on my block alone.

the market has to reach some stable level. We as citizens have to come to grips with the impact of this. that market level is likely to be far below what most owe to the bank. Is a reset in the offing? Probably but if the government intervenes the question we should all ask is "qui bono?"

The future looks shaky and for good reason. The value of our assets is unknown but probably less than we expected. Our government is slowly admitting that it cannot keep the committments it has made to the people. The economy is struggling and the government seems out of control to many.

the next year or so will be tough for all of us. Our rivals and enemies, sensing our weakness, are likely to pounce. Our "allies" are likely to turn their focus inward as the problems here in America sweep across the world.

Anger has many positive attributes. It certainly provides a lot of energy. But it may not be the best basis for rational thought. Yet the anger in America is palpable and not likely to dissipate because some politicians give some speeches.
We need ideas, and honesty now.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | October 14, 2010 3:51 PM | Report abuse

@54465446 "Compare that with Hillary who has never achieved ANYTHING"

Actually you make my point!!! DO COMPARE
the bimbo with Hillary. Being raised as a Wasilla redneck is certainly not the head start Hillary had...I give you that. But Hillary did achieve distinction in her higher education and early professional life. She has served SUCCESSFULLY as a Senator and now Secy of State. And I'm no Hillary fan but GEEESHHH!!!

"Rodham then entered Yale Law School, where she served on the editorial board of the Yale Review of Law and Social Action. During her second year, she worked at the Yale Child Study Center, learning about new research on early childhood brain development and working as a research assistant on the seminal work, Beyond the Best Interests of the Child (1973). She also took on cases of child abuse at Yale-New Haven Hospital and volunteered at New Haven Legal Services to provide free legal advice for the poor. In the summer of 1970, she was awarded a grant to work at Marian Wright Edelman's Washington Research Project, where she was assigned to Senator Walter Mondale's Subcommittee on Migratory Labor. There she researched migrant workers' problems in housing, sanitation, health and education. Edelman later became a significant mentor.[38] She was recruited by political advisor Anne Wexler to work on the 1970 campaign of Connecticut U.S. Senate candidate Joseph Duffey, with Rodham later crediting Wexler with providing her first job in politics.

Palin on the other hand....Palin attended Hawaii Pacific University in the fall of 1982 and North Idaho College in the spring and fall of 1983. She attended the University of Idaho in the fall of 1984 and spring of 1985, and attended Matanuska-Susitna College in the fall of 1985. Palin returned to the University of Idaho in the spring of 1986, receiving her bachelor's degree in communications with an emphasis in journalism from there in 1987.
After graduating, she worked as a sportscaster for KTUU-TV and KTVA-TV in Anchorage, and as a sports reporter for the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman, fulfilling an early ambition.

Do you REALLY want to compare the Wasilla hillbilly and Clinton.

Palin was mayor of a small town of 15,000 and a half term governor of one of the smallest (populaton) states in the Union.

I have been more successful as a sportscaster. I have a better education. I have been Chair of a Planning Commission in a city of 250,000 more than ten X larger than Wasilla. Palin was in the right spot at the right time to get the Alaska Governors mansion and again when Billy Kristol wet his pants on that now infamous cruise of conservatives that led to Palin's eventual VP selection.

REALLY 54465446 I respect your posts and don't mean to be insulting, but when you defend dimwits, especially harpy, mean spirited dimwits it reflects poorly on YOU!

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 14, 2010 3:51 PM | Report abuse

TO: SaveTheRainforest who wrote:
“A lot of expensive legal advice is NOT worth what you pay for it.”
^^^^^^^^^
That can only be true if (1) you don’t follow that advice; or
(2) you’re so guilty it’s just better to admit that you were wrong.

+++++++++++++++++++++

TO: Liam-still who wrote:
“She lied to the court when claimed that her employer had prevented her from attending Princeton in pursuit of a Masters Degree. She did not have a college degree then, so she was never even enrolled in Princeton, because she was not eligible to pursue a Masters Degree.
The Woman is a habitual liar, and nothing but a High Stakes Grifter.”
^^^^^^^^^

That’s what Republicans like about her.


Posted by: lindalovejones | October 14, 2010 3:52 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone ELSE want to actually discuss the thread topic?

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 3:53 PM | Report abuse

Her employer; A Conservative Non-Profit Organization, fired her, after they caught her running some business for herself, using their offices, phones etc, while she was being payed by them.

She turned around and made up a pack of lies, in order to try and shake them down for over six million dollars.

Think about that for a moment folks. She claims to be a genuine conservative, yet she tried to Grift A Non-Profit Conservative Organization out of more that Six Million dollars. That is why I call her A High Stakes Grifter.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 14, 2010 3:55 PM | Report abuse

Plus, he's not running on abolishing public education. It's not on his campaign website and it's not part of anything he's saying on the campaign trail. It's a position he took in an Op-Ed in 2000. So, we'll see if that alone ruins his campaign. It is, admittedly, an uphill climb. But, as of now, I wouldn't mind seeing him take the prize.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 14, 2010 2:53 PM | Report abuse
**************************************************************************************

Has he publicly changed his position on abolishing public education? If not, why would you not mind seeing someone like that "take the prize"? Simply because he's a teabagger?

You teabaggers think that if someone said something years ago, it automatically doesn't matter anymore. But, I beg to differ. The same ideological policy beliefs I had 10 years ago still apply. And, this is probably true of 90% of the electorate. Why wouldn't this be true of the Republican teabagging candidates?

Posted by: denise4925 | October 14, 2010 3:59 PM | Report abuse

denise4925:

She's right, and you are wrong (regardless of whether the CIA qualifies as "an armed force of the US" or not). No one is saying that there's still a Soviet Union. Are you really claiming that the American government NEVER provided the Mujahideen weapons and/or training in Afghanistan back when there was a Soviet Union?!

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 4:02 PM | Report abuse

Kevin says that he could not vote for O'Donnell because he finds her unqualified, but he is a big supporter of Palin.

Keep in mind, that Palin is the one who is mainly responsible for O'Donnell winning the nomination. I wonder how Kevin can support Palin, since she finds the likes of O'Donnell to be the sort of people she wishes to surround herself with.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 14, 2010 4:04 PM | Report abuse

skipsailing wrote:

"No one else is left. the value of our homes will be crushed so that even a sale of the house won't relieve the debt. I own a home that I cannot sell for 15% of my mortgage value. A house two doors down for me sold for 5,000. There are three out right abandonned houses on my block alone."

Okay this one is delicate, but frankly this is hard to believe. Unless you live in Detroit, (in which case I say why?) no habitable house should sell for $5,000. Furthermore, it is hard to believe that even if you bought at the absolute peak in AZ, CA, or FL that your house is worth only 15% of your mortgage.

I have no reason to call you names, so forgive me but I'm sorry your numbers just don't add up.

Posted by: 54465446 | October 14, 2010 4:04 PM | Report abuse

Jake & Rainforest: What did you think of O'Donnell's moustache last night? I thought the lighting really brought it out well. Yeah, she's hot, alright. (Yes, I know I'm being offensive-duh!)
But honestly, trashing O'donnell is just getting boring, it's like kicking a bully when (s)he's down. She's just too easy a target!

Posted by: nyskinsdiehard | October 14, 2010 4:06 PM | Report abuse

P.S. 20 years ago, Chris Coons said that he was a "bearded Marxist" so that still applies? Why is it OK for him to get away with that, but Christine O'Donnell is honest about her repentence from a sinful life during college so you are never going to let her live that down?

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 4:06 PM | Report abuse

I still just cannot believe the people of Delaware would elect ODonnell. They cannot be that stupid and twisted much less look forward to having someone represent them in the US Senate that would want the fable of Noah's Ark taught instead of Evolution.

"In the next period class we will go over the poof theory of how we all got here"

Posted by: dkeller1 | October 14, 2010 4:07 PM | Report abuse

JakeD2 : "...Are you really claiming that the American government NEVER provided the Mujahideen weapons and/or training in Afghanistan back when there was a Soviet Union?!

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 4:02 PM
=====================================
Would that "Mujahideen" be Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar?

Posted by: kishorgala | October 14, 2010 4:08 PM | Report abuse

nyskinsdiehard:

I didn't notice that or the lighting (but, I am not one to support candidates based on their looks; I voted for Alan Keyes in 2008 ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 4:09 PM | Report abuse

The fact that Palin's "advisers" helped prep Christine O'Donnell for this debate was clearly evident when she was asked about which recent Supreme Court decisions she disagreed with. Cf. "what do you read?" (posed by Katie Couric).

Also, @SaveTheRainforest, if you actually read the column, you will NOT find the Tea Party mentioned anywhere in Greg Sargent's The Plum Line, Oct. 14, 2010. But that's okay, you can see whatever it is you want to see. Part of the many Freedoms guaranteed by my Constitution. Maybe yours, too.

Posted by: TheShadowKnows | October 14, 2010 4:10 PM | Report abuse

@5446*2,

You added something new to the discussion today: Christine did NOT finish her coursework for her undergraduate degree until recently. What happened to Jake 'd Judge acknowledging this new "proof"? Didn't make a whit of difference, did it.

This is just another example of how Christine slips and slides through life by ALMOST finishing her coursework, NOT QUITE paying her school loans, ALMOST paying her mortgage, and ALMOST having a job. She's ALMOST up to a debate, but not quite.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 14, 2010 4:12 PM | Report abuse

What does is say about the mentality of the viewer that saw the debate and found O'Donnell to be compelling in any way possible?
How delusional are these supporters that they would be willing to vote for her even though she hasn’t a clue as to what is going on in the world?
It’s a shame that in a country like America embarrassments like her (and other pseudos like Palin/ Paul/ Angle etc have gotten this far already).
It speaks very poorly of their supporters’ capacity to understand the real issues the country is facing.

Posted by: Moosem750 |
**************************************************************************************

They don't care Moosem. The whole point of the teabaggers and their Republican lap dogs is to defeat President Obama at all costs. If that means that if the whole country has to go down with him, than the end justifies the means. They hate that he won for many reasons, including his race. I would say the latter was the driving force for the majority of the teabaggers. However, I have faith that the President and the country will overcome their negative and evil agendas.

Posted by: denise4925 | October 14, 2010 4:14 PM | Report abuse

@denise4925 Agreed. What was said 10-20-30 years ago does matter when it involves policy.

I am not talking about frivolous stuff like witchcraft or m*st$rbation but actual policy statements DO COUNT.

I will say however anybody is free to CHANGE their position over the years. I do not view that as flip flopping unless it's apparent the change was simply pandering for the vote. e.g. If someone said they were against public education 20 years ago and then 5 years ago said they've reconsidered their position and didnt' run until this year I'd listen to them and take them at their word.

An example of the opposite is Rand Paul.
Maddow simply pushed until he clarified a position caught on tape with the Louisville Herald Courier about Paul's belief that the Federal Gov't should not have been involved in desegregation of private enterprises even if they served the PUBLIC. He believed that "free enterprise" would have corrected that situation if given enough time. OK then Rand...I'm sure others believe the same thing...simply stick to your position...but the R establishment got to R.P. and voila he started waffling and changing his position. That is called pandering.

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 14, 2010 4:15 PM | Report abuse

dkeller1:

I'm sure calling the voters "stupid" is a great electoral strategy! Keep it up, please : )

kishorgala:

As I understand it, Osama bin Laden was pretty far down the food chain and probably did not receive direct U.S. assistance. In fact, by 1984 he had joined with Abdullah Azzam to establish an independent group called Maktab al-Khadamat, which funneled money, arms etc. into the rebel camps. Osama had enough "family" money to not need U.S. assistance himself.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 4:18 PM | Report abuse

How come every Republican candidate needs to be "groomed" and totally reinvented by teams of slick advisers before opening their mouths?

Glad you asked. Because if they ever actually said what they believe...and intend to do...the men in white with butterfly nets would come and take them away.

Posted by: wilder5121 | October 14, 2010 4:18 PM | Report abuse

rukidding wrote:

"REALLY 54465446 I respect your posts and don't mean to be insulting, but when you defend dimwits, especially harpy, mean spirited dimwits it reflects poorly on YOU"


You are really stuck for anything that Clinton has accomplished after college aren't you? LOL

The fact is that she got elected to the Senate as the wife of a sitting president, and that is the ONLY reasson. In fact had Guiliani not gotten caught with his hand (or something else) in the cookie jar, so to speak, at the wrong time he would have beaten her.

We are talking about a woman who is so poltically inept that she blew an absolute certainty as the Democratic nominee for president.

Exactly what are her accomplishments as Sec State, or in the Senate for that matter?

Funny when you ask people about her achievements and qualifications they always bring up law school at Yale but maybe there is good reason, since that was the last time she did anything on her own.

Hillary Clinton is the quintessential "wife of", the ultimate coattail rider!

Posted by: 54465446 | October 14, 2010 4:18 PM | Report abuse

I don't live in Detroit, I live in a suburb of Cleveland. It matters not whether you believe me. I speak the truth.

I have heard of houses in Sandusky Ohio selling for less than a thousand dollars.

Another house I know of is in the same situation. In the fifties a family built three identical houses. Today one house has a mortgage in excess of 110K. Two doors down the same house sold for 50K after being empty for two years. In North east ohio, its a depression and there is no sign of improvement. Overnight the value of the home with mortgage declined by close to 50%. How will that home owner ever recoup?

Have you been to this part of the country? Would you like to see what decades of Democrat party rule can do to a community? 15% unemployment sound good to you?

People are simply walking away from this part of the state. The corruption and mismanagement have destroyed a once vibrant part of the country. All we'll have left soon is folks on the dole as the lack of work drives people to states like TX.

So don't believe me, I don't much care about your opinions of me. I understand your question but I'm no liar.

the market needs to correct. How this is done will be very important to all of us. It is not that I want something for nothing. It is that the government and the banks screwed the people. And in response the government let two men who were most responsible for the fiasco write the "reform" bills.

Anger is a valid emotion. The people have a right to it.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | October 14, 2010 4:20 PM | Report abuse

@54464556 "I have no reason to call you names, so forgive me but I'm sorry your numbers just don't add up."

Exactly! You are correct those numbers do not add up. I live in the Tampa Bay area of Florida one of the hardest hit real estate market. Even those who bought at the height of the boom and put zero down still have 60% of their original value...and that is a WORST case scenario!!!

You are a polite poster and I respect that. You are also a diplomat when you point out that people here sometimes play fast and loose with the facts. I'll try to learn from you. :-)

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 14, 2010 4:22 PM | Report abuse

Mullah Omar OTOH fought as a guerrilla with the Harakat-i Inqilab-i Islami faction, under the command of Nek Mohammad, who DID receive American assistance in fighting the Soviet Union:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Nabi_Mohammadi

If anyone else wants to discuss this, or why I think that O'Donnell beat Coons in last night's debate, let me know.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 4:24 PM | Report abuse

overall, I think Christine O'Donnell still has a chance - she has to get within 7 points by election day - same with Linda McMahan - these candidates will pick up 7 points on election day- so if they are within that margin, they will win.


This year could be more of a sweep than we think.


Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 14, 2010 2:45 PM | Report abuse

Who is McMahan?

Have you been dropped on your head too many times?

Posted by: law1946 | October 14, 2010 4:26 PM | Report abuse

denise4925:

Are you still around?

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 4:31 PM | Report abuse

I am not a resident of Delaware, so while entertaining, the choice is not mine. It seems clear to me that anyone who steps back and considers the two candidate's qualifications, only one seems fit. The Tea Party desire to protect one of their own at all costs reinforces that they are just a party of emotional thugs swarming to protect the hive.

As a resident of South Carolina, while a registered Democrat, I can not support the candidate for U.S. Senate. I can not defend his qualifications, nor support spin on his current legal issues over showing porn to a college student. I detest Jim DeMint, but will vote for him because he is the only candidate who is qualified in my opinion.

I believe most Americans who reside in Delaware will clearly see that their choice is equally clear.

Posted by: Ebzra | October 14, 2010 4:32 PM | Report abuse

So I guess these professional politician backroomers will be sitting in her office telling her what to do if she were to be elected? BTW, if there's a Palin/O'Donnell ticket in 2010, I'm considering a sex change.

Posted by: 4avocats | October 14, 2010 4:38 PM | Report abuse

Jake, I don't agree with anything you say in these political blogs, but at least you have a sense of humor. You're OK by me, go in peace!

Posted by: nyskinsdiehard | October 14, 2010 4:39 PM | Report abuse

@skip "Anger is a valid emotion. The people have a right to it."

Agreed! But misdirected anger is totally non productive and in fact oft times more damaging than the original cause of the anger.

Somehow you view the party of the "working man" as the reason all of those midwestern manufacturing jobs were outsourced to Asia but not the wealthy investors who talk all those tax breaks and as any smart investor would do...placed that money where they could achieve the greatest return...overseas...and alas for too many of them..in exotic derivatives insured by worthless Credit Default Swaps.

I truly understand how the R's have captured a large segment of people on social issues...abortion..gay rights etc..but for the life of me anybody who does even a minimum of reading would understand that the wealthy of our country who are represented by the R's and the middle class by the D's. The radical shift in our wealth distribution should at least be a clue!

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 14, 2010 4:39 PM | Report abuse

denise4925:

She's right, and you are wrong (regardless of whether the CIA qualifies as "an armed force of the US" or not). No one is saying that there's still a Soviet Union. Are you really claiming that the American government NEVER provided the Mujahideen weapons and/or training in Afghanistan back when there was a Soviet Union?!

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 4:02 PM | Report abuse
**************************************************************************************

Just because, Jake?

LOL, she is saying there's still a Soviet Union, when she says we fought them in the 80's and 90's and we had to go back to finish the job. Finish what job? Fighting the Soviets?

I never said the US didn't supply weapons to the Afghans. I said we didn't fight the Soviets in Afghanistan, contrary to what COD said.

If she meant we supplied arms through our CIA agents to Afghans, then that's what she should have said. It's just as easy to say that, as it is to say what she said. But, what does supplying arms to the Afghans 30 years ago have to do with what we're doing there now? She's the one who said we had to go back and finish the job.

Now you have ME talking to you like you're a two year old. Stop playing with me. LOL

Posted by: denise4925 | October 14, 2010 4:42 PM | Report abuse

"Listen to the ravings of this O'Donnell lunatic.

Six Million Jewish people were murdered by The Nazis, and this O'Donnell Loon says "God always provides a way out".

Posted by: Liam-still "

Guess God provided them a way out....

Posted by: thrh | October 14, 2010 4:44 PM | Report abuse

P.S. 20 years ago, Chris Coons said that he was a "bearded Marxist" so that still applies? Why is it OK for him to get away with that, but Christine O'Donnell is honest about her repentence from a sinful life during college so you are never going to let her live that down?

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 4:06 PM | Report abuse

**************************************************************************************

Was her stint as a witch some satire she wrote about in college? Because that's the only way you can compare the two. LOL

Posted by: denise4925 | October 14, 2010 4:45 PM | Report abuse

If I'd heard that Christine spent the preceding day on a 12 hour drinking binge rather than preping, I might have thought better of her performance. Funny, Sean Hannity is exactly parroting the same excuse - three on one - they ganged up on her. Pretty funny.

Posted by: Keesvan | October 14, 2010 4:45 PM | Report abuse

If I'd heard that Christine spent the preceding day on a 12 hour drinking binge rather than preping, I might have thought better of her performance. Funny, Sean Hannity is exactly parroting the same excuse - three on one - they ganged up on her. Pretty funny.

Posted by: Keesvan | October 14, 2010 4:46 PM | Report abuse

54465446 Again I am not a Clintonista.
I hold no special fondness for either Bill or Hillary and so I don't disagree with most of your assertions. You are absolutely correct she blew what was a year before the election considered a coronation in the waiting. She too can be shrill and abrasive.

We can quarrel about her Senate success...by most accounts she had the respect of both sides of the aisle. As far as Secy of State...again you're preaching to the choir here...I am on Biden's side...Afghanistan is a complete disaster...as we used to say in the Army..FUBAR...IMHO Clinton gave Obama the worst possible advice...IMHO the jury is still out on her Mideast peace efforts.

So again let me be clear. It was the COMPARISON of Palin to Clinton that I was referring to...Clinton can go on MTP or even Faux news and hold her own...Obama went on Faux on numerous occasions including BillO's show....Palin is such a dim bulb she can't even hold an open press conference. Her handlers in the 08 campaign literally HID here from the press because they all KNEW she is an intellectual lightweight who was not even qualified to be Gov of Alaska. Turns out they were right about the Alaska thing..she couldn't even last an entire term.

Again I disagree with R's like Whitman,Fiorina, McMahon etc...but at least they are INTELLECTUALLY qualified to run for office. They also do the hard work of reading reams of position papers and can handle an open press conference even when there are hostile reporters. BTW the same would go for Clinton.

Palin on the other hand is a joke...or should is say a Jake...much like Jake Gump who posts on this site. She calls herself BS like a Mama Grizzley when she is too COWARDLY to even hold a simple press conference.

I don't know about you but I don't want a President or Senator who won't work harder than me or isn't even nearly as intelligent as me. I wouldn't wish to debate Whitman, Fiorina but I'd love to go up against mental midgets like COD and Palin.

I am not qualified to be President or Senator. Nor are the vast majority of my neighbors and again especially those in the Totally Embarrasing America Party. These wizards have yet to discriminate between socialism and private insurance reform.

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 14, 2010 4:53 PM | Report abuse

what nonsense RUK. Yes some jobs went overseas. It was ever thus. When did the textile jobs leave America RUK? Does the turn of the 20th century come to mind?
So spare me the foolish class warfare bubulum stercus.

I live in the rust belt. I know why the jobs are gone and I know where they went:
(1) Some jobs simply no longer exist. Robots build our cars now. A steel mill can get the same output with about half the labor force. It is just the way it is.
(2) Some jobs went overseas. As I said this will always occur. As global logistics improve the pace of this will quicken. China is already losing jobs to Viet Nam, who will lose jobs to Africa and on and on.
(3) Some jobs went south. Missippi just got a new Toyota factory. When Kia talks about proudly built in America, they mean Georgia not Ohio. NCR, born and raised in Dayton Ohio relocated to Georgia this year. Hundreds of jobs just gone, gone, gone from the state.

Want another example? This is one of my faves. the Detroit lions play at Comerica park. comerica bank used to be in downtown Detroit. Now they are in downtown Dallas.

it isn't class warfare, it is simple prudence. No company will long remain, nor relocate to an area with high crime, entrenched political corruption, high taxes failing schools and a difficult labor force.

and you are simply wrong about the demographics of today's Democrat party. do a little research. The example I use is CT suburbs of NYC. Wealthy wall streeters who vote solidly Dem.

The party that will prevail is the party that has the solutions. Bashing the rich won't win the D's any converts. What the democrats have tried thus far has failed us miserably. The American people are right to be outraged at the government and the price of that outrage is always paid by the party in power. Those that much is given, much is demanded.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | October 14, 2010 4:54 PM | Report abuse

@Ebzra...I realize your position and agree the Dem candidate is just a disgraceful as many of the tea party wackos.

However couldn't you write in a name on the ballot to at least show you protest DeMint?

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 14, 2010 4:56 PM | Report abuse

Then it's no wonder she failed to answer the question about Supreme Court decisions. Palin was stumped by the exact same question during the '08 campaign. You'd think these advisers would have learned from that and prepped O'Donnell this time around.

Posted by: IndieOne | October 14, 2010 4:58 PM | Report abuse

denise4925:

Are you still around?

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 4:31 PM | Report abuse
******************************************************************************************

LOL, I promise you Jake, I'm not one you want to bait.

Posted by: denise4925 | October 14, 2010 4:59 PM | Report abuse

With these two in her corner, O'Donnell even if she had a brain would be hamstrung. Palin's handlers sure did a great job prepping her for her Couric interview, didn't they? Palin advising O'Donnell is the blind leading the blind, deaf and dumb. I'll be glad when these people go back under their rocks.

Posted by: rob15 | October 14, 2010 5:00 PM | Report abuse

@skip....You do realize that more than 80% of the the Bush tax cuts went to the top 2%.
You also realize that Obama's stimulus contained the largest middle class tax cut in the history of our country.

And so I'll ask you a simple question...what do you believe the R's have done for you that has you so enthusiastic?

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 14, 2010 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Come on people. ganging up on Odonnell is like bringing a nuclear weapon to a paint- ball fight. The lady has no substance. What is so sad is that you have to get the candidates prepped for a debate;do any of them have an original thought? If you have to tell them what to say , then you will have to tell them what to do. I am not so sure if I want to use Palin's advisers ask Obama, he can be gaff prone at times.

Posted by: kahuna012003 | October 14, 2010 5:03 PM | Report abuse

@Jake:

She said that she got the certificate from the University of Oxford (not "at Oxford" as you claim). That's a lie.

She said that she had graduated from Fairleigh Dickinson University for many years before she completed the coursework necessary to obtain her degree. That's a lie.

In her complaint (which she signed and attested), Christine O'Donnell claimed that she "had already applied to Princeton University's Fall 2003 Semester to work towards a Master's Degree." In fact, she only audited an undergraduate course at Princeton. That's a lie.

This is all documented in the links that I provided above.

Posted by: QuiteAlarmed | October 14, 2010 5:03 PM | Report abuse

rukidding7 I think I'm in love with you. I'm definitely in love with your brain and what you say, LOL.

Posted by: denise4925 | October 14, 2010 5:06 PM | Report abuse

Hahahahahah, they sure did advise her(not on any supreme court decisions obviously), what a shock, full of slogans low on detail, classic Palin.....

Isn't it interesting tho for someone who claims to hold the constitution as reverential sa the bible and claims she will abide by it, can not name one case that legall upholds it? Derrrrrr

Posted by: Chops2 | October 14, 2010 5:08 PM | Report abuse

Exactly what is the point you are attempting to make?

Being, holding, and espousing liberal dogma requires absolutely NO preparation. It is the easiest of ground to hold. There are NO laws that apply to liberals, there is NO morality clarity or ambiguity, and there is NO God. Liberals believe in only what is easy, what is free, and what is contrary to common sense.

So you create an entire article about a Conservative preparing?

Posted by: jdaniel31 | October 14, 2010 5:09 PM | Report abuse

May I suggest that these two "advisors" were technically MCCAIN advisors, although I admit that doesn't make for a sexy headline.

Posted by: clawrence12 | October 14, 2010 5:12 PM | Report abuse

@denise4925: "I think I'm in love with you. I'm definitely in love with your brain and what you say, LOL"

You better watch out. Ruk's got quite the reputation as a ladies man.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 14, 2010 5:17 PM | Report abuse

Please! This reminded me of the debate between Jerry Falwell and Carl Sagan. Needless to say, Mr. Falwell got crushed. But here we are again with another nit wit running for a national office. We should be asking how this happened? Whatever virtues the Tea Party might have are totally blown away when some one like this is asked to represent their views. What are their views anyway? The USA is in a backwards spiral, and I say throw the Tea Party overboard before they become a total laughing stock.

Posted by: rryder1 | October 14, 2010 5:18 PM | Report abuse

Christine won that debate....She came across as articulate and real...he was a fumbling, always looking down, typical politico with vague answers.
Hope you folks in Delaware have had enough of the Coons type of politician and vote to put a real person in office.
Christine is the kind of fresh new voice we're looking for...she's sharp and energetic and has the "moxie" needed to stand for the people of her state..vote for her !!

Posted by: Gypsy1 | October 14, 2010 5:20 PM | Report abuse

more nonsense.

Of course the wealthy tax payers got a larger reduction. They pay most of the taxes. have ever looked at the excel spreadsheet that the IRS produces? So if there is to be a tax reduction shouldn't it fall to the people who pay the lion's share of the taxes?

The problem for you, I believe is that you see everything through ideological blinkers. Once people have convinced themselves that the rich don't deserve their money then the rest is easy. Just hammer the most productive among us and be done with it.

Look at the IRS data. In 2005, for example, the top 1% paid 21.2% of the taxes. The top 5% 35.75, the top 10% 46.44, top 25% 67.52, top 50% 87.17

that's right, 50% of the people paid close to 90% of the tax. That means that the other 50% paid about 10%

that's shameful. And you want more. There is a word for this: greed. Our government has become greedy. And you love it.

and the tax break in the stimulus? It amounted to what 15 a week? wow, I'm sure pizza sales skyrocketed with that.

And why didn't it work RUK?

Posted by: skipsailing28 | October 14, 2010 5:27 PM | Report abuse

Here's what I expect from the government: as little as possible. Keep the peace, create a set of rules that permit honest dealing and punish dishonesty and get the f word out of our way.

This is not easy. There is a balance but thanks to the liberals the government is intruding everywhere and failing us everywhere. It is a prescription for disaster.

I can think of one specific thing that an R did for me (and you) We won the cold war. We're still here (for the moment) and the soviet union is in the ash heap of history.

It is a matter of dogma for the left that Reagan didn't win this, it was Gorby and I expect doctrine party line responses from the libs here. Isn't it funny how America's liberals are sounding like the good old aparatchiks?

Posted by: skipsailing28 | October 14, 2010 5:32 PM | Report abuse

The debate really hurt any advantage she remotely could've had, and that's saying a lot because although Coons was professional, he was as stiff as a board in his delivery. And it was sad to see her being trashed because her own emotional instabilty backfired onstage. The GOP and the TParty should've coached her better . . .This was embarrassing and painful to watch her spriral downward in this debate.

The difference between the two:

He was composed, credible, only on defense when she was on the attack, and offered accurate and insightful answers.

She was . . . emotional, unstable, angry, on the offense with personal inaccurate trival attacks, ill prepared, and not credible (with all the financial mayhem still smoking - the unpaid employees, the forged fiscal documents, and the investigation going on now with the FEC)

Although he shouldn't take a win for granted, being 19 ahead of her, I'm pretty sure he's a shoe-in after this.

Posted by: SharonA2 | October 14, 2010 5:37 PM | Report abuse

Three against one, I thought she did well while Coons was sweating like a molester under questioning. Christine held her own and won the debate.

Coons is all big government, all big spender, a cool aid drinking minion of Obama.

Posted by: corneliusvansant | October 14, 2010 5:38 PM | Report abuse

How about exposing one of many LIES told by SP?
Revisiting the questions surrounding Trig Palin’s birth - "Anything goes?"
http://palingates.blogspot.com/2010/10/revisiting-questions-surrounding-trig.html

Posted by: aaaprogressive | October 14, 2010 5:41 PM | Report abuse

skip-

Spare me the faux outrage over the thread subject. You obviously don't want to discuss her but instead, want to change the subject, "hey, don't look here-look at that shiny object over there".

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | October 14, 2010 5:58 PM | Report abuse

Well, we certainly know what gypsy was doing during last night's debate...

The funny thing about all these blog posts and comments about COD vs Coons is that this is one of the least competitive Senate races in the country. But that's what you'd expect when one candidate is a competent if bland public servant and the other is a perennial candidate nutbag who has never held a real job in her adult life.

Posted by: Observer691 | October 14, 2010 5:59 PM | Report abuse

These two advisers, like many other leeches, are simply grabbing their share of the COD campaign pot o' gold.

Posted by: Observer691 | October 14, 2010 6:03 PM | Report abuse

skipsailing:

I sympathize with your situtation, it was only your numbers that I was arguing. It seems very hard to say that people need to vote with their feet, because many cannot leave.

Remember though that for those who are young enough moving is the best option. This nation has always been full of migrating people. My ancestors left Ireland for better life in PA. The area they settled in central PA is now almost a ghost town because the coal jobs ran out. They moved to Phila for a better life and eventually the General Electric facility that paid for my college education, closed it's doors and moved to Iowa. I moved to Maryland for a good job. God knows where my kids will live, but I told them I'm following them, or at least whichever one tolerates me the best!

Just little more than a century ago, Detroit had less than 300,000 people. in 1960, they had 1.6 million. Today they are down to about 875,000 and falling. The came because of auto jobs, and they are leaving because the jobs are gone.

The people with money always control the game, and it's not Dems vs. Reps, it's rich versus poor, always.

Good luck to you.

Posted by: 54465446 | October 14, 2010 6:23 PM | Report abuse

QuiteAlarmed:

Ms. O'Donnell's "resume" lists (under EDUCATION) the "University of Oxford" but it doesn't have a degree, because she didn't graduate from that institution -- she never has said that she "attended" or "graduated" -- she did take a summer seminar on the campus though. The Claremont information is just an honest mix-up (she did participate in her graduation ceremony but didn't pay until many years later, as I pointed out). And, none of those links contain her Princeton application, so it's kinda hard to say that she "lied" about that too.

Again, there's no "lie" on any of the links your provided, except of course for the false claim that she lied -- there are plausible explanations for all of it -- I have set forth all of this in detail on multiple Plum Line threads, including the one you linked to:

voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/09/closing_the_book_on_christ.html

If you have really read those threads, please let me know whether you have any specific question(s) that I can answer for you.

denise4925:

No, not "just because". I have posted for you plenty of the history as well as FACT that American military advisors were arming, training, and fighting along side of Afghan freedom fighters -- do you also think that America didn't fight the Vietnam War, because we were technically just "advising" South Vietnam? CIA operatives were in fact killed in action fighting the Soviets, contrary to what you said. BTW: if America wasn't fighting with the Afghan freedom fighters, why is it called "Charlie Wilson's War"? As for her "stint as a witch" apparently YOU believe Mr. Coons's claim that it was just satire, so why don't you believe her?

Lastly, I am not trying to "bait" you -- rather I have addressed each of your points above -- if you have any other questions for me, just make sure that you answer my questions to you first.

clawrence12:

Good catch!

Gypsy1 and corneliusvansant:

I agree with you both (they sure do seem pretty scared, though, what with this being one of the least competitive Senate races in the country : )

aaaprogressive:

Spare me the faux outrage over Sarah Palin. Do you realize that these two advisors were actually paid by the McCain campaign back in 2008? The only connection to Gov. Palin is that she recommended them. You obviously don't want to discuss O'Donnell but instead, want to change the subject, "hey, don't look here - look at that shiny object over there".

How about we give you Trig's birth certificate just as soon as Obama gives us his?

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 6:27 PM | Report abuse

Furthermore. It is the Republican practice to try and put as many schmoes as possible in to office, so the chief schmoe, Newt Gingrich, can tell them all what to do and they will do it because they can't think for themselves. Didn't we do this before? For about 8 years or so? Aren't the Republicans doing this now? Old Chicken Neck, Mitch McConnel, wouldn't know what to say, if Newt didn't tell him each morning. Same with the Boner guy. Not very creative but can follow directions, even if wrong. Thank you!

Posted by: rryder1 | October 14, 2010 6:28 PM | Report abuse

Wealthy taxpayers pay most of the taxes because we make (and have) most of the money. As one of my (enlightened) law partners likes to say, "If you are paying a lot of taxes, it means you are making a lot of money. How is that a problem?"

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 14, 2010 6:32 PM | Report abuse

rukidding wrote:

"So again let me be clear. It was the COMPARISON of Palin to Clinton that I was referring to...Clinton can go on MTP or even Faux news and hold her own...Obama went on Faux on numerous occasions including BillO's show....Palin is such a dim bulb she can't even hold an open press conference. Her handlers in the 08 campaign literally HID here from the press because they all KNEW she is an intellectual lightweight who was not even qualified to be Gov of Alaska. Turns out they were right about the Alaska thing..she couldn't even last an entire term."


. . . and yet many people love her in a way that they will never love and never have loved Clinton because in her they see part of their own story.

Again I would never voter for her, because we are poles apart politically but I respect hard work. Bill Clinton was our most wonkish president, and yet he signed both pieces of legislation that guranteed the financial mess we are in, Gramm-Leach and the CFMA. Did he sign them because he wanted to be praised, or because he listened to the wrong advisors, or because he thought he knew more about finance and money than he did? It doesn't matter the outcome is the same.

Hillary Clinto was and has been humiliated by her husband time and time again on the public stage, and what does she do? She takes it, because when all you have ever done is ride the train, you go where the tracks are taking you!

Posted by: 54465446 | October 14, 2010 6:39 PM | Report abuse

Observer691 presumes too much and obviously knows too little...

Posted by: Gypsy1 | October 14, 2010 6:47 PM | Report abuse

I'd say that Palin advising her may account for how stupid she is but that probably wouldn't be fair to Palin. who knew Delawarians wanted Alaskans to advise them on how to run a state?

Posted by: medogsbstfrnd | October 14, 2010 6:51 PM | Report abuse

Gypsy1:

He excels at that!

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 6:59 PM | Report abuse

oh, the poor Tea Baggers are being picked on.
For shame!
It's ok to trash gays; it's ok to trash illegals; it's ok to trash Obama; but not ok to trash Tea Baggers.
You Tea Baggers are despicable and I hope you get the chance to reap what ye sow. You have taken common sense to a new low. You are without reasoning nor are you humanistic in values. Yet you claim to be Christian. NOT!!!
Christ was a socialist in the making but you don't see that do you? I don't mean in the political sense but in the sense that he asked his followers to help those without the means to help themselves. Tribes were formed so that the entire tribe could help raise the children, hunt and care for the elderly. Yes it does take a village to raise a child! It does take the support of Americans to help our soldiers who come home wounded and missing limbs.
The difference between us is HUMANITY not Politics!

Posted by: beachbum1938 | October 14, 2010 7:15 PM | Report abuse

beachbum1938:

Who complained about TEA Partiers being "trashed"? Let freedom of speech ring!!!

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 14, 2010 7:23 PM | Report abuse

Have you noticed how rare it is to find a Democrat that will admit they supported ObamaCare and the Stimulus? A lot of them wont even say they are Democrats in their ads. If your own party wont own up to their work, what does that tell you about the work that was done? No wonder they wont run on their accomplishments, because there aren't any....

Posted by: DL13 | October 14, 2010 7:34 PM | Report abuse

Fox News made up a couple cartoon characters and their names are Palin & O'Donnell. The t-bags continue to show their lack of intelligence.

Posted by: wasaUFO | October 14, 2010 9:18 PM | Report abuse

Fox News made up a couple cartoon characters and their names are Palin & O'Donnell. The t-bags continue to show their lack of intelligence.

Posted by: wasaUFO | October 14, 2010 9:19 PM | Report abuse

"what amounts to news now is that a candidate for senate had the nerve to prep for an important debate." -------------

I'm thinking that a candidate should keep up on issues and wouldn't need prepping. I didn't see where the questions were off the wall or particularily hard.
They were about issues that most of us that read the news could easily discuss without "coaching" on how to answer.

Posted by: CommentingID | October 15, 2010 7:18 AM | Report abuse

"what amounts to news now is that a candidate for senate had the nerve to prep for an important debate." -------------

I'm thinking that a candidate should keep up on issues and wouldn't need prepping. I didn't see where the questions were off the wall or particularily hard.
They were about issues that most of us that read the news could easily discuss without "coaching" on how to answer.

Posted by: CommentingID | October 15, 2010 7:18 AM | Report abuse

Having watched a portion of her debate the other night, I was struck at how she rarely answered quesitons directly, but instead had her superficial talking points, little sound-bites that she clung to with a smile...very much in the Palin style. NOw it all makes sense, and explains why this vacuous lightweight came across so much, in my mind at least, like Palin. It would be funny if it were not so scary (ie, that a segment of our population is willing to give a dolt like this the authority of a Senate seat is indeed scary).

Posted by: MotSegye1 | October 15, 2010 5:31 PM | Report abuse

denise4925:

No, not "just because". I have posted for you plenty of the history as well as FACT that American military advisors were arming, training, and fighting along side of Afghan freedom fighters -- do you also think that America didn't fight the Vietnam War, because we were technically just "advising" South Vietnam? CIA operatives were in fact killed in action fighting the Soviets, contrary to what you said. BTW: if America wasn't fighting with the Afghan freedom fighters, why is it called "Charlie Wilson's War"? As for her "stint as a witch" apparently YOU believe Mr. Coons's claim that it was just satire, so why don't you believe her?

Lastly, I am not trying to "bait" you -- rather I have addressed each of your points above -- if you have any other questions for me, just make sure that you answer my questions to you first.
**************************************************************************************

Stop tap dancing. You know very well the issue is not whether the US fought the Soviets in the Soviet/Afghan war, but rather what the hell does that have to do with the war we are fighting in Afghanistan now and why she said that? What does she mean when she said we had to go back and finish the job?

What do you mean why don't I believe her? I do believe her. She said she practiced witchcraft when she was younger. That is a fact that she admitted to. You can't compare Coons being a Marxist to her being a witch, because it is not a fact that he was a Marxist. He wrote a satire calling himself that in the satire. Do you know what a satire is?

Posted by: denise4925 | October 15, 2010 6:06 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company