The true meaning of Memorial Day.
Friday, May 28, 2010
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Christine O'Donnell Supports Second Amendment Natural Rights
Last night Christine O'Donnell attended the Founders Values symposium titled The 2nd Amendment - Protecting Life and Liberty.
Christine's support of this comes on the heels of a NRA filing against the City of Wilmington for prohibity public housing residents from possessing firearms. Article on that here.
Christine's support of the U.S. Constititution and especially the right to bear arms is welcome considering all three federal legislators (Republican Congressman Mike Castle, Democratic Senator Tom Carper and Democratic Senator Ted Kaufmann) all have an F rating from either the NRA and/or Gun Owners of America.
Christine is challenging Mike Castle in the U.S. Senate primary for the special election. Let's unite behind Christine and throw all of our support behind her.
Christine's support of this comes on the heels of a NRA filing against the City of Wilmington for prohibity public housing residents from possessing firearms. Article on that here.
Christine's support of the U.S. Constititution and especially the right to bear arms is welcome considering all three federal legislators (Republican Congressman Mike Castle, Democratic Senator Tom Carper and Democratic Senator Ted Kaufmann) all have an F rating from either the NRA and/or Gun Owners of America.
Christine is challenging Mike Castle in the U.S. Senate primary for the special election. Let's unite behind Christine and throw all of our support behind her.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Delaware Minor Parties Score Major Victory Over the Machine
The minor parties in the State of Delaware deserve a huge pat on the back for working together against an oppressive squeeze tactic. Back in 2009 Delaware certified and ballot qualified all major and minor parties in accordance with the agreed upon guidelines at that time. Minor parties then were required to have no less than ~350 registrants to be considered "ballot qualified" provided they could come up with the required fees, etc.
In 2010, the Delaware Department of Elections (specifically Director Elaine Manlove) asked the Delaware legislature to draft a bill that would double the size and scope of minor party membership for ballot qualification to more than 700 members. That meant that parties like the Constitution Party, Working Families Party and even Delaware's own "Blue Enigma" Party were in jeopardy of losing their ballot qualifications and by extension and exclusively third party candidates would lose the opportunity to run for office, despite any money raised/spent since 2009. The bill (HB245) was rushed through the General Assembly and signed by Markell. There was one little problem.
The Constitution Party wasn't going to back down from the machine. They worked with other minor parties in Delaware to come up with a coalition across party lines to fight back against the law that by all designs appeared to be changing the rules in the middle of the game. Earl Lofland and Pell Sherman led the fight against Dover's attacks and mounted a legal challenge. The State of Delaware Attorney General's office investigated the law and it's implications. Deputy AG Ann Wolfolk returned a suggestion last week that the Delaware Department of Elections contact the state legislature and ask them to delay the portion of HB245 pertaining to minor parties ballot qualifications until AFTER the 2010 general election in November. The AG's office understood that both morally and legally, changing the rules in the middle of the game is wrong. Legally the state (therefore the Department of Elections) would likely lose a court challenge by the Constitution Party and be forced to pay costs, damages and more to the minor parties. Manlove has since asked the legislature to write and quickly pass said bill to ensure that it is protected against legal action.
Thank you Earl Lofland and Pell Sherman (as well as others from many other minor parties who stood with Earl and Pell) for your hard work and dedication to fighting for what is right and just.
In 2010, the Delaware Department of Elections (specifically Director Elaine Manlove) asked the Delaware legislature to draft a bill that would double the size and scope of minor party membership for ballot qualification to more than 700 members. That meant that parties like the Constitution Party, Working Families Party and even Delaware's own "Blue Enigma" Party were in jeopardy of losing their ballot qualifications and by extension and exclusively third party candidates would lose the opportunity to run for office, despite any money raised/spent since 2009. The bill (HB245) was rushed through the General Assembly and signed by Markell. There was one little problem.
The Constitution Party wasn't going to back down from the machine. They worked with other minor parties in Delaware to come up with a coalition across party lines to fight back against the law that by all designs appeared to be changing the rules in the middle of the game. Earl Lofland and Pell Sherman led the fight against Dover's attacks and mounted a legal challenge. The State of Delaware Attorney General's office investigated the law and it's implications. Deputy AG Ann Wolfolk returned a suggestion last week that the Delaware Department of Elections contact the state legislature and ask them to delay the portion of HB245 pertaining to minor parties ballot qualifications until AFTER the 2010 general election in November. The AG's office understood that both morally and legally, changing the rules in the middle of the game is wrong. Legally the state (therefore the Department of Elections) would likely lose a court challenge by the Constitution Party and be forced to pay costs, damages and more to the minor parties. Manlove has since asked the legislature to write and quickly pass said bill to ensure that it is protected against legal action.
Thank you Earl Lofland and Pell Sherman (as well as others from many other minor parties who stood with Earl and Pell) for your hard work and dedication to fighting for what is right and just.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Sunday, May 23, 2010
The Supreme Court - Another Threat to Our Constitutional Republic
This is a repost of an article written by the nephew of my grandfather, Bob Guida who is running for U.S. Congress (NH-2nd District).
“All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States…”
U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 1
“The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court…”
U.S. Constitution, Article III, Section 1
“…Mentioning Kagan's late mother, Obama said: "I think she would relish, as do I, the prospect of three women taking their seat on the nation's highest court for the first time in history — a court that would be more inclusive, more representative, more reflective of us as a people than ever before."” By BEN FELLER, Associated Press Writer – Tue May 11, 1:51 am ET
With this remark, the President once again showed his disregard, if not his disdain for the Constitution he is sworn “to support and defend”. While the sound bite about “more inclusive, more representative, more reflective” has strong appeal at first glance, we must not forget that it is not the role of the Supreme Court to be “inclusive, representative or reflective”. That is the Constitutional function of the House and Senate. The role of the Supreme Court in this instance is to measure the actions of the legislative and executive branches of government against the original intent of the Constitution, and thereby to perpetuate the freedoms guaranteed therein. The Supreme Court was intended to judge, not to legislate. And it was certainly not intended to institute social reforms or establish government policies.
Let’s talk about a few of the terrible decisions made by the lifetime-tenured members of the nation’s highest court.
In its infamous Dred – Scott decision in the 1800s, the Supreme Court established that slaves were not citizens, but were in fact property. Ultimately, our bloodiest war (the Civil War) was fought with this as one of its underlying causes.
In the ludicrous Brown vs. the Board of Education in the 1950s, the Court ruled that “separate but equal” facilities were Constitutional, reaffirming in law the practice of discrimination against black Americans.
And in the tortured 1973 proclamation of Roe vs. Wade, the Supreme Court ruled that a woman can legitimately end the life of an unborn child, thereby denying y that child any rights whatsoever – including the most fundamental of all rights, the right to life.
In each of these cases, unelected judges legislated social policies that plunged our nation into moral turmoil for decades. Wars – both military and political – were required to right the wrongs they imposed from the bench. The moral torture of our nation and the political and emotional wars that resulted from Roe vs. Wade continue to this day.
Liberal judges who impose their worldview by legislating from the bench imperil both our system of government and our freedom. And a President and Congress which do not vigorously enforce the Constitutional separation of powers are complicit in undermining the crucial timeless principles enshrined in our Constitution and replacing them with the politically expedient social order of the day.
The link of the article is: http://www.bobgiuda.com/content/supreme-court-%E2%80%93-another-threat-our-constitutional-republic
“All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States…”
U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 1
“The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court…”
U.S. Constitution, Article III, Section 1
“…Mentioning Kagan's late mother, Obama said: "I think she would relish, as do I, the prospect of three women taking their seat on the nation's highest court for the first time in history — a court that would be more inclusive, more representative, more reflective of us as a people than ever before."” By BEN FELLER, Associated Press Writer – Tue May 11, 1:51 am ET
With this remark, the President once again showed his disregard, if not his disdain for the Constitution he is sworn “to support and defend”. While the sound bite about “more inclusive, more representative, more reflective” has strong appeal at first glance, we must not forget that it is not the role of the Supreme Court to be “inclusive, representative or reflective”. That is the Constitutional function of the House and Senate. The role of the Supreme Court in this instance is to measure the actions of the legislative and executive branches of government against the original intent of the Constitution, and thereby to perpetuate the freedoms guaranteed therein. The Supreme Court was intended to judge, not to legislate. And it was certainly not intended to institute social reforms or establish government policies.
Let’s talk about a few of the terrible decisions made by the lifetime-tenured members of the nation’s highest court.
In its infamous Dred – Scott decision in the 1800s, the Supreme Court established that slaves were not citizens, but were in fact property. Ultimately, our bloodiest war (the Civil War) was fought with this as one of its underlying causes.
In the ludicrous Brown vs. the Board of Education in the 1950s, the Court ruled that “separate but equal” facilities were Constitutional, reaffirming in law the practice of discrimination against black Americans.
And in the tortured 1973 proclamation of Roe vs. Wade, the Supreme Court ruled that a woman can legitimately end the life of an unborn child, thereby denying y that child any rights whatsoever – including the most fundamental of all rights, the right to life.
In each of these cases, unelected judges legislated social policies that plunged our nation into moral turmoil for decades. Wars – both military and political – were required to right the wrongs they imposed from the bench. The moral torture of our nation and the political and emotional wars that resulted from Roe vs. Wade continue to this day.
Liberal judges who impose their worldview by legislating from the bench imperil both our system of government and our freedom. And a President and Congress which do not vigorously enforce the Constitutional separation of powers are complicit in undermining the crucial timeless principles enshrined in our Constitution and replacing them with the politically expedient social order of the day.
The link of the article is: http://www.bobgiuda.com/content/supreme-court-%E2%80%93-another-threat-our-constitutional-republic
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Mike Castle's Liberal Love Affair Revealed
The Amercians for Democratic Action list Mike Castle as one of the most liberal Republican. The newsletter's tag line is a newsletter for liberal activists.
Here is the 2009 report: http://www.adaction.org/media/votingrecords/2009.pdf. By their admission Castle voted 55% in line with the Democrats in 2009.
If you go back one year, Castle supported them 65% in 2008. Here is that report: http://www.adaction.org/media/votingrecords/2008.pdf (HINT: Change the year of the pdf label and you get the previous year's report).
Here is the summary since he's been in Washington:
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 55% of the time in 2009
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 65% of the time in 2008
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 50% of the time in 2007
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 40% of the time in 2006
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 40% of the time in 2005
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 50% of the time in 2004
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 40% of the time in 2003
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 25% of the time in 2002
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 30% of the time in 2001
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 30% of the time in 2000
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 55% of the time in 1999
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 30% of the time in 1998
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 50% of the time in 1997
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 25% of the time in 1996
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 5% of the time in 1995
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 20% of the time in 1994
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 20% of the time in 2009
ANALYSIS:
- Mike Castle's BEST year was in 1995, following the historic GOP sweep that handed Congress to the Republican Party
- Mike Castle has progressed over time to voting more in line with the Democratic Party than of his own Republican Party
- 2008 was the year when Mike Castle sided with the Democratic agenda 65% of the time.
- Mike Castle has side with the Democratic agenda 6 years fifty percent or more of the time (1997, 1999, 2004, 2007, 2008, 2009)
Here is the 2009 report: http://www.adaction.org/media/votingrecords/2009.pdf. By their admission Castle voted 55% in line with the Democrats in 2009.
If you go back one year, Castle supported them 65% in 2008. Here is that report: http://www.adaction.org/media/votingrecords/2008.pdf (HINT: Change the year of the pdf label and you get the previous year's report).
Here is the summary since he's been in Washington:
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 55% of the time in 2009
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 65% of the time in 2008
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 50% of the time in 2007
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 40% of the time in 2006
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 40% of the time in 2005
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 50% of the time in 2004
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 40% of the time in 2003
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 25% of the time in 2002
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 30% of the time in 2001
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 30% of the time in 2000
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 55% of the time in 1999
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 30% of the time in 1998
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 50% of the time in 1997
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 25% of the time in 1996
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 5% of the time in 1995
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 20% of the time in 1994
By the ADA's admission Mike Castle has support the ADA 20% of the time in 2009
ANALYSIS:
- Mike Castle's BEST year was in 1995, following the historic GOP sweep that handed Congress to the Republican Party
- Mike Castle has progressed over time to voting more in line with the Democratic Party than of his own Republican Party
- 2008 was the year when Mike Castle sided with the Democratic agenda 65% of the time.
- Mike Castle has side with the Democratic agenda 6 years fifty percent or more of the time (1997, 1999, 2004, 2007, 2008, 2009)
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Mike Castle - Fiscal Responsibility Fact Check
On his website Mike Castle claims to be Fiscally Responsible. I decided to do some Fact checking. I thought, maybe I'm WRONG about Congressman Castle. Maybe he IS a budget hawk. This is what I found:
FACT - Castle voted for TARP (the $700 Billion bailout of the financial industry in 2008
FACT - In 2008 the American Conservative Union and Club for Growth (Fiscal conservatism) rated Mike Castle at 28% and 26% respectively.
FACT - Castle voted FOR the Auto-bailout that resulted in GM being owned by the unions and taxpayers
FACT - American for Fair Taxation rated Mike Castle as a -1 against the FairTax measure
FACT - Castle Voted FOR permanently raising taxes on businesses
FACT - In 2008 the National Tax Payers Union gave Congressman Castle a D rating
FACT - AGAINST making the Bush tax cuts permanent, capping discretionary spending at $973 billion and imposing a moratorium on earmarks
FACT - Congressman Castle supported the interests of the National Small Business Association 60 percent of the time from 2007-2008
FACT - Castle voted FOR the Obama Omnibus spending bill that increased spending 8% on TOP of the Stimulus packages
Castle's website states:
The $787 Billion stimulus package (which is projected to cost $3.27 Trillion) has resulted in $514, 012, 482.38 in Delaware dollars or put another way 6 one hundredths of one percent of the total stimulus package (assuming $787 Billion is correct). The Stimulus package has resulted in 1,174 jobs gained however, by December of 2009 Delaware had lost 11,400 jobs which resulted in a net loss of 10,226 jobs. Home foreclosure filings are still averaging 13 per day.
The website also states:
This committee failed to stop Fannie and Freddie from bringing down the entire national housing system, failed to properly regulate and evaluate the banking industry and is largely responsible for the financial services bailouts (which Castle voted for).
Finally, Castle's website states:
Despite this statement Mike Castle has voted against PAYGO (pay-as-you-go) amendments. The most recent of which was on February 14th 2010. He has a 2008 rating of 26% from the Club for Growth and has voted AGAINST making the Bush tax cuts permanent, capping discretionary spending and imposing a moratorium on earmarks 3 times since 2005. He's also voted FOR Cap and Trade, the auto bailouts, cash for clunkers, the 2008 stimulus package, the Omnibus spending bill (increased federal spending 8% ABOVE stimulus package) and believes that Social Security works relatively well despite the fact that it owes more than $14 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities and is the second largest budget item in federal spending (2nd only to Medicare/Medicaid which he has also praised).
Congressman Castle is CLEARLY not fiscally responsible with the people's money. He has time and again voted in ways that go against what is "fiscally responsible". His votes tend to contradict his campaign promises in the area of fiscal responsibility.
FACT - Castle voted for TARP (the $700 Billion bailout of the financial industry in 2008
FACT - In 2008 the American Conservative Union and Club for Growth (Fiscal conservatism) rated Mike Castle at 28% and 26% respectively.
FACT - Castle voted FOR the Auto-bailout that resulted in GM being owned by the unions and taxpayers
FACT - American for Fair Taxation rated Mike Castle as a -1 against the FairTax measure
FACT - Castle Voted FOR permanently raising taxes on businesses
FACT - In 2008 the National Tax Payers Union gave Congressman Castle a D rating
FACT - AGAINST making the Bush tax cuts permanent, capping discretionary spending at $973 billion and imposing a moratorium on earmarks
FACT - Congressman Castle supported the interests of the National Small Business Association 60 percent of the time from 2007-2008
FACT - Castle voted FOR the Obama Omnibus spending bill that increased spending 8% on TOP of the Stimulus packages
Castle's website states:
Economic Stimulus - Mike Castle has supported the federal initiative to return millions of taxpayer dollars back to individuals and families, spur business investment, and expand refinance options for homeowners.
The $787 Billion stimulus package (which is projected to cost $3.27 Trillion) has resulted in $514, 012, 482.38 in Delaware dollars or put another way 6 one hundredths of one percent of the total stimulus package (assuming $787 Billion is correct). The Stimulus package has resulted in 1,174 jobs gained however, by December of 2009 Delaware had lost 11,400 jobs which resulted in a net loss of 10,226 jobs. Home foreclosure filings are still averaging 13 per day.
The website also states:
Financial Services Committee: Mike Castle serves on the House Committee on
Financial Services, which has jurisdiction over banking and the securities and
insurance industries. In this capacity, he has worked to ensure the viability of
low income housing programs and has introduced legislation to shield consumers
from identity theft.
This committee failed to stop Fannie and Freddie from bringing down the entire national housing system, failed to properly regulate and evaluate the banking industry and is largely responsible for the financial services bailouts (which Castle voted for).
Finally, Castle's website states:
Budget Reform: One of the reasons Mike Castle first ran for the United States
Congress was to bring to the federal government the same principles of fiscal
responsibility that he practiced as Governor of Delaware. Castle has fought for
solid budget reforms in Washington, including a presidential line item veto,
rainy day accounts, pay as you go for both tax cuts and spending, and a
no-excuses balanced budget process.
Despite this statement Mike Castle has voted against PAYGO (pay-as-you-go) amendments. The most recent of which was on February 14th 2010. He has a 2008 rating of 26% from the Club for Growth and has voted AGAINST making the Bush tax cuts permanent, capping discretionary spending and imposing a moratorium on earmarks 3 times since 2005. He's also voted FOR Cap and Trade, the auto bailouts, cash for clunkers, the 2008 stimulus package, the Omnibus spending bill (increased federal spending 8% ABOVE stimulus package) and believes that Social Security works relatively well despite the fact that it owes more than $14 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities and is the second largest budget item in federal spending (2nd only to Medicare/Medicaid which he has also praised).
Congressman Castle is CLEARLY not fiscally responsible with the people's money. He has time and again voted in ways that go against what is "fiscally responsible". His votes tend to contradict his campaign promises in the area of fiscal responsibility.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
The Establishment Lost Tonight
Four states voted today and in two key races, the establishment lost.
Kentucky - Rand Paul, son of Texas Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) beat Kentucky Secretary of State Trey Greyson.
In the highly visible Pennsylvania Democratic primary, Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA) beat sitting U.S. Senator (D-PA, then R-PA, then D-PA). This is a major coup against a thirty-year career politican.
The trend against incumbents and entrenched establishment candidates continues. Two weaks ago, long-time Bob Bennett (R-UT) lost his bid in a primary battle.
This does not bode well for Delaware's Mike Castle. Mike Castle is a career politican and owns the Republican Party in Delaware. He is the problem why the Republican Party here is left of center. He too must go!
Kentucky - Rand Paul, son of Texas Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) beat Kentucky Secretary of State Trey Greyson.
In the highly visible Pennsylvania Democratic primary, Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA) beat sitting U.S. Senator (D-PA, then R-PA, then D-PA). This is a major coup against a thirty-year career politican.
The trend against incumbents and entrenched establishment candidates continues. Two weaks ago, long-time Bob Bennett (R-UT) lost his bid in a primary battle.
This does not bode well for Delaware's Mike Castle. Mike Castle is a career politican and owns the Republican Party in Delaware. He is the problem why the Republican Party here is left of center. He too must go!
FOUNDERS VALUES Natural Rights Symposium
Founders Values Presents...
FOUNDERS VALUES Natural Rights Symposium:
The 2nd Amendment - Protecting Life and Liberty
Come find out the basis of the right to bear arms and what it means to you today!
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
6:30-8:30pm
Newark Senior Center, Evergreen Room
200 White Chapel Drive, Newark, DE 19713
Founders Values is honored to present you with 3 guest speakers at our May monthly meeting. Get all the information that you need to know about the Founders 2nd Amendment in one place! Speakers will include:
John Thompson - President, DE State Sportsmen's Association
Mr. Thompson will be speaking on the formation of the 2nd Amendment and the current laws relating to the ownership of firearms.
Mark Garfinkel - NRA Training Counselor and Concealed Carry Trainer
Mr. Garfinkel currently trains NRA instructors and students. He will facilitate a discussion on firearm safety, handling and training.
Paul LaManna - Owner, Accurate Arms Custom Gunsmithing
Mr. LaManna will talk about how the process of buying and selling firearms, as well as firearm maintenance and repair.
This is sure to be a very informative evening! Please arrive early and bring your questions!
COST: Free! Donations are greatly appreciated.
"Americans have the rights and advantages of being armed - unlike the citizens of the countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." - James Madison
Please pass this along to other friends, family, co-workers, neighbors, etc. This is one meeting that you don't want to miss.
Sincerely,
Evan Queitsch
Founders Values
Sunday, May 16, 2010
2010 GOP State Convention Review
This years convention (I am told) was the largest turn out in many years and it showed. Caucuses were squeezed into hallways and small conference rooms that bulged with the weight of establishment Republicans and a few T.E.A. party members. Of course the stalwarts were there but interestingly enough some of the MAJOR players in the GOP remained "sticker neutral" (meaning they backed none of the candidates who were competing for office). THAT above any other fact shows that beneath the GOP leadership's cries for unity is a deep division amongst the brightest budding stars and the dimming party elites. A new era is about to begin within the GOP and this year's primary election could be the catalyst for it.
There were two contended nominations at this years convention
The first was for the people's United States Senate seat formerly held by Joe Biden. The Delaware GOP had decided that Mike Castle would be the establishment candidate and Christine O'Donnell had sought T.E.A. Party support. I was honored, as a T.E.A. Party leader to be asked to nominate Christine. I began by speaking about why we have debates in politics and why it is healthy. I also talked about James Madison who is not only the "Father of the Constitution" and our 4th President but also the "Father of Partisanship". Having served his constituents as both a Federalist (when he wrote the Constitution) and later as an Anti-Federalist (fighting against Hamilton's banking system), Madison understood the need for the parties (or factions as he called them) to present clear differences to the voters and to force them to pick a side. I argued that Congressman Mike Castle and challenger Christine O'Donnell couldn't be more different and I pointed to many of Castle's liberal votes as proof. During my nominating speech Castle's supporters (who weren't even delegates) got up and began handing out campaign materials. Following my speech, Diane Hernandez from Smart Girl Politics took to the stage and seconded my nomination of Christine. During her speech the National Committee Woman Priscilla Rakestraw made it a point to heckle her from the floor. The big boo's came when Jon Sherman took the stage and pronounced Mike Castle "the Arlen Specter of Delaware".
In fact, we T.E.A. baggin rednecks elicited such fear from Castle and his staff that they brought in the big guns. Castle's nominating speech was given by former Governor and Delaware GOP idol Pete DuPont (who incidentally spoke at the Wilmington T.E.A. Party rally exactly 1 month prior). There were two other speakers that seconded his nomination. One was a woman whose name I can't remember and the other is Sussex County Senator Joe Booth (who it is said will face Eric Bodenwieser (T.E.A. Party activist) in a primary and whose primary win was erroneously attributed to Castle's support when in reality it belongs to the hundreds of T.E.A. Party goers who made the rounds on Joe's behalf...thanks Joe). The woman whose name I cannot remember is only memorable for her unremarkable quotation of a founding father. Her quote came from Henry Clay and was obviously a Castle team members answer to my Madison laced speech. The problem with this is that Madison is both the "Father of the Constitution" and our 4th President whereas Henry Clay is known as "The Great Compromiser" who authored the Missouri Compromise in 1820 which allowed the sinful excersise of slavery to continue in Missouri and other states south of the 36th parallel. When Clay was appointed Secretary of State, his maneuver which had won John Quincy Adams the election, was called a "corrupt bargain" by many of Jackson's supporters and tarnished Clay's reputation. Finally, it was also mentioned that Mike Castle is the 5th Great Grandson of Benjamin Franklin who referred to himself as "an extreme moderate" (just watch "John Adams") and who was a great political mind if not the most honest of all the founding fathers.
In the end Castle also broke out the entire Dover High School Marching Band complete with school owned (and taxpayer funded) instruments, Mike Castle 2010 T-Shirts and "Dover High School Marching Band" tuba covers. Now, I'm not a lawyer but I'm pretty sure there is an issue with that.
There were two contended nominations at this years convention
The first was for the people's United States Senate seat formerly held by Joe Biden. The Delaware GOP had decided that Mike Castle would be the establishment candidate and Christine O'Donnell had sought T.E.A. Party support. I was honored, as a T.E.A. Party leader to be asked to nominate Christine. I began by speaking about why we have debates in politics and why it is healthy. I also talked about James Madison who is not only the "Father of the Constitution" and our 4th President but also the "Father of Partisanship". Having served his constituents as both a Federalist (when he wrote the Constitution) and later as an Anti-Federalist (fighting against Hamilton's banking system), Madison understood the need for the parties (or factions as he called them) to present clear differences to the voters and to force them to pick a side. I argued that Congressman Mike Castle and challenger Christine O'Donnell couldn't be more different and I pointed to many of Castle's liberal votes as proof. During my nominating speech Castle's supporters (who weren't even delegates) got up and began handing out campaign materials. Following my speech, Diane Hernandez from Smart Girl Politics took to the stage and seconded my nomination of Christine. During her speech the National Committee Woman Priscilla Rakestraw made it a point to heckle her from the floor. The big boo's came when Jon Sherman took the stage and pronounced Mike Castle "the Arlen Specter of Delaware".
In fact, we T.E.A. baggin rednecks elicited such fear from Castle and his staff that they brought in the big guns. Castle's nominating speech was given by former Governor and Delaware GOP idol Pete DuPont (who incidentally spoke at the Wilmington T.E.A. Party rally exactly 1 month prior). There were two other speakers that seconded his nomination. One was a woman whose name I can't remember and the other is Sussex County Senator Joe Booth (who it is said will face Eric Bodenwieser (T.E.A. Party activist) in a primary and whose primary win was erroneously attributed to Castle's support when in reality it belongs to the hundreds of T.E.A. Party goers who made the rounds on Joe's behalf...thanks Joe). The woman whose name I cannot remember is only memorable for her unremarkable quotation of a founding father. Her quote came from Henry Clay and was obviously a Castle team members answer to my Madison laced speech. The problem with this is that Madison is both the "Father of the Constitution" and our 4th President whereas Henry Clay is known as "The Great Compromiser" who authored the Missouri Compromise in 1820 which allowed the sinful excersise of slavery to continue in Missouri and other states south of the 36th parallel. When Clay was appointed Secretary of State, his maneuver which had won John Quincy Adams the election, was called a "corrupt bargain" by many of Jackson's supporters and tarnished Clay's reputation. Finally, it was also mentioned that Mike Castle is the 5th Great Grandson of Benjamin Franklin who referred to himself as "an extreme moderate" (just watch "John Adams") and who was a great political mind if not the most honest of all the founding fathers.
In the end Castle also broke out the entire Dover High School Marching Band complete with school owned (and taxpayer funded) instruments, Mike Castle 2010 T-Shirts and "Dover High School Marching Band" tuba covers. Now, I'm not a lawyer but I'm pretty sure there is an issue with that.
So here are your Dover High tax dollars at work.
Are they allowed to wear those shirts?But I digress, it took a band, a theme song, a sitting State Senator and the most beloved former Republican governor in state history to combat Chistine O'Donnell and her band of merry T.E.A. Party leaders. The final outcome? Despite the complete chaos that erupted with Mike Castle being NOMINATED, Christine O'Donnell still carried 30% of the room. 30% of the GOP establishment (that's who generally attends these conventions)jumped behind Christine. Couple that with the fact that key players (not the tools who do as they are told) but real leaders showed the party their true feelings by not falling in line and refused to show allegiance to the two "party nominees" and you have a convention that was all BUT full of "unity".
In the other contested race (for U.S. Congressman) Michele Rollins took 70% of the GOP establishment vote in a second ballot after Kevin Wade was removed from consideration. So Glen Urquhart and Christine O'Donnell each carried 30% of the GOP establishment Republicans. Interesting considering that these two candidates also stand for the "T.E.A. Party" values that 70% of regular Americans (primary and general election voters) support. Can Glen and Christine carry that message to the regular folks and win the day in September? Absolutely and with the O'Donnell campaign receiving attention from Senator Jim DeMint, Tony Perkins from the Family Research Council and Sarah and Todd Palin as well as Doug Hoffman (the man who discovered Doug is now the man behind the O'Donnell campaign) she is poised to begin her fight from 30% (as opposed to 0% where most candidates start). Glen certainly has the money and message but has thus far lacked the ability to reach out to local grassroots groups and to align with other T.E.A. Party candidates to present a more united front in the upcoming elections. He would do well to make such an effort.
In closing, the convention out come was a surprise to most of us realistic attendees. Castle and Rollins beat the drums and dumped their warchests and stomped the competition. With that said, both Urquhart and O'Donnell took home 30% of the vote from the GOP establishment and THAT is a major accomplishment that bodes well for them in September.
Friday, May 14, 2010
So here's the thing...
I'm all for offshore drilling, on shore drilling, ANWR drilling and clean coal manufacturing. I'm for natural gas, propane gas, oil, solar, wind, nuclear, geothermal, etc. Heck, I heard an interesting proposal for capturing the methane animals and humans release into the atmosphere via flatulence and turning THAT into energy. I'm also a conservationist, I want to see the earth repaired where we scar it and I want to ensure that we have places all over the globe where people can commune and live amongst nature. I'm NOT an Earth killer as the looney left generally labels us "Conservative TEA Baggers".
I felt the need to state the above because I do have a problem with the gulf oil spill and the subsequent "clean up attempts". The problem is this, if you're going to try something new, I understand accidents happen but shouldn't you have worked out the kinks? Shouldn't you be prepared for...I don't know a MASSIVE oil leak that spews thousands of barrels of oil a day into the waters? I mean it seems to me like these oil companies (I'm going to pick on BP through the rest of this) should have worked witht he Federal Government to develop a plan in the event that could stop this kind of thing. For instance, let's say a terrorist decided to puncture that tube and thereby cause a disaster, it's the Federal Government's responsibility to be prepared for that (Common Defense of the nation). It's also BP's responsibility to ensure the safety and security of the rig. So, folks can we stop pointing fingers now and get this damn thing cleaned up before it destroys us?
In the future, these plans need to be worked out BEFORE you sink a hole in the ground. I KNOW we need the oil but I can deal with not having it while you make sure it's safe to do it and make sure that the delivery system is secured. Hey, we could put many, many Americans back to work by employing them in the service of securing and monitoring these pipes. Here is a link to the full story from FOX News.
I felt the need to state the above because I do have a problem with the gulf oil spill and the subsequent "clean up attempts". The problem is this, if you're going to try something new, I understand accidents happen but shouldn't you have worked out the kinks? Shouldn't you be prepared for...I don't know a MASSIVE oil leak that spews thousands of barrels of oil a day into the waters? I mean it seems to me like these oil companies (I'm going to pick on BP through the rest of this) should have worked witht he Federal Government to develop a plan in the event that could stop this kind of thing. For instance, let's say a terrorist decided to puncture that tube and thereby cause a disaster, it's the Federal Government's responsibility to be prepared for that (Common Defense of the nation). It's also BP's responsibility to ensure the safety and security of the rig. So, folks can we stop pointing fingers now and get this damn thing cleaned up before it destroys us?
In the future, these plans need to be worked out BEFORE you sink a hole in the ground. I KNOW we need the oil but I can deal with not having it while you make sure it's safe to do it and make sure that the delivery system is secured. Hey, we could put many, many Americans back to work by employing them in the service of securing and monitoring these pipes. Here is a link to the full story from FOX News.
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Mark Levin Slams Mike Castle
Not exactly a warm message from the Great One, Mark Levin. Mark Levin rightfully throws Mark Levin under the bus. Watch this great video:
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Congressman Castle, Bad on Defense, Bad for Delaware
The most important duty of government is to protect the people. Not to Mike Castle. Since 2007 Congressman Castle has voted against funding the United States Missile Defense Shield that would protect America and her allies from Iranian and North Korean Nuclear missiles. When the opportunity came to Congressman Castle to speed up construction on the border fence to keep terrorists and illegal immigrants from streaming across the border, Congressman Castle voted no. He voted against the troop surge in Iraq that is credited with forcing Al Qaeda out of the country and bringing that theater to a near ending. Worst of all, Congressman Castle voted with the Democrats to start an investigation that would have led to an impeachment hearing against President George W. Bush.
With his record on defense in the last 5 years how can we feel safe with him as our next Senator from Delaware? Issues can be passed or bad bills blocked with just a single vote, can we afford to give one of ours away to a Progressive RINO? Congressman Mike Castle has been in elected office for 40 years. It's time for a change in Delaware. It's time to Repeal Castle.
Bennett’s Failure Indicates the Rise of the Conservative Wing of the GOP
The following is an email I received. It is worth posting:
Fellow Patriots,
My name is Steven Foley and I'm the Director of New Media for Liberty First PAC and TaxDayTeaParty.com. As Eric Odom has mentioned, we recently launched 73wire.com to serve as our premier "campaign trail" blog for the 2010 election cycle.
In case you missed the news about the stunning defeat of incumbent Republican Bob Bennett in Utah's primary election last week, you'll want to click here to read about it.
I believe Bennett's failure indicates a rise in conservatism within the Republican Party, and I want to invite you to read my post about it at 73wire.com. I'm posting the full column below, but you can click here to read it online and leave a comment or two.
When we say conservative wing we’re not talking about just the so-cons or the religious right, as the media likes to categorize conservative’s but the fiscally responsible common sense conservative that inhabits the hearts of all right of center individuals throughout the spectrum.
For more years than most people can count or remember, the GOP, has been run by a coalition of people who were either identified as the religious right or identified as politically moderate.
Moderate, in recent years, as defined by the likes of John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and others under the guise of maverick was purely an excuse for so-called conservatives to vote on liberal bills in order to provide themselves cover.
A moderate or a maverick is nothing more than a fence sitter who’s found a way to betray his or her principles, or more importantly the will of their constituents, in the false hope that their actions will have some kind of profound bipartisan effect on our nation…
Problem is – this action, more often than not, results in conservatives giving up their principles and ideals while the other side (liberals) takes everything and gives nothing!
I’m happy to say, with the halt of Bob Bennett’s campaign, that the era of the moderate’s controlling the GOP may be winding down. His defeat signals the growing feeling around the country that if you subvert the will of the people and vote for bad bills, you will be shown the door!
It’s time for common sense conservatives to steer the party! It’s time for Fiscally Conservative freedom loving Republicans to take leadership roles and move this party into positions where we can start to counteract the immense damage that;s currently being wrought on the United States and it’s amazing population of patriots and liberty minded individuals.
Please join us in continuing this cleansing of the party…with your help we can identify and elect strong freedom loving individuals that will uphold the constitution and think… Liberty First before selling their vote to the highest bidder or political favor in order to get reelected. Someone who will think… how does this bill affect my constituents liberty before voting for a bill…
Show me that person, and I will vote for them! Show me a patriot that puts his/her country before job security and I’ll vote for them! Show me someone who values the constitution and does their best to live and vote by it and I’ll vote for them!
I will vote for them… I hope you’ll join me?
Regards,
-Steven Foley
Director of New Media, Liberty First PAC
Fellow Patriots,
My name is Steven Foley and I'm the Director of New Media for Liberty First PAC and TaxDayTeaParty.com. As Eric Odom has mentioned, we recently launched 73wire.com to serve as our premier "campaign trail" blog for the 2010 election cycle.
In case you missed the news about the stunning defeat of incumbent Republican Bob Bennett in Utah's primary election last week, you'll want to click here to read about it.
I believe Bennett's failure indicates a rise in conservatism within the Republican Party, and I want to invite you to read my post about it at 73wire.com. I'm posting the full column below, but you can click here to read it online and leave a comment or two.
When we say conservative wing we’re not talking about just the so-cons or the religious right, as the media likes to categorize conservative’s but the fiscally responsible common sense conservative that inhabits the hearts of all right of center individuals throughout the spectrum.
For more years than most people can count or remember, the GOP, has been run by a coalition of people who were either identified as the religious right or identified as politically moderate.
Moderate, in recent years, as defined by the likes of John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and others under the guise of maverick was purely an excuse for so-called conservatives to vote on liberal bills in order to provide themselves cover.
A moderate or a maverick is nothing more than a fence sitter who’s found a way to betray his or her principles, or more importantly the will of their constituents, in the false hope that their actions will have some kind of profound bipartisan effect on our nation…
Problem is – this action, more often than not, results in conservatives giving up their principles and ideals while the other side (liberals) takes everything and gives nothing!
I’m happy to say, with the halt of Bob Bennett’s campaign, that the era of the moderate’s controlling the GOP may be winding down. His defeat signals the growing feeling around the country that if you subvert the will of the people and vote for bad bills, you will be shown the door!
It’s time for common sense conservatives to steer the party! It’s time for Fiscally Conservative freedom loving Republicans to take leadership roles and move this party into positions where we can start to counteract the immense damage that;s currently being wrought on the United States and it’s amazing population of patriots and liberty minded individuals.
Please join us in continuing this cleansing of the party…with your help we can identify and elect strong freedom loving individuals that will uphold the constitution and think… Liberty First before selling their vote to the highest bidder or political favor in order to get reelected. Someone who will think… how does this bill affect my constituents liberty before voting for a bill…
Show me that person, and I will vote for them! Show me a patriot that puts his/her country before job security and I’ll vote for them! Show me someone who values the constitution and does their best to live and vote by it and I’ll vote for them!
I will vote for them… I hope you’ll join me?
Regards,
-Steven Foley
Director of New Media, Liberty First PAC
Sunday, May 9, 2010
Mike Castle Sides with Democrats
Boy, Mike Castle sure does keep great company. That would be true if here were a Democrat. Mike Castle continues flirting with the other side in these photos.
Is Mike Castle the next Arlen Specter?
Is Mike Castle the next Arlen Specter?
Mike Castle, Please Explain This
Mike Castle, can you please explain this. Remember by showing us who YOUR friends are, we can tell you WHO you are.
Source: Here
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Open Letter to Delaware's Republican Delegates
Dear Delaware Republican Delegates,
I don’t mean to be a bother and I apologize for this unsolicited email however, I firmly believe that there are some things that need to be said before we cast our final votes at the 2010 Delaware GOP Convention. We will be choosing the “party nominee” for both the U.S. House and the U.S. Senate races. While there may still be a long primary season in some cases, I hope that the decision we make does not divide the party anymore than it already is. This is not something to approach lightly or without deep reflection. That is why I am writing this email now and why I have copied the party leadership. I’m not going to secretly communicate with anyone (as some of the candidate teams have done). I’m going to be upfront and honest about my concerns. I would like to take a moment to discuss both races below.
In the U.S. House race we have a number of candidates running. All of them have positive qualities and to rule any of them out at this point would be a mistake. Sure, there are some who have the backing of the Republican Party elite’s and others have personal disagreements with one another. Folks, this race is not a popularity contest and the winners are not dictated by party leadership. This is our opportunity as delegates to express our true feelings and to pick the person who we feel will best represent Delaware as our only Congressional Representative. This person must be able to beat John Carney, that is true. This person must also have the courage of their conviction and stand for our Republican principles. Republican principles that align closely with T.E.A. Party principles. Fiscal Responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government (which requires knowledge of the Constitution and respect for its contents and limits) and support for Free Markets are mutually supportive principles that both the GOP and the grassroots “T.E.A. Party” movement can agree on. Whichever candidate you support, these principles ought to be at the front of your thought process. I would urge you to look at all of these candidates and not to exclude anyone based on preconceived notions. Kevin Wade, Glen Urquhart, Michele Rollins and Rose Izzo are all fine people and no matter who wins the nomination (or the primary if it goes there), all of them should be considered for other/future positions within the party or within our state government. WE need their minds and we need their spirit. New leaders are never bad. With that said, I would urge you all to read the latest posts related to the race at the following site: www.delawarepolitics.net You will find TREMENDOUS insight into the candidates here from a center-right perspective. Those of you who attended the straw poll may have already decided on where you stand but I can tell you that I am personally supporting Glen Urquhart although all of the candidates have thus far been intriguing and a few have had my support at different times.
In the U.S. Senate race we have two candidates running. This is a contentious race and I will not hide the fact that I have personally already made a decision. Nor will I hide the reasons why I have made this decision. This particular race is between Congressman Mike Castle and challenger Christine O’Donnell. Christine had been a “rumored” candidate for some time but declared officially earlier this year. Congressman Castle has been asked repeatedly to debate Christine in many different settings. For instance, Founders Values (who is a neutral 3rd party) wanted to facilitate the kind of debate and general diffusion of knowledge about the candidates that the founding fathers intended. Both candidates were invited in the same manner and given the same amount of time to respond. Christine accepted but Congressman Castle declined to answer the initial contact. Congressman Castle was eventually asked publicly about the debate and he refused to do it. He said he would not debate Christine O’Donnell period. Congressman Castle feels that it is good politics and somehow in the best interests of the people of Delaware to flat out ignore Christine O’Donnell while simultaneously having his campaign attempt to assassinate her character with apparently baseless accusations. Filing some reports late is a valid concern but apparently one that the FEC did not even find to be egregious enough to investigate. The campaign was sent letters, complied with those requests and the issue became a non-issue to them. I would urge you to approach Christine directly with concerns about other “rumors” and to seek the truth before you make a decision. As for Congressman Castle’s record, he can duck Christine but he cannot duck his record. Below is a list of the concerns that I have with making Congressman Castle your next Senator from Delaware. Ask yourself, can you support him when you see this?
Here is some information that has come to my attention:
1.) Here is an actual video showing Mike Castle’s position on the Constitutionality of Federal involvement in healthcare: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3Lx3bdWDt4
2.) Mike Castle has also consistently defended the Global Warming hoax, C.A.F.E standards and as you may know, he voted in favor of Cap and Trade Legislation in June of 2009 (in fact he was one of only 8 Republicans to vote for the legislation). (http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_member.php?cs_id=26496)
3.) Mike Castle voted FOR the 2009 Omnibus bill that increased spending 8% on top of the stimulus bill. (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/111/house/1/votes/86/)
4.) Congressman Castle voted FOR the $700 billion bailout of Wall Street (TARP) in 2008 (http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?cs_id=22467&can_id=26792)
5.) Mike Castle also voted in favor of “Cash for Clunkers” which as we know, took many inexpensive used vehicles off the market that may otherwise have been purchased by people with low incomes who could use the vehicle for transportation. (http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_member.php?cs_id=26194)
6.) Mike also voted against a bill that would require the parents of minors to be notified if their child wanted to be transported across state lines in order to obtain abortion services and also voted to allow federal funds to be used for abortions. (http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_member.php?cs_id=7973) and (http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_member.php?cs_id=8863)
7.) Mike Castle voted AGAINST a 2007 amendment to withhold tax-payer dollars from Planned Parenthood. He then voted against a similar amendment in 2009. ( Quote from the American Conservative Union website “Planned Parenthood. HR 3293 (Roll Call 643). The House defeated an amendment to the Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations bill that would have eliminated funding for Planned Parenthood family planning services, which includes abortion services. ACU has always opposed Planned Parenthood and federal involvement in this area as unconstitutional, but the amendment was defeated July 24, 2009 by a vote of 183-247.”)
8.) Castle voted AGAINST the surge in Iraq which is credited for forcing Al Qaeda out of the country. He also voted FOR investigating President Bush for impeachment for “lying about Iraq.”( Surge - http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/house/1/votes/99/ Vote to impeach Bush - http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/house/2/votes/401/)
9.) Congressman Castle voted AGAINST strengthening our missile defense systems in 2007, 2008 AND 2009.
10.) Castle voted against the PAYGO rule on Feb. 4th 2010. (http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?cs_id=28603&can_id=26792)
11.) He also voted to enforce the 90% tax on bonuses paid to employees of TARP recipient companies. This tax is nothing more than a bill of attainder which is a DIRECT violation of Article 1 Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution (“No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.” In the context of the Constitution, a Bill of Attainder is meant to mean a bill that has a negative effect on a single person or group (for example, a fine or term of imprisonment). Originally, a Bill of Attainder sentenced an individual to death, though this detail is no longer required to have an enactment be ruled a Bill of Attainder.). (http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?cs_id=24249&can_id=26792)
12.) Congressman Castle has joined Congressman Van Hollen in introducing a bill that would strike back at the Supreme Court’s ruling to uphold Free Speech in American politics, including by those who cannot necessarily speak with their voice. The Supreme Court ruling allows corporations to run political ads and show their support for candidates. (http://www.delawarepolitics.net/a-real-leader/)
13.) National Journal Ranked Mike Castle as the most liberal Republican in the House (http://www.delawarepolitics.net/national-journal-rankings-are-out/)
I have a list much longer than this and if you would like to see it please let me know. I simply cannot bring myself to support Congressman Castle given the extremely long list of votes that offend many of my Conservative and Constitutionalist sensibilities.
I’m going to vote for Christine O’Donnell and I want you all to know that if you do the same I will personally stand by you 100%. Otherwise I will stand alone but rest assured I will stand for principle. Oh and before you wonder if Conservatism can win in Delaware, Pete DuPont was pretty conservative and is still one of the most beloved Gov. we have ever had. In fact, more people would vote for him today than would vote for Markell. Bill Roth had a good run in office as well. The reality is that most of the state (over 50% of those over voting age) doesn’t even register to vote. We have to go out and wake people up (and we are doing that) but these T.E.A. Party principles are supported by more than 65% of the state already. Vote on principle and we will prevail.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Evan Queitsch
I don’t mean to be a bother and I apologize for this unsolicited email however, I firmly believe that there are some things that need to be said before we cast our final votes at the 2010 Delaware GOP Convention. We will be choosing the “party nominee” for both the U.S. House and the U.S. Senate races. While there may still be a long primary season in some cases, I hope that the decision we make does not divide the party anymore than it already is. This is not something to approach lightly or without deep reflection. That is why I am writing this email now and why I have copied the party leadership. I’m not going to secretly communicate with anyone (as some of the candidate teams have done). I’m going to be upfront and honest about my concerns. I would like to take a moment to discuss both races below.
In the U.S. House race we have a number of candidates running. All of them have positive qualities and to rule any of them out at this point would be a mistake. Sure, there are some who have the backing of the Republican Party elite’s and others have personal disagreements with one another. Folks, this race is not a popularity contest and the winners are not dictated by party leadership. This is our opportunity as delegates to express our true feelings and to pick the person who we feel will best represent Delaware as our only Congressional Representative. This person must be able to beat John Carney, that is true. This person must also have the courage of their conviction and stand for our Republican principles. Republican principles that align closely with T.E.A. Party principles. Fiscal Responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government (which requires knowledge of the Constitution and respect for its contents and limits) and support for Free Markets are mutually supportive principles that both the GOP and the grassroots “T.E.A. Party” movement can agree on. Whichever candidate you support, these principles ought to be at the front of your thought process. I would urge you to look at all of these candidates and not to exclude anyone based on preconceived notions. Kevin Wade, Glen Urquhart, Michele Rollins and Rose Izzo are all fine people and no matter who wins the nomination (or the primary if it goes there), all of them should be considered for other/future positions within the party or within our state government. WE need their minds and we need their spirit. New leaders are never bad. With that said, I would urge you all to read the latest posts related to the race at the following site: www.delawarepolitics.net You will find TREMENDOUS insight into the candidates here from a center-right perspective. Those of you who attended the straw poll may have already decided on where you stand but I can tell you that I am personally supporting Glen Urquhart although all of the candidates have thus far been intriguing and a few have had my support at different times.
In the U.S. Senate race we have two candidates running. This is a contentious race and I will not hide the fact that I have personally already made a decision. Nor will I hide the reasons why I have made this decision. This particular race is between Congressman Mike Castle and challenger Christine O’Donnell. Christine had been a “rumored” candidate for some time but declared officially earlier this year. Congressman Castle has been asked repeatedly to debate Christine in many different settings. For instance, Founders Values (who is a neutral 3rd party) wanted to facilitate the kind of debate and general diffusion of knowledge about the candidates that the founding fathers intended. Both candidates were invited in the same manner and given the same amount of time to respond. Christine accepted but Congressman Castle declined to answer the initial contact. Congressman Castle was eventually asked publicly about the debate and he refused to do it. He said he would not debate Christine O’Donnell period. Congressman Castle feels that it is good politics and somehow in the best interests of the people of Delaware to flat out ignore Christine O’Donnell while simultaneously having his campaign attempt to assassinate her character with apparently baseless accusations. Filing some reports late is a valid concern but apparently one that the FEC did not even find to be egregious enough to investigate. The campaign was sent letters, complied with those requests and the issue became a non-issue to them. I would urge you to approach Christine directly with concerns about other “rumors” and to seek the truth before you make a decision. As for Congressman Castle’s record, he can duck Christine but he cannot duck his record. Below is a list of the concerns that I have with making Congressman Castle your next Senator from Delaware. Ask yourself, can you support him when you see this?
Here is some information that has come to my attention:
1.) Here is an actual video showing Mike Castle’s position on the Constitutionality of Federal involvement in healthcare: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3Lx3bdWDt4
2.) Mike Castle has also consistently defended the Global Warming hoax, C.A.F.E standards and as you may know, he voted in favor of Cap and Trade Legislation in June of 2009 (in fact he was one of only 8 Republicans to vote for the legislation). (http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_member.php?cs_id=26496)
3.) Mike Castle voted FOR the 2009 Omnibus bill that increased spending 8% on top of the stimulus bill. (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/111/house/1/votes/86/)
4.) Congressman Castle voted FOR the $700 billion bailout of Wall Street (TARP) in 2008 (http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?cs_id=22467&can_id=26792)
5.) Mike Castle also voted in favor of “Cash for Clunkers” which as we know, took many inexpensive used vehicles off the market that may otherwise have been purchased by people with low incomes who could use the vehicle for transportation. (http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_member.php?cs_id=26194)
6.) Mike also voted against a bill that would require the parents of minors to be notified if their child wanted to be transported across state lines in order to obtain abortion services and also voted to allow federal funds to be used for abortions. (http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_member.php?cs_id=7973) and (http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_member.php?cs_id=8863)
7.) Mike Castle voted AGAINST a 2007 amendment to withhold tax-payer dollars from Planned Parenthood. He then voted against a similar amendment in 2009. ( Quote from the American Conservative Union website “Planned Parenthood. HR 3293 (Roll Call 643). The House defeated an amendment to the Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations bill that would have eliminated funding for Planned Parenthood family planning services, which includes abortion services. ACU has always opposed Planned Parenthood and federal involvement in this area as unconstitutional, but the amendment was defeated July 24, 2009 by a vote of 183-247.”)
8.) Castle voted AGAINST the surge in Iraq which is credited for forcing Al Qaeda out of the country. He also voted FOR investigating President Bush for impeachment for “lying about Iraq.”( Surge - http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/house/1/votes/99/ Vote to impeach Bush - http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/house/2/votes/401/)
9.) Congressman Castle voted AGAINST strengthening our missile defense systems in 2007, 2008 AND 2009.
10.) Castle voted against the PAYGO rule on Feb. 4th 2010. (http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?cs_id=28603&can_id=26792)
11.) He also voted to enforce the 90% tax on bonuses paid to employees of TARP recipient companies. This tax is nothing more than a bill of attainder which is a DIRECT violation of Article 1 Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution (“No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.” In the context of the Constitution, a Bill of Attainder is meant to mean a bill that has a negative effect on a single person or group (for example, a fine or term of imprisonment). Originally, a Bill of Attainder sentenced an individual to death, though this detail is no longer required to have an enactment be ruled a Bill of Attainder.). (http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?cs_id=24249&can_id=26792)
12.) Congressman Castle has joined Congressman Van Hollen in introducing a bill that would strike back at the Supreme Court’s ruling to uphold Free Speech in American politics, including by those who cannot necessarily speak with their voice. The Supreme Court ruling allows corporations to run political ads and show their support for candidates. (http://www.delawarepolitics.net/a-real-leader/)
13.) National Journal Ranked Mike Castle as the most liberal Republican in the House (http://www.delawarepolitics.net/national-journal-rankings-are-out/)
I have a list much longer than this and if you would like to see it please let me know. I simply cannot bring myself to support Congressman Castle given the extremely long list of votes that offend many of my Conservative and Constitutionalist sensibilities.
I’m going to vote for Christine O’Donnell and I want you all to know that if you do the same I will personally stand by you 100%. Otherwise I will stand alone but rest assured I will stand for principle. Oh and before you wonder if Conservatism can win in Delaware, Pete DuPont was pretty conservative and is still one of the most beloved Gov. we have ever had. In fact, more people would vote for him today than would vote for Markell. Bill Roth had a good run in office as well. The reality is that most of the state (over 50% of those over voting age) doesn’t even register to vote. We have to go out and wake people up (and we are doing that) but these T.E.A. Party principles are supported by more than 65% of the state already. Vote on principle and we will prevail.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Evan Queitsch
Atlas Shrugs lands firmly behind Christine O'Donnell
Christine O'Donnell picked up yet ANOTHER endorsement yesterday. In a major announcement from Pamela Gellar, the founder, editor and publisher of AtlasShrugs.com, a national sensation in the blogosphere, Christine O'Donnell went from black sheep to dark horse.
The local news media in combination with the GOP establishment leadership and the Mike Castle campaign had been running a series of hit pieces in order to discredit Ms. O'Donnell. Through it all she has remained calm, cool and collected. She has answered the charges levied against her by Castle campaign operatives and has refuted successfully, the bogus attacks levied by the Delaware GOP establishment.
Claims brought by former campaign volunteers (currently associated with the Castle campaign) about not having been properly compensated have been proven to be false. Other rumors levied by the Delaware GOP and reported in the News Journal (such as reported tax lein that never existed) have also been proven to be incorrect. Yet the local media has not corrected their stories nor have they apologized to the public and to Ms. O'Donnell for the obviously false report.
Yesterday's bombshell endorsement from Atlas Shrugs comes as the O'Donnell campaign prepares for the Delaware GOP Convention in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware on May 15th. While the campaign goes in knowing that Congressman Mike Castle enjoys a lead in the delegate race for the party nomination (odd though it might be that the party nomination should take place in may when the primary is in September), they are confident that they will be able to continue to make in roads in the party and pick up support from Delaware voters.
Pamela Gellar's glowing endorsement of Christine O'Donnell shows the nation what many Delawareans already know, that Christine O'Donnell is the best choice to represent Delaware in the U.S. Senate. Pamela writes this when she describes O'Donnell:
"There are people running for office across the country that best embody the ideals and aspirations of this great nation. They have the clarity, the spine, the morality, the logic, the intelligence and the guts to fight the scourge and decadence of the left and return our homeland back to its constitutional principles.
Christine On'Donnell is such a person. Her candidacy instills hopes in Americans in despair."
Congratulations to Christine O'Donnell for gaining the endorsement of a well respected and widely read alternative news source. Atlas Shrugs is a top level endorsement and one worthy of more than one look. You can view the entire endorsement here.
The local news media in combination with the GOP establishment leadership and the Mike Castle campaign had been running a series of hit pieces in order to discredit Ms. O'Donnell. Through it all she has remained calm, cool and collected. She has answered the charges levied against her by Castle campaign operatives and has refuted successfully, the bogus attacks levied by the Delaware GOP establishment.
Claims brought by former campaign volunteers (currently associated with the Castle campaign) about not having been properly compensated have been proven to be false. Other rumors levied by the Delaware GOP and reported in the News Journal (such as reported tax lein that never existed) have also been proven to be incorrect. Yet the local media has not corrected their stories nor have they apologized to the public and to Ms. O'Donnell for the obviously false report.
Yesterday's bombshell endorsement from Atlas Shrugs comes as the O'Donnell campaign prepares for the Delaware GOP Convention in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware on May 15th. While the campaign goes in knowing that Congressman Mike Castle enjoys a lead in the delegate race for the party nomination (odd though it might be that the party nomination should take place in may when the primary is in September), they are confident that they will be able to continue to make in roads in the party and pick up support from Delaware voters.
Pamela Gellar's glowing endorsement of Christine O'Donnell shows the nation what many Delawareans already know, that Christine O'Donnell is the best choice to represent Delaware in the U.S. Senate. Pamela writes this when she describes O'Donnell:
"There are people running for office across the country that best embody the ideals and aspirations of this great nation. They have the clarity, the spine, the morality, the logic, the intelligence and the guts to fight the scourge and decadence of the left and return our homeland back to its constitutional principles.
Christine On'Donnell is such a person. Her candidacy instills hopes in Americans in despair."
Congratulations to Christine O'Donnell for gaining the endorsement of a well respected and widely read alternative news source. Atlas Shrugs is a top level endorsement and one worthy of more than one look. You can view the entire endorsement here.
Monday, May 3, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)