ترول ایرانی

گالری عکس

L. Brent Bozell: Christine O’Donnell is a Buffoon

I got no issues with this.  Felt the same about the woman when she waltzed into the Bloggers Lounge at CPAC in February of 2010.

It’s time to weigh in on the Christine O’Donnell v. Piers Morgan dust-up Wednesday.

In short, O’Donnell’s behavior was beyond indefensible. It was downright bizarre.

The questions Piers Morgan put forward may have been trite, even seemingly silly, but given to whom they were being posed, they were not inappropriate. He asked if in her heart O’Donnell has committed lust.

He asked her views on gay marriage. He asked her views on witchcraft and on masturbation. Titillating questions? Sure, but O’Donnell has staked out public opinions on all these fronts and it is those public statements she’s made that invite questions like his. She had to know she’d be asked these things when she accepted the interview invitation. If she didn’t then she’s living in a parallel universe. Moreover, Morgan was neither Chris Matthews rude nor Keith Olbermann offensive. He simply asked the questions.

O’Donnell had no right to reject the questions. Even worse, in declaring them inappropriate she made an ass of herself.

She answered the gay marriage question by declaring, over and over, that the answer could be found in her book, which book she was there to promote, except she refused to discuss her position on gay marriage, which was in the book. She declared she was there to “talk about the issues I chose to talk about in the book,” and when asked by Morgan, “Do you answer that question in the book?” she answered, “I talk about my religious beliefs, yes. I absolutely do.” But she wouldn’t answer his question about gay marriage, and instead accused him of being rude to her.

Nonsensical is too kind. She is a buffoon.

O’Donnell had no right to walk off the set. But in a sense I’m glad she did — if it means she’ll never come back. Conservatives do themselves no favors by defending this woman and she is doing conservatives no favors by going on national television programs to talk about — God only knows what she’ll talk about, or not talk about, next. Please, Christine O’Donnell, call it a day.

Frankly, what I would love to see someday is someone finally go off in a full column on the jack-offs at RedState and other blogs who felt that “Ideological Purity” mattered more than winning a Senate seat with Mike Castle instead and left us with this freak of nature.  That was a seat that, to quote Milwaukee Buck announcer Ted Davis, was ‘in the bank and earning interest’ for Republicans and this woman and her backers turned it into a loss.

So congratulations guys, for both the loss for the GOP and sticking her on us for the foreseeable future.

Then again, on the other hand, I should probably be grateful for the O’Donnell candidacy.  With the major national blogs completely under the spell (pun intended) of the O’Donnell candidacy, it kept our race off their radar long enough to not worry about them.  Though it was rather funny to read tweets from Kossites on Twitter during the campaign going “Dear God people, why are we focusing on the Crazy Witch, Russ Feingold is losing!”

(Yes, I monitored Twitter.  Tweets from Feingold staffers were often a hoot.)

Be Sociable, Share!
  • MikeM

    “Frankly, what I would love to see someday is someone finally go off in a
    full column on the jack-offs at RedState and other blogs who felt that
    “Ideological Purity” mattered more than winning a Senate seat with Mike
    Castle instead and left us with this freak of nature.”


    I hear ya.  I’m not big on the purity test either.  BUT, I understand the frustration as well.  I am also sick and tired of the aisle-crossers.  If you’re going to elect someone because they have an R next to their name, it’d be nice if they’d vote like a Republican occasionally, particularly on the important issues.  RINO has been too broadly used, but there are a few true RINO’s in DC and they are frustrating as hell.  It sucks when the deciding vote comes down to the girls from Maine or John McCain, because you’ve got zero confidence that they’ll vote the right way even half the time.

    In the end though, I’d prefer to make the Democrats nonviable and then work on the left-leaners within the party. 

    Jack-off is a little harsh.  There’s guys at RedState that have had good things to say about you.  Moe Lane in particular.  And I don’t find the whole site to be as puritan as you indicate.  There’s plenty of one issue guys – Steve Maley and Energy, LaborUnionReport and organized labor, etc., and there’s plenty who don’t froth at the mouth.  Erik Erickson is the ideological purity guy over there, not the site as a whole.

  • Anonymous

    Sorry, thought when I wrote “RedState” it was read between the lines as “Erick.”

  • MikeM

    It wasn’t obvious to me, but my wife tells me that I can be oblivious at times.  No arguments from me regarding Erickson.  The guy’s heart is in the right place, but he gets wound up and loses the big picture, big time.

    The way I look at it is that you fight the ideological battles in the primary and vote the party in the general.  Having said that, the choice between Castle and O’Donnell would be a terrible one to have to make.  Rino versus buffoon.  I can’t honestly say how I would have voted.  What an awful choice to have to make.  I’d have voted for a cabbage before I voted for Chris Coons though.

    This has been an interesting journey for me.  I’m an Okie by birth.  Okie Democrats are often more conservative than corn belt Republicans.  I’ve been in Wisconsin about five years now and it’s been a joy to me to see the State of Doyle, Obey, and Feingold turn into the State of Walker, Ryan, and Johnson.  We’ll see if it holds.  I think it will.  There’s a big movement afoot.