• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mike Castle Won't Endorse Christine O'Donnell

Because the party is supposed to trump individual beliefs :/

Sadly that's what is expected these days. No room for free thought, just do what the party leadership tells you.

O'Donnell, BTW, is a crazy loon.
 
Because it shows some class.
Because you're supposed to be big enough to put a defeat behind you.
Because you rally around the representative of your party... no matter how badly it hurts.

His behavior merely proved the electorate was right.

.

This is how you break a representative Republic. There is no way in hell he should support her if she varies too greatly from his own political platform. He's completely different politically. Supporting her would show lack of resolve, lack of conviction, lack of a functioning brain. You vote for the person you believe is best able to do the job, who is best competent at the job, who most closely resembles your political platform and beliefs. This crazy girl differs greatly from his own political beliefs and thus there is no logical reason to endorse her.
 
I don't know why this is a big deal. After all, they don't share political views. That's why the primary was so heated, after all - Castle is more socially liberal than O'Donnell is. So why should a politician who doesn't share political views with a candidate be forced to endorse a candidate?

I just heard a speech he was giving before he lost. Going on and on about how everyone needs to back the republicans. I guess he didn't mean himself.

He sounds like it's all about him. He hasn't even called to congratulate her, much less endorse her.

AND he's met with Biden and Obama. Maybe looking for a job on their team in exchange for not endorsing her?
 
If he doesn't political agree with her, I don't see any reason why he should endorse her just because they have the same letter next to their name.
 
Sadly that's what is expected these days. No room for free thought, just do what the party leadership tells you.

O'Donnell, BTW, is a crazy loon.

If there were room for free thought on the side of the dims, then the healthcare debacle would be a memory. Instead we have it, and we get to enojoy it in all its glory come next year. Hopefully the Republicans can stop funding it like they promised. Trust me, everyone will be watching that. Either way, you're niave if you think the "party" doesn't move as one politically. The Dems do, and so do the Republicans. I don't like it, and frankly I would prefer people vote their conscience, but that ain't happening, so the conservatives, if they act like conservatives once in power will clean a lot of it up.

We always end up cleaning up someone else's mess. :)

It's what we do.


Tim-
 
If there were room for free thought on the side of the dims, then the healthcare debacle would be a memory. Instead we have it, and we get to enojoy it in all its glory come next year. Hopefully the Republicans can stop funding it like they promised. Trust me, everyone will be watching that. Either way, you're niave if you think the "party" doesn't move as one politically. The Dems do, and so do the Republicans. I don't like it, and frankly I would prefer people vote their conscience, but that ain't happening, so the conservatives, if they act like conservatives once in power will clean a lot of it up.

We always end up cleaning up someone else's mess. :)

It's what we do.


Tim-

Well that's probably proof that the Republocrats don't deserve to be in office anymore. The "party" didn't used to move as one politically and it's horrible to even endorse that sort of group think in a democratic, free Republic. Group think is not good for our form of government. We need intelligence, not ventriloquists.
 
Are you seriously suggesting that he should "rally behind her" just because she has an (R) after her name?

He was all for doing just that when he was sure he was going to be the winner and on the receiving end. Now, instead he took off for a meeting with Obama and Biden after he lost.
 
Are you seriously suggesting that he should "rally behind her" just because she has an (R) after her name?

Yes.

Exactly.

It's called "team spirit", "good sportsmanship", "honor", "integrity", and "being a real man".

And it's EXACTLY what he would demand of her and her supporters if he'd won the primary. But, since he's always been a RINO, "hypocrite" is his middle name.
 
Yes.

Exactly.

It's called "team spirit", "good sportsmanship", "honor", "integrity", and "being a real man".

And it's EXACTLY what he would demand of her and her supporters if he'd won the primary. But, since he's always been a RINO, "hypocrite" is his middle name.

Not even the Republican party feels that way. Besides since when do "campions of individual rights and liberties" say someone has no choice but to follow the Party against their wishes.
 
Sadly that's what is expected these days. No room for free thought, just do what the party leadership tells you.

O'Donnell, BTW, is a crazy loon.

Sorry, but you're wrong.

A person joins a party because a presumed shared set of beliefs, the party (ie the people) chose candidates on the presumption that the candidate shares enough similar beliefs to be a useful member of the team, and as a member of the team, they are expected to follow certain basic codes. One of those codes is to keep supporting the team when the fans voted for the other guy as MVP.

Did the Red Queen endorse McCain just because her attempts to play the race card in the 2008 primaries were trumped by Obama's natural joker in the Race Game? No. Hillary went out and helped, and the Messiah carefully put her out in plain sight as Secretary of State where he could keep an eye on her.

Refusing to support your rival in the primary in a childish fit of pique knowing that such churlishness might easily allow the opposing team to win the game is dispicable and cowardly.

I'm all for crazy loons if they'll:

Cut spending.
Cut taxes.
Protect the unborn.
Close the damn borders and send the invaders home.
 
Sorry, but you're wrong.

A person joins a party because a presumed shared set of beliefs, the party (ie the people) chose candidates on the presumption that the candidate shares enough similar beliefs to be a useful member of the team, and as a member of the team, they are expected to follow certain basic codes. One of those codes is to keep supporting the team when the fans voted for the other guy as MVP.

Did the Red Queen endorse McCain just because her attempts to play the race card in the 2008 primaries were trumped by Obama's natural joker in the Race Game? No. Hillary went out and helped, and the Messiah carefully put her out in plain sight as Secretary of State where he could keep an eye on her.

Refusing to support your rival in the primary in a childish fit of pique knowing that such churlishness might easily allow the opposing team to win the game is dispicable and cowardly.

I'm all for crazy loons if they'll:

Cut spending.
Cut taxes.
Protect the unborn.
Close the damn borders and send the invaders home.

One might also say its childish to give insulting nicknames and deny the respect the President and Sec of State deserve simply by being "voted MVP" as you put it.
 
Not even the Republican party feels that way. Besides since when do "campions of individual rights and liberties" say someone has no choice but to follow the Party against their wishes.

Yes.

That's why the GOP is finding it's hand picked candidates getting pushed out the door and American candidates are replacing them on the ballots.

When the indivdual chooses to join a group, he assumes responsibilities and duties as a member of that group. Ain't one damn thing in libertarianism that relieves the individual of the responsibility to fulfill formal and implied obligations. If Castle wanted to abandon the Republicans in Delaware, there were two times when it was appropriate to do so, when his choice would not harm people he allowed to rely on his behavior. When he filed his candidacy for the Senate primary, and when the November election was over.

Castle was the little child who ran home crying when the short-stop got the ball to first base before he did. The GOP should be glad that wimpy ass lost. The Americans certainly are.
 
One might also say its childish to give insulting nicknames and deny the respect the President and Sec of State deserve simply by being "voted MVP" as you put it.

One might, but if that's what you got for ammunition, you're probably not going to get anywhere in any sort of debate. When the Messiah and the Red Queen do something I can respect them for, like resigning, I'll give them the respect they deserve, just like I do right now.

Besides, who was the last Secretary of State the earned any respect? Kissinger?
 
Last edited:
Yes.

That's why the GOP is finding it's hand picked candidates getting pushed out the door and American candidates are replacing them on the ballots.

When the indivdual chooses to join a group, he assumes responsibilities and duties as a member of that group. Ain't one damn thing in libertarianism that relieves the individual of the responsibility to fulfill formal and implied obligations. If Castle wanted to abandon the Republicans in Delaware, there were two times when it was appropriate to do so, when his choice would not harm people he allowed to rely on his behavior. When he filed his candidacy for the Senate primary, and when the November election was over.

Castle was the little child who ran home crying when the short-stop got the ball to first base before he did. The GOP should be glad that wimpy ass lost. The Americans certainly are.

I wonder if you'll be so sure "its what the Americans want" when she loses. Anyway, again the Republican Party isn't supporting O'Donnell that much either. So Castle is actually more in line with his Party than O'Donnell is, in a way. And why is that? Because the Republican party doesn't think she can win and don't like her positions precisely because they are too divisive. So if you expect Republicans to do whats best for the party as a whole than O'Donnell should change her platform so her money holders can hope their investment will pay off come election day.
 
One might, but if that's what you got for ammunition, you're probably not going to get anywhere in any sort of debate. When the Messiah and the Red Queen do something I can respect them for, like resigning, I'll give them the respect they deserve, just like I do right now.

Besides, who was the last Secretary of State the earned any respect? Kissinger?

How about give them respect because he's the President of the United States, and is doing a job and keeping the things going day by day that any President is expected to do by virtue of being in that position. For example continueing to oversee the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? Or even if you can't respect them for a thing, at least respect them out of "good sportsmanship" and the fact that they were elected by the American people.

You can still respect someone and disagree with them politically.
 
I wonder if you'll be so sure "its what the Americans want" when she loses.

Sure I will.

American's don't vote for socialists or liberals, so her possible loss means only that the Americans were out numbered.

After all, Americans in the cemetaries don't vote, something one can't say about Democrats, given that Eric Holder and his refusal to have the US Department of Justice's refusal to compel the states to purge its voter rolls of dead people.

Anyway, again the Republican Party isn't supporting O'Donnell that much either.

Yes, the party that claims a name that implies it supports a representational republic is refusing to support the will of the people in regards to the candidate that will be campaigning under the Republican banner.

That says tons about why so many "Republican" candidates, like Castle, are being tossed aside by the angry mob of Awakening Americans.

So Castle is actually more in line with his Party than O'Donnell is, in a way. And why is that? Because the Republican party doesn't think she can win and don't like her positions precisely because they are too divisive.

No. Absolutely not.

The Republican Party is the people.

Castle is aligned with the party leadership, who are increasingly shown to be out of touch with the people they purport to represent.

Pay attention to the difference.

So if you expect Republicans to do whats best for the party as a whole than O'Donnell should change her platform so her money holders can hope their investment will pay off come election day.

Ah.

You're saying O'Donnell shoud be just like Obama and let the donors control the puppet strings.

Well, Americans don't really want that to happen any more.
 
How about give them respect because he's the President of the United States,

Why? Don't you pay any attention to the clowns that have been getting elected? We had the Read My Lips Oath Breaker Guy, the Rapist is a Perjurer, the Texas Frat Boy, and the Messiah Marxist.

Winning an election doesn't give them a ticket to my respect, they have to earn it.

and is doing a job

No.

The job of the President is to uphold the Constitution and faithfully execute all laws. Like the Frat Boy and the Rapist Perjurer, the Messiah Marxist is neither supporting the Constitution nor upholding the law. At the end 2012, the United States will have suffered under twenty straight years of presidents who viewed the Constitution as nothing more than a roadblock to be bypassed by guile or force.

and keeping the things going day by day that any President is expected to do by virtue of being in that position. For example continueing to oversee the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?

You mean like when the Messiah Marxist gave the commanders in the field 2/3 of the troops they requested, and simultaneously told the enemy that they need only hang on until the end of 2011, when he will be withdrawing the troops? I'm supposed the respect an ignorant turd like that?

Why?

Or even if you can't respect them for a thing, at least respect them out of "good sportsmanship" and the fact that they were elected by the American people.

Welcome to the real world. I'm not a party member with obligations to them. I'm an American, and my obligations are to the United States.

But I'm sure you spent the eight years between 2001 and 2009 berating all those Democrats dissing Bush, right?

You can still respect someone and disagree with them politically.

Equally, I can still disrespect someone because they're wrong, politically.
 
Don't you think you're view of who are "Americans" is a bit too narrow? You've just about singled everyone who voted Democrat as American along with everyone who voted for Obama, which you describe as a socialist, as not being American either. Also I'd like to point out that there is no national unity like you describe behind Republicanism or Americanism as you see it. Tea Party candidates have lost in many elections and primaries nation wide, are those Republicans also not American, or not even Republican?

You make it sound like the politician opposition isn't even American in the same sense you are.
 
Don't you think you're view of who are "Americans" is a bit too narrow? You've just about singled everyone who voted Democrat as American along with everyone who voted for Obama, which you describe as a socialist, as not being American either.

Really?

Gee, I wonder why I might have done that? You think maybe it's because socialism is unamerican, is outlawed by the Constitution, and is what's wrecking the country? You think maybe that becaue Obama is a socialist I call him one?

Those facts might be relelvant.

Also I'd like to point out that there is no national unity like you describe behind Republicanism or Americanism as you see it. Tea Party candidates have lost in many elections and primaries nation wide, are those Republicans also not American, or not even Republican?

Hello? Why on earth do you equate "lack of national unity" with any particular group losing elections? I've already pointed out that it's possible that the Americans may have been so lackadaisical about their responsiblities to the republic that they might be outnumbered. That might have meaning, too.

A person that does not stand for American values can't honestly claim to be an American. That's just how life is.

You make it sound like the politician opposition isn't even American in the same sense you are.

No, they're not american in any sense at all.

In fact, their positions don't make any sense when weighed against their stated goals. War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Tax Ourselves to Prosperity.

Well, war ain't peace, freedom is freedom, slavery isn't freeom, and the money runs out before taxation can create prosperity, every damn time.

Americans believe in self-reliance, independence, personal responsibility, and a trainload of other concepts the Left can't discuss.
 
I think you need to get some sleep. You are claiming the majority of Americans aren't Americans because they don't think the way you think an American should. What gives you the right to judge people like that? I thought being an American was about the freedom to pick the type of government you live under, and changing it as is seen fit by the voters, but apparently its about conforming to a single political ideology without which one cannot be an American.

You speak of independence but yet offer no chance of disagreement. So if I can't be a democrat and still be American, that eliminates a huge portion of the country, and I can't be a certain type of Republican without giving up my "Americanism." So let me ask you, where can you, a true American, and me, apparently not one, disagree? What is up for debate, whats left? Lets say I wanted to be a real American in your eyes, what would I have to do.

I've got news for you. You're just as much an American as me, or anyone else born in this country or naturalized to be a citizen. America is NOT about following a certain ideology or believing the government should work in one way. And I, along with all my other non-Americans, have the same claim to that title of being an American as anyone else.

I take few things personally but this is one of them, don't ever say I'm not an American, and don't ever say those who disagree with you are not Americans. I know many individuals who are more of an American than you'll ever be if you don't change and accept the differences that exist, and have always existed in our country, these are my friends, family, Christians, Muslims, soldiers who've fought and some who have died.

Americanism is about a set of values and personal liberties set in the Constitution and other places, but not what you've twisted them into you with this ignorant self-righteous contempt filled rhetoric.
 
I think you need to get some sleep. You are claiming the majority of Americans aren't Americans because they don't think the way you think an American should. What gives you the right to judge people like that?

The First Amendment of the Constitution of United States, the document the people who aren't Americans don't bother to understand.

I thought being an American was about the freedom to pick the type of government you live under, and changing it as is seen fit by the voters, but apparently its about conforming to a single political ideology without which one cannot be an American.

Like I said, people who aren't Americans don't understand the Constitution so they come up with comments like that one.

Explain what document defines the structure of the United States government and what document provides what procedure to alter that structure.

You speak of independence but yet offer no chance of disagreement.

I'm not saying you can't disagree. But if you're going against the Constitution, you're not a real American.

It's not complicated.

So if I can't be a democrat and still be American, that eliminates a huge portion of the country, and I can't be a certain type of Republican without giving up my "Americanism."

Yeah, that's too bad for you people, but the real Americans are waking up from a century long nap and we're not happy with the damage you've done to our country. We're going to have to ask you to move a country that fits you're vision of how bad a nation should be and stop wrecking ours to fit that vision.

So let me ask you, where can you, a true American, and me, apparently not one, disagree? What is up for debate, whats left?

Don't know. So far you haven't been right on anything that I've seen. You should work on learning more about what America is really about.

What it isn't about is punishing the successful to buy votes from the useless, it isn't about apologizing to the world for existing, it isn't about stealing money to make y ou white guilt go away, it isn't about letting other nations invade us and being afraid to speak against it because that might be construed as racist.

Americans have friggin' backbones.

Lets say I wanted to be a real American in your eyes, what would I have to do.

Grow up and stop demanding others take care of you and stop demanding others take care of the problems of others that seem to be urgent to you. That's the first step.

Let us know when you take it.

I've got news for you. You're just as much an American as me, or anyone else born in this country or naturalized to be a citizen. America is NOT about following a certain ideology or believing the government should work in one way.

Like I said, real Americans understand the Constitution and are incapable of making such a foolish statement. And being an American is about following a certain broadly defined ideology, an ideology that's encoded in the Constitution itself.

And I, along with all my other non-Americans, have the same claim to that title of being an American as anyone else.

Well, all the non-Americans are making false claims. They're claim jumpers, without the huge desserts.

I take few things personally but this is one of them, don't ever say I'm not an American, and don't ever say those who disagree with you are not Americans.

Hmmm....real Americans recognize the true value of this:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

They don't tell others they're not allowed to say things.

Your angst isn't impressive. The goal is to get you off your current path and onto the track to make a real American out of you, if you're in the country legally, that is.

I know many individuals who are more of an American than you'll ever be if you don't change and accept the differences that exist, and have always existed in our country, these are my friends, family, Christians, Muslims, soldiers who've fought and some who have died.

Yes, how droll. Now you're pretending that I don't know there are differences between people. No advocate of any form of socialism fully understands what it is to be an American, and that includes Thomas Jefferson, who wrongly wanted the federal government to fund public education, but who at least had the honesty to understand that the Constitution would have to be Amended to allow this. That amendment was not forthcoming, and the Constituion still does not allow the federal government to fund education, and that means all advocates of public education are not complete Americans.

Any other strawmen you want to set up before you strike the match?

Americanism is about a set of values and personal liberties set in the Constitution and other places, but not what you've twisted them into you with this ignorant self-righteous contempt filled rhetoric.

Ah, so you HAVE heard of the Constitution. All you need to do now is begin to understand it and what it means on a personal level.
 
Alright dude I can't be part of this discussion anymore without breaking a few forum rules, take that how you will but im out.
 
Back
Top Bottom