Huge Win In Delaware!

[Guest 6.8 AR]

But Coons doesn't have the disadvantage of being estranged from his own party (yet). And I can completely understand why the GOP has been trying to distance itself from her: Rough Sketch - Christine O'Donnell on human mice, lying to Nazis, and the women of Middle Earth

Losing a Senate seat to the Dems because of this lady's loony past = buyer's remorse. Rove is on the money with this one.

I think Rove will go down with the GOP ship if he doesn't shut up. The GOP aren't the only Republicans and their contributions are showing it. The conservatives in the party are the ones getting the contributions. The right thing to do would have been battle during the primary, then get behind the victor during the general election. Rove and Krauthammer are both out of line this time. They are both showing "inside the beltway" mentality and it will hurt their credibility in the future. A moderate Republican like Castle is the same thing as a Democrat, just like Bart Stupak proving their is no such animal as a "pro-life" Democrat. They will betray you when you

need their vote.

[raydog1]

She trails badly in a Fox News poll:

Fox News Poll: Coons Leads O'Donnell By 15 Points In Delaware | TPMDC

And there is a report that Tea Party support is spotty:

Tea Party Leader Lashes Out Against Christine O'Donnell: "She's a Loser" | Tea Party and the Right | AlterNet

"Dodge notes that while it hasn't made national headlines, there is a reasonable and healthy discussion inside the tea party movement about whether O'Donnell deserves national support."

There's more at stake here than Castle-hate aka "Throw Da Bums Out!"

Stand by her if you want, but I'd strongly recommend that the Tea Party find better candidates if it wants the current momentum to actually mean something long term. There is a 2nd half to this "game."

[Guest Lester Weevils]

TN is more conservative than DE, and TN hasn't been that great about electing the most desirable politicians. After electing such as Wamp, Ford, Alexander and Corker, we don't have much room to criticize the DE voters' choices! Heck, we even elected Gore, multiple times! DOH!

[Guest HvyMtl]

The fool hardy witchcraft crap does not bother me.

However, the questions on her gender discrimination suit, where it seems she was legitimately fired (she dropped the case) defaulted on her mortgage, the bank sued and got a $90k judgment against her, she sold the house to her boyfriend (and campaign lawyer) the day before the Sheriff's Auction, the Tens of thousands of $$$ owed in Back Taxes (sounds more like a democrat) supposedly misused campaign contributions to pay her rent, pay for gasoline, etc., and supposed false statements to the Federal Election Commission are more important issues than the witchcraft B.S. that was brought up on a T.V. show... Insinuating your opponent is in a gay affair does not seem honest, either... (part of the reason she is not getting his support...)

If this was a Democrat Candidate, people would have been calling for her head a long time ago...

Edited September 21, 2010 by HvyMtl

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I'm not in some pissing match with whether or not she's going to win based on whatever.

Also, I don't really care about the mudslinging, whether it's true or not. You aren't going

to find a citizen candidate without some kind of dirt that someone will object to. Also, Hvymtl,

et al, "supposedly" seems to turn up in a lot of these allegations you mentioned.

Good, it's settled, innuendo is king. Whatever the truth may end up, doesn't matter.

I'm going to stick with her a while longer. She would never had Castle's support, but I didn't

know about the gay thing, either. If those things turn out to be true and DE wants a marxist

instead, she will lose.

As far as polls go, watch the trends, not just just one poll.

At this point, all I want is less democrats in the house, and she is the only game in DE.

[Guest HvyMtl]

I use "supposedly" to protect myself, not her. I do this when I have not fully confirmed the information (typically 3 independent sources...) In this way if the info is not true, I have it marked as "supposed" info, and then can correct it. And to give her the benefit of the doubt...

But hey. Innuendo is the "is she a Witch" crap, the stuff I listed seems to be a bit more factual. So... Here I go sourcing it for you:

I did not bother to mention this: She did not pay all of her tuition and was sued for it and lost: Her legal woes date back to 1994, when her alma mater, Fairleigh Dickinson University, in Rutherford, N.J., sued her for $4,823 in unpaid expenses, according to New Jersey and California court documents. The university won a judgment in New Jersey for the entire amount. In 2000, the judgment was transferred to California, where O'Donnell lived at the time, as unpaid, according to court documents.

California reported the debt as satisfied in 2003, but she was never conferred a degree by Fairleigh Dickinson because of non-payment. She supposedly did, finally, get her degree sometime within the past year. (Again, read she got her degree in only one source.)

O'Donnell said she pays half of her rent with campaign donations because she also uses the town home as her Senate campaign headquarters. (This is an issue, as using campaign donations for personal expenses is a no-no.)

She purchased a home on Lincoln Street in Wilmington,VA in August of 2003, taking out a mortgage with CitiBank for $98,500, according to New Castle County property records.

O'Donnell was also having trouble paying her mortgage, according to the lawsuit filed by the mortgage holder on March 5, 2008. The mortgage company secured a default judgment against O'Donnell for $90,421.31 on May 13, 2008.

But a month before the sheriff's auction, O'Donnell sold the house at 518 N. Lincoln Street for $135,000 to Brent Vasher, who was working as legal counsel for her Senate campaign.

O'Donnell said she sold it to Vasher, who was her boyfriend at the time, with the intention of buying it back. (She has not bought the property back, yet... Note the change to One Month from One Day... thus the why I put "supposed" in...)

She was fired from the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, a non-profit group: O'Donnell was fired by ISI on Feb. 26, 2004, after she complained to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that she was the victim of gender discrimination, according to court filings. O'Donnell sued ISI in U.S. District Court in 2005, alleging she was fired in retaliation for complaining to the EEOC. In her suit, O'Donnell sought back pay, future pay and punitive damages.

ISI countered that O'Donnell was running a for-profit public-relations business while on the clock.

In January 2008, O'Donnell dropped the lawsuit against ISI, saying at the time she could no longer afford an attorney. (Lawsuits are public knowledge.)

O'Donnell owes the federal government $11,744.59 in taxes and penalties from the 2005 tax year, according to a lien filed by the IRS on March 2, 2010, with the New Castle County Recorder of Deeds. (Liens are public knowledge, in general.)

LINK: Delaware politics: O'Donnell faces campaign debt, back-tax issues | delawareonline.com | The News Journal

Here is the claim she supposedly mislead the Federal Election Commission:

At issue are more than $20,000 of spending in 2009 and 2010 that Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington claims was illegal.

"It turns out Miss O'Donnell has treated her campaign funds like they are her very own personal piggy bank. She's used that money to pay for things like her rent, for gas, meals and even a bowling outing. And that's just flat-out illegal," said Melanie Sloan, the group's executive director.

In an interview on CNN's "AC360," Sloan said her organization would be sending letters to the U.S. Attorney's Office in Delaware and the Federal Elections Commission on Monday asking them to investigate.

"For example, in 2009, Miss O'Donnell wasn't a candidate for anything, yet she had numerous campaign expenses, things like travel and gas, and yet she had no actual campaign," Sloan said.

I used "supposedly" there, as the allegations have not yet been proven...

However, this claim seems valid:

But Ms. O’Donnell’s personal and political economies have suffered turmoil. In her unsuccessful 2006 bid for the Senate, federal election officials cited Ms. O’Donnell several times for failing to properly disclose campaign donations. A file in a 2007 Federal Election Commission dossier features a note she wrote by hand pleading, “We are not professionals and for many of us, this was our first campaign!”

Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/16/us/politics/16odonnell.html?_r=1 (this source also backs up the previous source claims...)

Another source claims O'Donnell has her MOM on her campaign payroll, too. CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time Blog Archive - O’Donnell’s mother on campaign payroll « - Blogs from CNN.com

Supporting Link: Delaware's O'Donnell is a 'tea party' hero, but controversy casts a shadow

(yeah, the Washington Post... why it is a support link... didn't bother with the MSNBC link, as IMHO they are not fair with Republican candidates...)

Supporting Link: Citing "Mental Anguish," Christine O'Donnell Sought $6.9 Million in Gender Discrimination Lawsuit Against Conservative Group | The Weekly Standard

Supporting Link: GOP is correct to spotlight O'Donnell's problems with the truth | delawareonline.com | The News Journal

All these allegations? Well. Some are. Some (such as the lawsuits, lack of degree, mortgage failure, and failure to pay taxes) certainly do not seem to be, as they can be easily proven false, by merely fact checking open records...

Like I said, I used "supposedly," as I had not had the time to see if I could get 3 sources...at the time.

And, honestly, to give her the benefit of the doubt. But, well, I do not see giving her a benefit of the doubt, nope, not so much anymore...

Edited September 22, 2010 by HvyMtl

[Guest 6.8 AR]

They are still allegations. She answered several of your points on Hannity, but that's

just pure bias, I guess. The tax lien was a mistake and has been corrected. Of course,

her word means nothing and I don't expect you to change your mind about anything

until it shows up on the internet, somewhere. And you appear to want her to go down,

so good for you. With friends like that, who needs enemies.

The hope for a citizen legislature is fruitless until people realize that finding someone to

kiss babies and run for office, will have flaws. I would never want to fall under your scrutiny.

I'm sure i would fail most of your acid test of purity.

Most of what is being printed about the Republican candidates is printed out of desperation

because they are becoming a popular commodity again. I expect it, like I expected your

response. Links don't prove anything except to the gullible who choose to believe them,

or want to believe them.

The ideology is more important to me and I doubt you can provide a link to convince anyone

that her ideology is wrong. Even that "witchcraft" allegation is a joke.

I'll still stay on her side:D

Her vote on the important issues in the senate is what matters to me, not some purity test.

[Guest HvyMtl]

She claims the tax thing was in error. So, supposedly the IRS is wrong. Somehow, I doubt it. Did she pay anything to the IRS, or did they forgive the debt 100%? If she paid, it was no error...

As for the foreclosure, the sale within a month of the home going to Sheriff Auction, to HER BOYFRIEND, and campaign attorney, the issue with the Federal Election Commission, the lawsuits over lack of paying her debts, the not getting her degree until years later due to her owning money to the school, etc...

Hmm. She smacks of a person, if a (D) was behind her name, you would crucify.

Yet, since she is a Tea Party Candidate and "claims" to be for a certain ideology, she gets a free pass...

Hypocritical?

In actuality, due to the fact she is a Tea Party Candidate, she should be closer to "above reproach" in my book, as we are supposed to be "throwing the bums out," instead of electing another bum.

And yes, she has shown her own inability to 1) follow rules 2) pay debts 3) be honest. So, she must, therefore, be a perfect political candidate.

True she has "answered" some of the allegations. However, being sued over debts and losing in court are a bit stronger answers to her character than what she, Hannity, or the internet, says.

And the "witch" crap does not matter much, except, perhaps, to show how gullible she was when she was young. Sensationalist media B.S., typical to covering any candidate.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

If all what you say is true, then, yes, she should

be taken to task over it. Believe what you wish,

I don't think allegations prove anything. I don't

particularly care to speak for her, but as to your

expectancy of puritanism, get a life. That won't

happen. I'll gladly take her over another left leaning

sellout.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Maybe Ann Coulter could sum it up better than I can.

How Many Times Did Goldwater Run For President Again? - HUMAN EVENTS

I share her thoughts. You like links. I gave you one