Around the Horn
The Special Election in the 19th continues to occupy our collective time. The most likely winner of the race, Rep. Booth, ironically, is the least scrutinized candidate. Indeed, last week we concentrated on Polly. This week it seems Libertarian and vaccine conspiracy theorist Wendy Jones was our focus. I had previously endorsed Ms. Jones in this race for the sole reason that I would rather see real conservatism again become the loyal opposition to liberals and progressives rather than a dishonest weak neocon theocon birther teabagging borrow and spend lying conservatism. That still remains my goal. Yet if I am going to condemn 9/11 Truthers and Birthers as whacked out lying conspiracy theorists, then I must do so with Ms. Jones. Her statements opposing public health vaccinations this week on these very pages are shockingly insane, do a disservice to Libertarianism, and have lost her my support. So, people of the 19th, vote for who you like. I like none of your choices, and neither should you.
Meanwhile, we here at Delaware Liberal have taken on the supposedly nonpartisan Caesar Rodney Institute in a spectacular series of posts by the Beast Who Slumbers, Cassandra and Donviti.
THE CAESAR REPUBLICAN INSTITUTE
An Honest Broker, Part I
An Honest Broker, Part II
An Honest Broker, Part III
Charlie…come out come out wherever you are. Bulo offers to unmask for the truth.
Steve Newton thinks this is all much to do about nothing. Predictable.
Donviti gets Copeland on the record.
And then catches the smoking gun.
Charlie is still denying all.
THE 19TH
Politics By The Numbers — John Tobin
Travel time to and from the State Fair in Harrington from various places in the 19th.
The State Fair’s affect on the Election.
The majority of voters in 14 of the 16 districts in the 19th are over 50 in 2002 and every district in 2006.
Yes, there is a reason politicians hang out at Senior Centers.
Redwaterlily
Polly Mervine bases her bigotry on the claim that she will represent Mennonites. Turns out they are a small minority of the people are Mennonites. And one of them is not Jason Scott. Amish.
Wendy Jones’ condescension won her no fans.
Resolute Determination
CR thinks Polly controlling her late father’s campaign funds is a conflict of interest.
Delaware Watch — Dana Garrett
Thurman Adams’ Campaign Funds
Delaware Politics — Group Blog
Booth finally launches his website.
The Mourning Constitution — Brian
Wendy Jones on the issues.
Brian reposts the candidates’ answers to the News Journal Questionnaire and then analyzes them.
Lower Slower Delaware — MJ
Polly Mervine and her husband take a self defeating bigoted stance against Homosexuals.
Delaware Libertarian — Steve Newton & Tyler Nixon
Wendy Jones gets some national and local attention
Steve disowns Wendy Jones’ stance on vaccinations. Good for him.
An exclusive interview with Libertarian candidate Wendy Jones.
DANA GARRETT ON LIBERTARIANISM
Steve Newton reacts to the news of Garrett’s upcoming analysis
Dana’s first thoughts on Libertarianism: A Porcupine Freedom Festival
Dana’s thoughts on Libertarianism and Paternalism.
Steve thinks it is great news for Steve and Libertarians everywhere that we are now paying attention to them, although he is disappointed with Dana’s posts on Libertarianism. Don’t get too excited or disappointed yet Stevo. First, a liberal is not going to offer a glowing review of Libertarianism. If you expected it, you were naive. Second, you need viable candidates who are not conspiracy theorists. Then you have to win elections. And then, maybe, you will be a viable opposition party. Now, I want that to happen too. But you guys have a long way to go.
FRIED VENABLES
Would you like Fries with that?
A French … er ah.. Freedom Fried Earmark.
Senator Venables likes his pork fried and kept within the family.
DP thinks it is a smear. Sorry, but reality has a liberal bias.
DELAWARE LIBERAL POSTS OF THE WEEK
Of Cops and Recovery Funds
Around the Horn Last Week
Mike Castle Takes Credit for another Stimulus Project he voted against.
Read All About It Sunday Papers
What About Protack? A Leader or a Crank?
Carper ducks the question?
Crazy Eileen is revealed.
Sussex County Drinking Liberally was a blast.
MISCELLANY
Steve offers interesting thoughts on why we dedicated partisans engage each other on each other’s blogs with no hope of changing minds: it is because we like the battle.
Happy Birthday to David Anderson.
Delaware Politics thinks Markell wants to ration energy. No, it is called conservation. Conservatives against Conservation. Who knew?
Tommywonk answers their inanity expertly.
Delaware Politics offers their weekly regional political roundup.
Redwaterlily reveals the horrid unpatriotic nature of conservative Sussex Countians.
MJ on blogging etiquette. Then he ends anonymous comments.
Kavips on healthcare. He says we are all right.
Resolute Determination on Peter Schwartzkopf vs. the NFL. Naturally, the DuPont heir sides with the multibillion dollar corporation. They also don’t think too kindly of him on other matters.
Good coverage. Busy week.
I would rather see real conservatism again become the loyal opposition to liberals and progressives…
Just another mouse cheering for the cats to come back.
“So, people of the 19th, vote for who you like. I like none of your choices, and neither should you. ”
AMEN. I am really in a pickle here – I can not imagine NOT voting yet can’t see myself voting for any of the candidates. A write-in is sort of out of the question because he or she could never win, but I may just do that only because I don’t want any of the candidates to get my vote.
I live in the district and I don’t want to vote for either of the candidates! But, in order to put the whole Adams dynasty to sleep forever, I will vote for Booth to make sure she doesn’t win. I’m not taking chances because Opaleski & Jones are going to split the votes, and take votes away from Adams and Booth. This is really a sad election. And now that Venables has been exposed for the dog he really is, maybe we’ll get rid of him soon. He was really upset that Polly didn’t get the committee vote on the first night, and he was “sorry it was not an Adams.” This was his response to a Parker worker at the July 4th parade in Laurel. Truly, people; wake up, please. We do not want this gal to take up where her father left off. And hearing her comments, it surely sounds like that is what she will do.
A1,
By real conservatism I take DD to mean a movement that contributes level headedness, thrift, and a slow to stir anti-interventionist foreign policy and a “we may disagree but we’re all in this together” approach reconciling philosophical differences. Not the stupid, greedy, shallow ass-wipes we have running the GOP now.
Seriously, don’t we all miss real conservatism?
I’m with Jason. I would like to have some reality-based conservatives again. We know there will always be conservatives, so I’d like to get some smart ones, please.
Your attacks on the Caesar Rodney Institute are totally unjustified. Why don’t you people try to change your famously corrupt one-party-system-bred political establishment rather than taking on and attempting to destroy anyone who rightfully has a problem with it. Apparently you can accept your thieving politicians, but not those those who want to expose them.
Jim may be stupid or merely naive, but either way he provides a good example of the kind of thinking that directly leads to the tragedy of electing people like George Bush. He’d rather invest corporations and the wealthy with unlimited power than give a moments thought to the possibility that they are not as altruistic as they say they are.
Jason wrote:
Seriously, don’t we all miss real conservatism?
No, we all don’t. In addition to the repubs, there is plenty of so-called “real conservatism” in the current democratic party. Look at the current health care debate – do you really want more “real” conservative repubs to partner with Blue Dog dems to kill liberal programs like health care?
And, who specifically are some examples of “real conservatism”-type politicians from the last 50 years that you all miss so dearly? I’d like to see some names and why.
Suzanne….Unless I am mistaken a certain State Senator Patricia Blevins sponsored legislation to take away your right to write in…I can not verify that the bill passed.
Someone please fill in here……thanx.
For your Saturday morning reading. Love me some Margaret and Helen!!
http://margaretandhelen.wordpress.com/2009/07/21/rush-limbaugh-is-big/
Suzanne and Susan,
Here is an excerpt from the relevant section of the Delaware Code regarding write-in candidates:
TITLE 15
Elections
Primary Elections and Nominations of Candidates
CHAPTER 34. WRITE-IN CANDIDATES
§ 3402. Write-in candidates for a general election.
(a) Superior Court shall only count a write-in vote for a person who has declared himself or herself a write-in candidate for the office for which that person was written-in in accordance with this chapter. Superior Court shall count a write-in vote for a candidate on a general or special election ballot if the write-in vote is for the office for which the person is a candidate.
http://delcode.delaware.gov/title15/c034/index.shtml
that sucks.
I heard the same BTW – about Venables telling a Parker worker he was sorry it wasn’t an Adams that won the nomination at that time. However, from what I understand that Parker worker was actually Parker’s son!
That, along with Polly the cracker’s comments about this seat “belonging to her family” and being “rightfully hers” really turns me away. I have considered voting for Booth to open up the chance of a special election in Georgetown and getting a democratic 3/5th majority in the house. I just can’t sta nd him at all, so can I really do that? Wendy Jones and Opaleski are out for me because you are right, all they will do is split the votes – they have no chance of taking it and in the case of Wendy Jones I am quite happy about the fact that she can’t win. I don’t know about “O” to say much about him other then that he is too conservative for my taste.
Someone circulated the idea of writing in a guy named “McCabe” since I don’t know who he is at all as well as the fact that he hasn’t declared that he is running as a write-in candidate, this is out of the question as well.
OH WHAT TO DO? To vote or not to vote> If voting, whom to vote for?
This really sucks.
Opaliski, IMO, has a really good chance of running away with this. He is coming off real well at the debates, and is very knowledgeable. I wouldn’t be surprised if he squeaks this one out, or comes in a close second.
The McCabe in question is Russ McCabe, the just-retired state archivist. He was an active JackPacker and is a great guy. Very progressive and would make an excellent elected official.
MJ – why didn’t he file as a write-in candidate – any idea?
If ‘Real Conservatism’ is defined in the “America First” mindset of Charles Lindbergh and Pat Buchanan, put me down as a Harry Truman Democrat in the foreign affairs side of thing.
Note that the “Progressive” opponent to Truman in the 1948 election faulted Truman for being so beastly towards the Soviets with such abominations as NATO and the Marshall Plan.
Some examples of “real conservatism”-type politicians from the last 50 years that you all miss so dearly? *crickets chirping*
Thanks for the birthday wish.