Bill Maher digs up [Senate candidate] O'Donnell 'witchcraft' clip

[OrdinaryMelkite]

First of all, it is uncharitable and rude to refer to the president as ‘Barry’, since that is not his name.

Overzealous aides covered up the symbols at Georgetown – don’t read into that some type of reference to Islam. And I think the president’s background was thoroughly covered and he answered a raft of questions about it. There was bi-partisan review of the candidates.

But you are still at it – this thread is on O’Donnell. Can’t you stay on her?

I call him Barry since he himself (according to some biographers) liked to call himself that in his youth. Maybe still does privately.

It probably does have an element of sarcasm to it, but I primarily do it because I
am more comfortable using that name instead of Barack (I have that American tendency to shorten names anyway) and because he himself is apparently not averse to using it.

Overzealous aides may indeed have covered up the symbols at Georgetown, but he did nothing to stop that. That to me says “something” about his willingness to “deny” certain aspects of his Christinity to score political points or simply for expediency.

I used the reference to Obama’s religion in response to your assertion that the Electorate had the right to know the context of O’Donnell’s remarks concerning her allegedly having practiced witchcraft. and that she should clarify them.
Fine. One can do that. But it should be for candidates ACROSS the board—not just Republicans or Conservatives. You agree, right?

And it also goes for Obama. You may be satisfied, but many on the Right AND Left are not satisfied with his answers regarding his religion and devotion to it.

I WILL stick to O’Donnell for the rest of the thread-----just wanted to put my revious questions and concerns in context.

 

[Catherine_D]

I find it interesting that the sorts of inquiries that are made about many of the women candidates are not always made about candidates that are men.

For example, regarding Ms. O’Donnell ~ her finances have been probed throughout the recent campaign.

But where were those questioning Mr. Castle’s finances during the same time period? How does someone spend most of their adult life in public service and become a multi millionaire? Yet there didn’t seem to be the questions about his finances, why is that?

Similarly, during the last Presidential campaign, so many people were obsessed with Sarah Palin’s clothes. But interestingly, there were never any discussions about any of the clothes of the male candidates. Or they would discuss her children, but the children of the other candidates were not an issue.

The fact of the matter is that in this, as in many campaigns, when someone cannot argue with a candidate on the issues, they start with the personal attacks and name-calling. And women are almost always treated worse than men.

It seems we have a long way to go to achieve equality after all.

 

[Nec5]

It seems we have a long way to go to achieve equality after all.

Discrimination is always wrong unless it’s a useful tool for getting your way.

 

[Beau_Ouiville]

I find it interesting that the sorts of inquiries that are made about many of the women candidates are not always made about candidates that are men.

For example, regarding Ms. O’Donnell ~ her finances have been probed throughout the recent campaign.

But where were those questioning Mr. Castle’s finances during the same time period? How does someone spend most of their adult life in public service and become a multi millionaire? Yet there didn’t seem to be the questions about his finances, why is that?

He was in office. Federal authorities are always public officials. O’Donnell, however, was not in public office and I don’t know if she was employed at all. She seems to have a history of some financial problems which should be explored.

Similarly, during the last Presidential campaign, so many people were obsessed with Sarah Palin’s clothes. But interestingly, there were never any discussions about any of the clothes of the male candidates. Or they would discuss her children, but the children of the other candidates were not an issue.

Palin’s clothes were paid for by the RNC, which complained about her excessive spending. It became an issue. Palin also had her kids out on the campaign trail – I saw very little discussion of her children other than the youngest and Bristol.

The fact of the matter is that in this, as in many campaigns, when someone cannot argue with a candidate on the issues, they start with the personal attacks and name-calling. And women are almost always treated worse than men.

Even if what you say is true, I don’t think that Palin or O’Donnell received bad treatment. They are playing in a hard league.

 

[TMC]

My concern wtih O’Donnell is not her past, I agree that lots of people do stupid or odd things when they are young. Its her present that will be a problem for her. The credible stories of her lack of honesty and her shady financial dealings continue to mount. The latest I heard was that she apparently put her mother on her campaign payroll.

O’Donnell is beginning to remind me of Carol Mosley Braun. For those that don’t remember Braun, she was a Democrat elected to the Senate from Illinois in a liberal backlash against the incumbent who was a Democrat, but considered too moderate (specifically he voted to confirm Justice Thomas). Braun’s main credentials were that she was a black woman, and that she was very liberal. There were lots of questions about her financial dealings, including how she handled campaign finances and how she supported herself and her mother. The allegations were derided as political smears, racism, sexism, etc. After she was elected, she turned out to be everything her accusers said she was, and more. And she turned out not to even be that liberal.

I am beginning to think O’Donnell is cut from same cloth, just from the conservative end.

 

[estesbob]

Next thing you know people are going to start telling us she’s a Muslim…

 

[Catherine_D]

He was in office. Federal authorities are always public officials. O’Donnell, however, was not in public office and I don’t know if she was employed at all. She seems to have a history of some financial problems which should be explored.

I believe you missed the larger point. Unless a public official is extremely corrupt, it is impossible to become a multi-millionaire over a life of public service, because no public service job pays that well. Mr. Castle is now an extremely wealthy man. How did that happen? And why wasn’t that subjected to the same scrutiny?

Isn’t that AT LEAST as big an issue as someone who has struggled financially (something that many of us can identify with?)

It’s pretty clear to me that one of Ms O’Donnell’s real problems is that she is female and that discrimination is still very much alive and well in this country. When do we ever see men treated this way?

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

I find it interesting that the sorts of inquiries that are made about many of the women candidates are not always made about candidates that are men.

For example, regarding Ms. O’Donnell ~ her finances have been probed throughout the recent campaign.

But where were those questioning Mr. Castle’s finances during the same time period? How does someone spend most of their adult life in public service and become a multi millionaire? Yet there didn’t seem to be the questions about his finances, why is that?

Similarly, during the last Presidential campaign, so many people were obsessed with Sarah Palin’s clothes. But interestingly, there were never any discussions about any of the clothes of the male candidates. Or they would discuss her children, but the children of the other candidates were not an issue.

The fact of the matter is that in this, as in many campaigns, when someone cannot argue with a candidate on the issues, they start with the personal attacks and name-calling. And women are almost always treated worse than men.

It seems we have a long way to go to achieve equality after all.

Thought-provoking post.

To me, it IS Ok to ask for clarification regarding her finances and past dabbling in witchcraft, but it should be ACROSS the board regarding everyone, regardless of political affiliation. And when we ask that of certain candidates on the Left, we should not have a “oh, we’ve been throught that! That is unfair and uncharitable” response ,like we always get—don’t you agree?

 

[Vonier]

Here’s her response.

"Delaware Republican Senate nominee Christine O’Donnell responded to old clips that surfaced over the weekend where she said she had once “dabbled in witchcraft,” clarifying at a GOP picnic in Delaware Sunday, “I was in high school, how many of you didn’t hang out with questionable folks in high school? But no, There’s been no witchcraft since, if there was, Karl Rove would be a supporter.”

I love it.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

Next thing you know people are going to start telling us she’s a Muslim…

Or a member of the Michigan Militia. Remember that one?

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

Maybe the lesson is,

If you aspire to a future in politics, don’t go on the Bill Maher show and say foolish things.

 

[Catherine_D]

Thought-provoking post.

To me, it IS Ok to ask for clarification regarding her finances and past dabbling in witchcraft, but it should be ACROSS the board regarding everyone, regardless of political affiliation. And when we ask that of certain candidates on the Left, we should not have a “oh, we’ve been throught that! That is unfair and uncharitable” response ,like we always get—don’t you agree?

Yes, fair treatment would be a refreshing change.

 

[Beau_Ouiville]

O’Donnell is beginning to remind me of Carol Mosley Braun.

Two differences: Mosely Braun was a graduate of a top law school and a Justice Department lawyer before becoming a senator. She had also been a state representative and a county official. Sen. Mosely Braun had been closely vetted.

There’s nothing like that in O’Donnell’s background so she merits a very close review.

It’s pretty clear to me that one of Ms O’Donnell’s real problems is that she is female and that discrimination is still very much alive and well in this country. When do we ever see men treated this way?

I would not wave the ‘victim of sexism’ flag on this one.

Plus, we are dealing with her. Even if they did not examine him; she should be examined for good reason, bad reason or no reason at all.

 

[tomarin]

Next thing you know people are going to start telling us she’s a Muslim…

Now that would be interesting.

 

[Catherine_D]

Plus, we are dealing with her. Even if they did not examine him; she should be examined for good reason, bad reason or no reason at all.

My point is that, during the primary campaign, it was fine to delve into her personal finances, but the extremely questionable finances of her opponent were ignored. Clearly sexist for anyone who wants to take off the blinders.

Hey, I’m not opposed to legitimate inquiry. And I’m not so sure that Ms. O’Donnell is the best candidate in the world, although I’d take her over a Marxist any day. But I’m not in Delaware, so it doesn’t matter how I would vote.

But I do think that the obvious unequal treatment of male and female candidates needs to end.

 

[Good_News_1]

but the extremely questionable finances of her opponent were ignored.

But there wasn’t any evidence of questionable finances on the part of her opponent.

He worked as a lawyer. It isn’t as if Congressmen are paid a meager salary. It isn’t surprising that, at 70, the man could have a net worth of $8 million, given a reasonably prudent investment plan and owning real estate all his life. In fact, I’m a little surprised it isn’t more.

 

[TMC]

Two differences: Mosely Braun was a graduate of a top law school and a Justice Department lawyer before becoming a senator. She had also been a state representative and a county official. Sen. Mosely Braun had been closely vetted.

There’s nothing like that in O’Donnell’s background so she merits a very close review.

You’re right, of course. At the same time, the big difference for O’Donnell is not so much her much weaker background, but that the growth of the information age means that she will not be able to shield her actions and rebuff allegations as easily as Braun did. I think Rove is playing the odds here, he knows O’Donnell has a good chance of imploding before November. It will be interesting to see if Palin and others begin to pull back from her a bit. I think she is dangerous to her opponent, but even more dangerous to her friends. If I were a politician, I wouldn’t invest any political capital in such an unstable and risky candidate.

 

[estesbob]

So would you rather have a Witch or a Marxist?

46 Days to Decide: Dem Candidate Coons Comes Under Scrutiny in Delaware Senate Race

While most of the attention in the Delaware race to win Vice President Biden’s old Senate seat has focused on the Republican candidate, Tea Party favorite Christine O’Donnell, her Democratic rival, Chris Coons, is now coming under scrutiny – a development that could give O’Donnell’s lagging campaign a boost.

Coons, 47, has already been targeted by Republicans for an article he wrote for the Amherst College newspaper when he was 21 – a piece entitled "Chris Coons: The Making of a Bearded Marxist."

foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/17/days-decidedem-candidate-comes-scrutiny-delaware-race-bidens-old-senate-seat/

 

[Toplink_pin]

“If you aspire to a future in politics, don’t go on the Bill Maher show and say foolish things.”

Thats the Best advice yet.

Big stinkin’ deal, she dabbled with witchcraft in highschool for goodness sake! That she abandonded those ideas at a early age is important too, as well as aspired much stronger to Christianity in her adult life.

I’m glad the liberals can cast stones so freely, and without guilt.

Makes me even more certain that I’m on the “right” side at this point in my life.

 

[TMC]

I find it interesting that the sorts of inquiries that are made about many of the women candidates are not always made about candidates that are men.

For example, regarding Ms. O’Donnell ~ her finances have been probed throughout the recent campaign.

But where were those questioning Mr. Castle’s finances during the same time period? How does someone spend most of their adult life in public service and become a multi millionaire? Yet there didn’t seem to be the questions about his finances, why is that?

Similarly, during the last Presidential campaign, so many people were obsessed with Sarah Palin’s clothes. But interestingly, there were never any discussions about any of the clothes of the male candidates. Or they would discuss her children, but the children of the other candidates were not an issue.

The fact of the matter is that in this, as in many campaigns, when someone cannot argue with a candidate on the issues, they start with the personal attacks and name-calling. And women are almost always treated worse than men.

It seems we have a long way to go to achieve equality after all.

Castle spent about half of his professional life as a partner in a law firm, which is presumably where he made his money. That said, I have no problem with taking a hard look at all candidates. I am guessing that someone, either the Dems or O’Donnel’s people, did take a good look at Castle. Or that someone did during one of his previous campaigns. But whatever is true about her former opponent, or her current opponent, O’Donnell will have to answer the very legitimate concerns raised about her if she wants to get elected. If concerns come up about her opponent the same will be true of him, of course.