The Inexhaustible Brilliance of Christine O'Donnell

Michael Moynihan | 12.8.2010 1:15 AM

Last we heard from failed Delaware Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell, pundits and bloggers were marveling that the truth-stretching Tea Party darling managed to finish her midterm race with almost $1 million dollars in the bank. And we aren't rid of her yet, according to a report in The Hill: O'Donnell is starting a PAC inventively called ChristinePAC. Why would we want to be rid of a politician so talented, so electrifying in front of a bank of cameras that she today compared the extension of unemployment benefits to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor (approximately 2,500 dead)?

"Today marks a lot of tragedy," O'Donnell, the Tea Party-backed GOP Senate candidate from Delaware, said Tuesday night during an appearance in Virginia.

"Tragedy comes in threes," O'Donnell said. "Pearl Harbor, Elizabeth Edwards's passing and Barack Obama's announcement of extending the tax cuts, which is good, but also extending the unemployment benefits."

I bet Delaware voters are kicking themselves today.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

NEXT: Obama: "When Medicare was started, it was a small program. It grew." You don't say!

Hide Comments (94)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

Anonymous 14 years ago

Why do you hate women, Moynihan?
John-David 14 years ago

It's a shame she didn't immediately explain her position, or even try to clarify it further after not quite getting her explanation right when she didn't explain it immediately after. Or something.
Ken Shultz 14 years ago

If you're so disagreeable to seeing her being taken seriously, then why take what she says so seriously?
Jeff B. 14 years ago

Ken, he can't get enough of her.
BoscoH 14 years ago

WTF?!? That's probably the funniest joke about Elizabeth Edwards until Conan weighs in.
Tim Cavanaugh 14 years ago

Yes, because every person who ever described having gotten drunk from sweet-tasting alcoholic drinks as having been "Pearl Harbored" was making a serious comparison to the attack on Pearl Harbor and clearly didn't understand the significance of the U.S. role in World War II.
1. J 14 years ago
  
  Oh, come on. You know we'd be fuming if Obama compared tax cuts to the rich as disastrous as a Pearl Harbor and a cancer death.
  
  It was a dumb thing to say for someone who wanted to be taken seriously in the political arena.
  
  She just doesn't belong in politics. Neither do most people I respect.
  1. J 14 years ago
    
    Remember Keith Olbermann comparing Citizen's United to Dredd Scott? Some people are just loudmouths, joking or not.
    1. Hobo Chang Ba 14 years ago
      
      And we mocked him endlessly for that too.
    2. Barry D 14 years ago
      
      Our outgoing blue dog rep in Idaho said the same thing BTW.
      1. Barry D 14 years ago
        
        A few days before being rolled in the election by a republican who had absolutely no chance of winning...
    3. J 14 years ago
      
      People seem to mistake what I'm driving at. I think Reason generally rightfully criticizes a lot of Obama's hyperbolic comparisons. My point is, when O'Donnell does the same, it's better to be consistent than come to her defense.
      
      I'm really surprised on a libertarian discussion board people are so defensive of her.
      
      If nothing else, libertarians should recognize a dud when we see one. It's called not being partisan.
  2. Fatty Bolger 14 years ago
    
    Yeah. Imagine if the President said something that stupid! We'd be fuming! Like, imagine if he said something like this:
    
    Obama: "I've said before that I felt that the middle-class tax cuts were being held hostage to the high-end tax cuts. I think it's tempting not to negotiate with hostage takers, unless the hostage gets harmed. Then, people will question the wisdom of that strategy.
    
    In this case, the hostage was the American people. And I was not willing to see them get harmed."
    1. 0x90 14 years ago
      
      Analogy often serves as a mental crutch, and this guy uses it constantly. I just wonder if he does it for his own benefit, i.e. if he's unaware that he's doing it and actually reasons in those terms, or if it's just more of a general condescension thing, where he assumes nobody else capable of dealing with issues in real terms. Whatever the case, it's very annoying.
      1. Fabius 14 years ago
        
        I also use analogies a lot. For me, it's more of a general condescension thing. So, I'll grant him the benefit of the doubt.
        
        Cuddly Soft Balls of Death 14 years ago
        
        Barry drove our hostages into the ditch with a Slurpee.
    2. MNG 14 years ago
      
      It's pretty clear he was using hostage negotiations as an analogy. O'Donnell was saying that the extension, Edward's deaths and Pearl Harbor were actual tragedies.
      
      So, fail.
      1. Ray Pew 14 years ago
        
        It's pretty clear he was using hostage negotiations as an analogy. O'Donnell was saying that the extension, Edward's deaths and Pearl Harbor were actual tragedies.
        
        Wouldn't hostage situations be a tragedy as well?
        
        Then again, I am not shocked by political figures making idiotic statements. I generally expect them.
        
        JohnD 14 years ago
        
        Are you shocked by MNG making idiotic statements? Probably not as that seems the norm.
      2. Fatty Bolger 14 years ago
        
        Yes, it was an analogy. He even prefaced it by saying "let me use an analogy" or something like that. It was also mind-bogglingly stupid in a similar way, which was the point. Did you really think I was making a perfectly literal equation between what O'Donnell said and what Obama said?
    3. johnl 14 years ago
      
      That was pretty horrific. BHO is a hot house flower who can not function with even the slightest adversity. No Bill Clinton.
  3. JoshINHB 14 years ago
    
    Oh, come on. You know we'd be fuming if Obama compared tax cuts to the rich as disastrous as a Pearl Harbor and a cancer death.
    
    How about if called tax cut proponents hostage takers that he only dealt with because they were threatening to harm the hostage, ie the American public.
2. Almanian 14 years ago
  
  TIMMEH!
3. Abdul 14 years ago
  
  So that's why they're called Kamikazis!
JB 14 years ago

That's dumb.

Almost as dumb as calling Republicans "hostage-takers" for trying to instill confidence in the people who actually create jobs (hint: they ain't poor people).

What's Obama going to call actual hostage-takers? Misunderstood poor souls?

Obama is a cunt.
1. Barry D 14 years ago
  
  Of course Zero won't instill confidence in job creators. Most of us who have even worked as mid level supervisors have had to fire people who seemed a lot like him.
Joshua Corning 14 years ago

"Pearl Harbor, Elizabeth Edwards's passing and Barack Obama's announcement of extending the tax cuts, which is good, but also extending the unemployment benefits."

Moynahan does not understand how hyperbole works.

He learned what irony was and stopped thinking after that.

To be honest that was pretty funny of her to say.
1. Joshua Corning 14 years ago
  
  note: I am not a big fan of O'Donnell if only because she took away the spot light of Rand Paul with her weirdness and gaffs.
  
  Still that line that is bothering Moynihan is getting funnier the more I look at it.
  
  I wonder if he goes into conniption fits when kids sing "Ring around the Rosy" because it refers to the tragic events of the black plague?
  1. J 14 years ago
    
    Maybe it's good she took the spotlight away from Paul. The media seemed genuinely threatened by Paul, but because she came along, they got distracted. The media may not have prevailed, but nothing scares them more then potentially principled small government conservatives, and they would have tried desperately to destroy him.
    
    The media prefer conservatives who claim to be small government, but who grow the government (like GW), so they can claim small gov't conservatism a failure.
  2. johnl 14 years ago
    
    The next time a 4 year old runs for USA Senate, and sings ringaringaroses, yes I will have a fit. Same as when they wet their pants.
Brian 14 years ago

Christine's the party guest who drove all of the guests away and now won't leave, even after the lights in the room have gone as dim as she is.

She'll be a even more embarrassing Meghan McCain - the go-to gal for making conservatives look stupid.
1. SIV 14 years ago
  
  Meghan McCain isn't a conservative. She is quite vocal about that.
Episiarch 14 years ago

Some of you can't seriously be defending O'Donnell. Support for her is even more mystifying, and retarded, than support for Palin. At least Palin didn't moonlight as a "witch" and didn't describe masturbation as adultery.
1. Joshua Corning 14 years ago
  
  You Don't have to support O'Donnell to see Moynihan has jumped the shark on this one.
  
  I am sure she will make a real gaff in the future but this one isn't a gaff and is actually funny.
2. Fabius 14 years ago
  
  It's because she's hot. Nothing mystifying about that.
  
  In seriousness, though, I think a lot of libertarians, even those who'd never admit it, were really hoping the GOP could take the Senate too, and when she won the primary, it made it that much harder; so people started trying really hard to defend her, even if it was against their better judgement.
  1. Joshua Corning 14 years ago
    
    I think a lot of libertarians, even those who'd never admit it, were really hoping the GOP could take the Senate too
    
    Oh bullshit...she never had a chance after the primary and it was the Tea party who were happy she took the republican nomination. The GOP establishment were pissed because she knocked off the guy who probably would have won the seat.
    
    Also there were 3 or 4 GOP nominees who actually had a chance.
    
    O'Donnell was first and foremost a tea party bomb meant to take out a RINO...then after she did take him out the left wing media latched on to her because she was weird and an idiot and prone to Gaff so they made a strawman out of her to poke at while ignoring serious Tea party candidates like Rand Paul.
    1. Joshua Corning 14 years ago
      
      Note: being an idiot in the senate is not necessarily a bad thing....and it has been proven to be the common currency in that chamber.
    2. prolefeed 14 years ago
      
      If by "ignoring serious Tea party candidates like Rand Paul" you mean doing the opposite of ignoring by doing relentless attacks, then sure.
      1. joshua corning 14 years ago
        
        Maddow is not the entire Left wing media.
    3. Fabius 14 years ago
      
      Okay, so maybe it's jut because she's hot.
      1. alan 14 years ago
        
        Hot now means pudgy?
        
        Anonymous 14 years ago
        
        I, personally, would have gone for 'cute' instead of 'hot'. Pudgy and cute go together quite nicely on occasion.
    4. creech 14 years ago
      
      A Delaware tea party leader says they were as shocked at her beating Castle as were the media and establishment. What happened was that she was such a long shot, those who preferred Castle didn't vote in large numbers in the primary because they figured he was a shoo-in.
3. Barry D 14 years ago
  
  I sometimes found myself defending W a few years back, not because I agreed with a lot of what he was doing, but because specific attacks on him were so stupid and/or insane...
  
  This is called Reason for a reason.
4. Tom 14 years ago
  
  +1
  Even when shes right about certain issues by accident that doesn't mean one has to defend her when she say's something openly retarded.
Fabius 14 years ago

Now I don't feel so badly about observing that it was the 69th anniversary of a lot of blowing and going down.
J 14 years ago

I'm sure that given the chance, she could qualify such a ridiculous statement. Just like I'm sure there are explanations for her saying "Gee, where in the constitution is the separation of church and state?"

Regardless, if she can't avoid letting such dumb things slip from her mouth, she doesn't belong in politics. Especially since she was one of the most watched politicians of the last election cycle.

Some people just can't speak in sound bites. I'm one of them. I'm a better man for it.
1. Fatty Bolger 14 years ago
  
  Maybe you can tell us where it is in the Constitution, then. The last time I looked, it said "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". There is no mention of "separation of state," which is exactly what O'Donnell was saying. The term was first mentioned in the Supreme Court in 1878.
  
  See, here's a great example of what's wrong with criticism of O'Donnell. Yes, she's more than a little kooky, yes she has said some silly things, and yes I wish we could come up with MUCH better candidates for the Senate (though I doubt her opponent qualifies). However, jumping all over her when she's actually right makes no sense unless your motivation is purely partisan. If Rand Paul had said the same thing, people here would be bending over backwards to explain that he was actually right.
  1. JoshINHB 14 years ago
    
    See, here's a great example of what's wrong with criticism of O'Donnell. Yes, she's more than a little kooky, yes she has said some silly things, and yes I wish we could come up with MUCH better candidates for the Senate (though I doubt her opponent qualifies).
    
    Exactly, most of the criticism of O'Donnell is complete bullshit.
    Running as a true outsider with no party support she did roughly as well as Carly Fiorina and Linda McMahon. Both spent tens of millions and had republican party support for the low 40s that they got. Why not talk about what crappy candidates they were? Or more realistically how stupid the voters in some states are.
    
    Oh and O'Donnell did a great service to small government advocate by eliminating that corrupt douche bag Castle. If she had won the general election, killing the Rhino would still be the most important thing that she ever did.
  2. Parah Salin 14 years ago
    
    The last time I looked, it said "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". There is no mention of "separation of state", which is exactly what O'Donnell was saying.
    
    Wow, those are some sweet mental gymnastics.
    1. Fabius 14 years ago
      
      It's a pretty legitimate argument. The way people use the phrase "separation of church and state" today is totally unfounded in those two clauses.
    2. MlR 14 years ago
      
      In the context of the Constitution "establishment of religion," meant something akin to the Church of England. I.e., an established state religion, not the abolition of religious influence on government. Suspicion that England might extend its sway to the colonies was a major contributor to the Revolution.
      
      I'm an agnostic, but not intellectually dishonest or historically ignorant.
  3. J 14 years ago
    
    No, it was stupid for two reasons:
    
    1) She said repeatedly that she has changed her mind and no longer wishes to legislate her morality and her religion. Many people found this hard to believe. Later, she asks petulantly where it says there is any such separation of church and state. Why dwell on the point if you have no interest in breaching this wall? It accomplishes nothing.
    
    2) Anyone with any political acumen whatsoever would know how a comment like that sounded. If separation of church and state really came after the constitution, and wasn't in it, she should have said so, but she instead said "Gee, I didn't know that" when her opponent said it was in the First Amendment. She basically conceded he was right (and apparently, he wasn't).
    
    Just because it was right, it was still a dumb thing to say.
    
    And you are all right to call me stupid, because it takes attention away from how inept she was. I didn't like her opponent either, and an extra seat taken from the Dems would've been nice. But, I'm not going to pretend she was a worthwhile candidate.
    1. J 14 years ago
      
      Apologies to Fatty Bolger and JoshlNHB, you didn't call me stupid. Only JohnD did, and he apparently thinks the separation of church and state is a bad thing.
2. JohnD 14 years ago
  
  J, you are the dumb one. The Constitution makes no mention of the seperation of Church and State. That phrase was coined by an activist, liberal judge and perpetuated by the left wing loons that hate Christanity. Get a clue, moron!
  1. creech 14 years ago
    
    I didn't realize that Thomas Jefferson was a liberal, activist judge.
    1. robc 14 years ago
      
      2 out of 3.
  2. J 14 years ago
    
    If anything, separation of church and state saved Christianity. They don't have it in England, and Christianity is all but dead there. In fact, more Muslims attend religious services in the UK than Christians.
    
    Now, if Islam became the dominant religion here, I think you'd be glad for the separation of church and state.
Some Guy 14 years ago

"Tragedy comes in threes," O'Donnell said. "Pearl Harbor, Elizabeth Edwards's passing and Barack Obama's announcement of extending the tax cuts, which is good, but also extending the unemployment benefits."

If it weren't her her horse, she wouldn't have spent that year in clown college.
1. O'Donnell 14 years ago
  
  I could go for some horse cock right about now, it would break my non-masturbation habit.
  1. JohnD 14 years ago
    
    Another post by a juvenile that thinks it's funny to make up shit and attribuite it to someone else. Grow up asshole.
    1. JohnD 14 years ago
      
      Correction: I love raping babies.
    2. O'Donnell 14 years ago
      
      JohnD, if you've been and these threads for any length of time, you know what this is often done as a joke. No one here would really believe that was her.
      
      Take a joke. Asshole.
    3. 8=====D 14 years ago
      
      Quit posting on here and come back and suck me some more, JohnD
Almanian 14 years ago

Tragedy comes in threes: Christine O'Donnell making a public statement, the making of the movie "Pearl Harbor", and the passing of gas after dinner tonight.

TRAGEDY, I SAY!
Hazel Meade 14 years ago

Why should anyone at Reason be adding wind to the sails of a mini-Sarah-Palin?
1. Leftist media 14 years ago
  
  Good point, that's our job.
frances 14 years ago

Jade Jewelry

Value-Added Crafts

Jade Thumb Ring

Jade Pot&Cup;

Jade Pot&Cup;

Jade Bowl

Jade Ruyi

Jade Seal

Jade Bracelets

Jade Pendant
1. Old Man with Candy 14 years ago
  
  Where can I find jade?
2. Ken Shultz 14 years ago
  
  See, and I was lookin' for jade cock ring.
  
  Oh well, I guess I'll have to go look somewhere else.
Mark E 14 years ago

Please be sure to use the same adjective ("failed candidate") the next time that you refer to ...
Hillary Clinton
John Edwards
John McCain
Al Gore
John Kerry
etc.
1. Ramsey 14 years ago
  
  Except those folks, you know, did something else
  1. SugarFree 14 years ago
    
    O'Donnell "did something else" as well. She jousted to be the loudest and dumbest of the conservative buffoons that Maher trotted out on Real Time as pretend "balance" to his crypto-liberalism-masquerading-as-libertarianism. And she did well, proving herself the loudest and dumbest quite a few times. And generating hundreds of pull-quotes to use against her when she got too pudgy for TV and decided to cash her chips in on a doomed senatorial race.
    
    Her willingness to be an idiot attention whore should be acknowledged, Ramsey. And celebrated.
  2. Barry D 14 years ago
    
    At least one did someONE else, and only one of them is doing anything they didn't do before failing as candidates. What dirt does HC have on the Obamas, I wonder...
  3. MlR 14 years ago
    
    Yeah, they were successful parasites.
2. Eric 14 years ago
  
  I prefer the adjective "federal government cum-swallowers", but I guess "failed candidate" works, too.
TEAM DOUCHEBAG 14 years ago

Enough about that conservatron whore Christine "the Witch" O' Donnell. Let's have some more links to that dreamy closet libertarian Glenn Greenwald. I could just gay marry him!
- 14 years ago

Moynihan could write about a tree falling in the woods and get 40 comments here.
1. Johnny Longtorso 14 years ago
  
  I didn't hear that.
  1. ? 14 years ago
    
    That tree was a douche!
    1. - 14 years ago
      
      That tree should die in a fire!
bill 14 years ago

Politics, of Greek and Latin origins, meaning..."Poli", meaning many, and "tics", meaning blood sucking vermin..
The conclusion is yours to form......
1. Parah Salin 14 years ago
  
  Actually, a tic is a "sudden, repetitive, stereotyped, nonrhythmic movement or sound".
Abdul 14 years ago

I think the real story here is not that O'Donnell made an over-wrought comparison to Pearl Harbor and unemployment benefits, but the rise of a new creature in politics: the celebrity politician.

We've had political celebrities before (Rush Limbaugh). They're famous, but have no real responsibility. We've had celebrities who became politicans (Reagan, Sonny Bono), people who were famous and took on responsibility.

But I can't think of too many politicians who became celebrities--eschewing responsibility for fame, and maybe being able to turn that fame into responsibility some day.
Hyperboliza Minelli 14 years ago

I bought three foods at the grocery: broccoli, chicken, and Twinkies.

OMG! I compared Twinkies to broccoli! I'm so much the stoopid! Broccoli is healthy and Twinkies are the other thing of that!
Con. Alan Grayson 14 years ago

You see, this is the kind of shit I have talking about. The Right is crazy.
Old Mexican 14 years ago

"Why would we want to be rid of a politician so talented, so electrifying in front of a bank of cameras that she today compared the extension of unemployment benefits to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor (approximately 2,500 dead)?"

You mean giving people money so they don't work, for 13 more months, is not AS tragic?

I bet Delaware voters are kicking themselves today.

I bet they will after the "bearded Marxist" grows an actual beard...
R C Dean 14 years ago

The last time I looked, it said "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". There is no mention of "separation of state", which is exactly what O'Donnell was saying.

O'Donnell takes a very respectable position here, one that was universal in this country until sometime after WWII, based on the argument that a rigid "separation of church and state" as currently practiced by SCOTUS is one step beyond what the Constitution actually prohibits.

Basically, it comes down to an argument about whether "establishment of religion" refers to the creation of a state church (as the Founders no doubt understood it) or refers to any reference to a particular religion by any state actor, or on any state property, or in any way supported directly or indirectly by state funds.

If only we could get such a rabid interpretation of other items of the BOR. Imagine if the 2A were policed as ferociously as that.
Remarkulus 14 years ago

My favorite part beyond all of the Christine O'Donnell love here is that nobody has noted that Christine O'Donnell has NO ACTUAL ROLE in Delaware or federal government. Or why (similar to the Tweetzilla from Wasilla), we get treated to her commentary as serious and important political analysis.
1. - 14 years ago
  
  Not. It's just filler.
George Lopez 14 years ago

That's an old cue card, fool!
MlR 14 years ago

It's already clear you're a hack, Moynihan. No need to continue flogging the latest bandwagon.
pgt 14 years ago

Also relevant to the theme of multiple disasters on December 7.
Delaware became the first state to ratify the Constitution on 12/7/1787. An alert Delaware politician would have already pointed that out.
Woodrow 14 years ago

Geez O'Donnell, I think both Edwards were idiots, but even I wouldn't bring up her death to talk about politics.

Please log in to post comments

The Inexhaustible Brilliance of Christine O'Donnell

Latest

Rise of the Samurai Lawyers

Marco Rubio Says He's Revoked 300 Student Visas Over Campus Activism

Pam Bondi Aims To Revive a Moribund Legal Process for Restoring Gun Rights

Trump Is Sabotaging His 'Drill, Baby, Drill' Agenda

How Backpage Became MILFS.com

Recommended

Login Form