What's In The Castle?

J-Ger fills in some of the 52.36 ACU rating blanks about which I was speculating over the weekend:

In 2009, ACU scored Castle at 56. So how did he get that rating from the group last year?

Castle opposed the Lilly Ledbetter pay act, which the ACU described as a “new Pandora’s Box for trial lawyers.” He voted for a January 2009 bill that would prevent the Treasury from spending the $350 billion that remained in the TARP program. He opposed the Obama stimulus. He voted against efforts to water down legislation barring federal funds to ACORN or other organizations that employ people who have been convicted of election-law violations. He voted to eliminate the earmark for the airport near Johnstown, Pa., named after Rep. John Murtha. He voted to cut discretionary government spending in the appropriations for the Departments of Housing and Transportation by 5 percent.

He supported an amendment to the health-care bill that would ban using taxpayer funds to provide abortion services, an interesting vote for a self-described pro-choice Republican. He voted against the health-care bill.

A central point of the O’Donnell folks is that Mike Castle is unacceptable because he doesn’t support the repeal of Obamacare. But that’s only half his stated position. Castle thinks trying to repeal Obamacare while Obama is president is a waste of time, but he’s open to the idea if the GOP can regain control of the White House....

He voted to extend the repeal of the estate tax and opposed making the new estate-tax rates permanent. He voted for a bill to repeal the TARP program and lower the federal debt limit. Finally, he voted against the financial-industry-regulation legislation backed by Barney Frank.

That sure seems to corroborate Governor Christie's endorsement comments about Mike Castle's fiscal conservative bona fides.  Although, to be fair, and gleaned from decades of experience with watching RINOs in action, there is a vast difference between voting against enormously higher spending, and voting in favor of enormous cuts in same.  One question the Obamidency has answered is just how extreme the Dems would have to get before RINOs closed ranks with "true conservatives" to form a true Opposition.  Once back in the congressional saddle, will that unity last?  Even with Red Barry as an unflagging [heh] unifier?

Castle is also as adamantly committed to stopping any Lame Duck jamdowns as his comely primary rival:

Delaware is holding a special election for the unexpired four years of Vice President Joe Biden’s term, and insurgent tea party candidate Christine O’Donnell has made a promise to stop the lame duck-agenda a centerpiece of her primary campaign against moderate Republican Mike Castle. O’Donnell has been vocal in her opposition to policies like cap and trade, card check, and tax hikes which are on the lame-duck agenda. She has made a clear public commitment to oppose any major policy changes in a lame-duck session.

Castle recently matched her promise to stop the lame-duck agenda. I asked his staff for a statement from Castle on the lame-duck session and they provided this very strong statement from the congressman: “The only business that should be conducted during a lame-duck session of Congress is keeping the government running until the newly elected legislators are sworn in. I do not agree with those who say this period of time should be used for passing controversial legislation and would not play a role in helping to circumvent the will of American voters.”

Hard to see any wiggle room there.  And remember, that would presumeably include any attempt by Dirty Harry to whip out cripple & tax and ram it through.  It'd have to, especially since Castle voted for C&T last summer on the House side, and some tighty-righties aren't letting him forget it.

About which DrewM raises a sound counterpoint:

[T]here's still no spinning the Cap and Trade vote. On the upside, it's unlikely to come up should the Democrats eke out control of the Senate and definitely won't if Republicans have the majority. Castle may want to kill us on that issue but he simply won't have the chance to do it for the foreseeable future.

Y'see, that's why winning elections matters.  'cause when you're in the majority, you control the agenda, which means the other side does NOT control the agenda.  Chris Horner - God bless him for his yeoman work fighting the battle against greenstremism - tries to make the term "electability" into a dirty word, and sometimes it IS misapplied, but the Delaware polling numbers tell the tale O'Donnellites do not want to hear with relentless brutality:

Rasmussen's also has a Delaware poll out today (3% margin of error) looking at the general election. [It] shows Castle comfortably in front of the Democrat Coons (Castle +11), while Coons leads O'Donnell in a hypothetical match up (Coons +11).

Jeff Lord can indulge in his William Proxmire fantasies all he likes, but the plain simple fact remains: One of two people will be the next United States Senator from the State of Delaware.  And Christine O'Donnell is not one of them.

Choose wisely, my Bluehen friends.