In Defense of Rove

There is talk all over the blogosphere and talk radio about Karl Rove's resistance to the candidacy of Christine O'Donnell.  It was not all that long ago that people in the tea party were complaining of "party hacks".  I am among them.  I don't want to follow a candidate blindly, that is exactly how we got President Obama.  The average voter did not research on their own. 

There are some serious questions regarding Christine O'Donnell.  Her foreclosure, her lack of income, her being fired by company for using their resources to start her business, and her accusations of being followed and harassed but not reporting this to the police, and her campaign staff allegedly being behind the accusations of Castle being gay.  There very well may be logical explanations to all of these issues.  But wanting answers to these questions is not only our right, but also our responsibilities as voters and people who donate to her campaign. 

Politics is a nasty business.  Like it or not, your entire life is put under a microscope.  Every mistake that you have made will become public fodder.  While I don't think it should necessarily be this way, the reality remains that it is.  This is the exact reason that I NEVER would run for public office. I have way too many things in my past that I would not want printed in the newspapers or talked about on television. 

One of the things that the Tea Party has been saying is that both parties have become too powerful and are more interested in power.  The politico's in Washington are too entrenched, dishonest, and corrupt.  Why then would we automatically back a candidate that has these serious issues to clear up?  Her explanations on these have not been detailed and in many cases have just turned into attacks on other people. 

Rove has stood up and said that if we talk about wanting principled based government, we should only be backing principled based candidates.  Many don't even realize that this is O'Donnell's third attempt at office.  She is not a candidate that was motivated by the "Tea Party" movement to through her hat into the ring.  She is an ambitious flawed woman.  Not there is anything wrong with ambition.  Ambition is a good motivator, especially in a market based economy that we have in America. 

While we are all flawed and there will never be the "perfect" candidate there are some flaws that go directly to question of character.  Honesty is the very least that we should be expect from our candidates and our representatives.  If we just going to say "well, they all lie" than what exactly is the point of what we are doing?  The power to end all of this is in the hands of O'Donnell, she can answer these questions thoroughly and honestly and then move on.  One would think that with all that has been dug up during the primary process, there is nothing more damaging to come out.  If she answers these questions she then can concentrate her efforts on the general election and she may also find that she will start to receive support from the conservatives that have some questions about her honesty and integrity.