Much has been made of Christine O’Donnell’s question on the First Amendment. Many others have well made the point that the First Amendment does not contain the words, “separation of church and state”. Just to make the point, the text is (in part):

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

These words prohibit the Federal government from establishing a religion, and deny the Federal government the power to prohibit religious practices.

The Constitution specifically acknowledges the existence of God, in fact Jesus Christ.

Fairly well known to the American public is the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Less well known, in fact all but unknown, is the postamble:

Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth. In Witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names.

Thus, when the states ratified the Constitution, they were affirming and acknowledging within the Constitution the existence of God and specifically Jesus Christ. This acknowledgement is also given in many of the states’ ratification messages.

Ratification of the Constitution included the following words:

Delaware: “…on the seventeenth day of September, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-seven…”

Pennsylvania: “…the twelfth day of December, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-seven…”

New Jersey: “…this 18th day of December, in the year of our Lord 1787…”

Georgia: “…the 2d day of January, in the year of our Lord 1788…”

Connecticut: “…this 9th day of January, A. D. 1788.”

Massachusetts: “…this 7th day of February, Anno Domini 1788…”

South Carolina: “…the 23d day of May, Anno Domini 1788…”

New Hampshire: “…acknowledging with grateful hearts the goodness of the Supreme Ruler of the universe in affording the people of the United States, in the course of his providence…”

New York: “…the 26th day of July, in the year of our Lord 1788.”

Rhode Island: “…the twenty-ninth day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and ninety…”

Mike Castle is the presumptive nominee for the GOP senatorial seat in Deleware this fall, or at least that’s what conventional wisdom says. That’s what the power brokers say. And that’s what the MainStreamMedia says.

The same folks who insisted that the road back for the GOP lay with Arlen Specter, Charlie Crist, Trey Grayson and Tim Bridgewater are now saying that only Mike Castle can bring to the GOP the pickup of the seat formerly held by Joe “Gaffemeister” Biden.

So, interested in examining just how Mike would advance the conservative, Republican agenda? Well, let’s see what the non-partisan On The Issues and Project Vote Smart have in the way of revealing how Congressman Castle might vote as Senator Castle:

Abortion: Castle has been rated as low as 0% by the National Right to Life Committee having voted Yes on federal funding of embyonic stem cell research, No on resticting the transportation of minors to receive abortions, and Yes on requiring taxpayer-funded military hospitals to provide abortions. Question: Considering Rep. Castle’s pro-choice voting record, would he have a pro-Roe v Wade litmus test for judicial nominees to the federal courts?

Social Issues: Rep. Castle received as low as a 0% rating from the American Family Association and an 18% from the Family Research Council garnered as a result of votes for repealing the Defense of Marriage Ammendment and banning employment discrimination against gays and against a Constitutional Ammendment banning same-sex marriage and ending affirmative action when it comes to admission to a college or university.

2nd Ammendment: Mike Castle received an “F” from the National Rifle Association (I do believe that’s as low as they go). ‘Nuff said.

Energy: Mike Castle voted in favor of the economically detructive government takeover of our energy production misnamed “Cap & Trade” (one of only 8 Republicans to do so) but has repeatedly opposed oil exploration in the forsaken tundra of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Immigration: The anti-illegal immigration group Americans for Better Immigration has rated Castle a C+ overall with grades ranging from an A to an F in individual years.

Taxes & Spending: 57% lifetime average from Citizens Against Government Waste (31% in 2008); the Tea Party-affiliated Freedom Works scored him at 35% in 2007; and the National Taxpayers Union gave Castle a grade of D for the 2008 session (probably because of votes against eliminating the Death Tax and against exempting middle-class taxpayers from the onerous burdens of the Alternative Minimum Tax, a tax enacted in the 1960′s to ensure the top 400 wage earners in the country paid taxes but which now ensnares millions of middle-class filers).

With a record like that, it’s no wonder that Human Events has Mike Castle listed as one of its top ten RINOs (Republicans in Name Only); or that the Club for Growth rated him at 43% in 2009 or the American Conservative Union rated him at 28% in 2008. Just how “Republican” is Mike Castle? Well, in 2008, Castle joined virtually every Democrat in the House to ask a Congressional Committee to investigate whether George Bush lied about invading Iraq and whether that should lead to impeachment procedings.

Now, that’s a rather lengthy exposition of Mike Castle’s decidedly left-of-center voting record and, thus, might be a bit much for the average person to remember off the top of his head. So, with that in mind, perhaps a picture will be worth 488 words:

Yes, that would be Mike Castle joining in applause with pro-life stalwarts Barack Obama, Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Nancy Pelosi as President Obama signed the bill which allows the use of American tax dollars to fund embryonic stem cell research. Apparently, Mike wasn’t content just to vote with the liberal Dems, he found himself like-minded enough and chummy enough to celebrate with them as well.

Now, if that picture gives you a rather nauseous, disgusted feeling in the pit of your stomach, the antidote is that you don’t have to accept electing a person with Mike Castle’s liberal voting record to the Senate because there is an alternative.

And before you go there, everyone said Marco Rubio didn’t have a chance either.

Originally posted at 73wire.com

In 2008 Joe Biden won two elections; he was elected Vice President and he was also re elected to the U.S. Senate from Delaware. Opposing him in that election was conservative Republican Christine O’Donnell. It is both an obstacle and an opportunity for Ms. O’Donnell that many of those who voted for her in 2008 still do not know her. The votes she garnered then were mainly from those who were not buying the “hope & change” scam being peddled by Obama and Biden. At that time, not many voters had woken up to the fact that liberal Republicans were part of the problem. In political terms 2008 is light years behind us. The radical leftist transition that has occurred in this country as a result of the recent Democrat lock on power would not have been possible without the active cooperation, over many years, of career liberal politicians from both parties.

One of the most liberal Republicans in congress has been Rep. Mike Castle from Delaware. He has been a career politician since before Ms. O’Donnell was born. He voted for Nancy Pelosi’s cap and tax energy scheme and also voted for the job-killing minimum wage hike. He voted to increase the national debt and has consistently supported Washington’s reckless spending. Accordingly, he has voted for virtually every tax bill that has crossed his desk including the “death tax.” Mr. Castle is anti life. He has voted to subject children to out-of-state abortions without consent of parents, has voted to use U.S. funds to support Planned Parenthood at home and abroad, has supported human cloning, and sponsored the bill to destroy, exploit and experiment on unborn children. He voted with the Democrats for the federal bailouts and the government takeovers of private industry. Although he did ultimately oppose it, he remained undecided about Obama care until four days before the vote, and he has indicated that he would not work to repeal it.

Mike Castle is quite fond of entitlements. In fact, he now considers himself entitled to the Republican nomination for the U.S. Senate. He has only two problems in this regard. Problem number one is an army of newly minted registered republican activists who have had enough of Mike Castle’s betrayals. Problem number two is a September, 14 Senate primary and Christine O’Donnell.

Christine

In contrast to Mike Castle, Christine O’Donnell is an unapologetic pro life conservative. She is on the right side of every issue that matters. She supports smaller government and lower taxes and the active roll back of recent socialist advances. She is opposed to an activist judiciary. She believes terrorism is an act of war and not a civil crime, and she believes in meaningful school choice. As U.S. Senator from Delaware, Christine O’Donnell would be a courageous conservative leader. She deserves the support of Delaware conservatives and the endorsement of leading national conservatives.