"Christine O'Donnell—the Delaware Republican whose U.S. Senate race made her a national figure in the tea party movement—compared the extension of jobless benefits a "tragedy" on the level of other Dec. 7 tragedies like Pearl Harbor and the death of Elizabeth Edwards."
come on, Tea Party, I understand that you're soulless bastards who don't give a damn about the poor and unemployed but really, you're going to trivialize Pearl Harbor in that way? (Nice of you to elevate the death of Elizabeth Edwards to Pearl Harbor, but even those of us who appreciated what she stood for think it's a little over the top.) But what's next, food stamps are worse than 9/11? Anyway, keep it coming, hopefully this kind of craziness hastens the end of your 15 minutes and finally gets people to ignore you.
ETA: A couple of people have noted that my comment, by using "come on, Tea Party ...", unfairly paints the entire TP based on O'Donnell's stupid remark. Fair enough, I won't try to argue that all Tea partiers believe what her comment would suggest she believes and I shouldn't have suggested that they do. I will maintain, though, that it's important because despite her inclination to say such things and hold such beliefs she seems to have been embraced by the Tea party in general, these comments were made at a Northern Virginia TP gathering at which she'd been invited to speak, and Palin in particular. To what extent does this show that the TP just isn't ready for prime time? To what extent does it reflect general craziness in the TP. (At some point "walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, is a duck", no? Or do we have to keep downplaying every single manifestation of TP craziness as just a single representative who fails to represent the TP?) To what extent is this prioritization of spending cuts over helping the unemployed representative of TP philosophy? To what extent will Christine O'Donnell's comments hurt the TP going forward?
ETA: Actual quote (h/t montanaisaleg ): "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." S/he states it well: " Your local online paper wrote a story about a quote without actually including the quote. You wrote an LJ post about a quote without including the quote. Both of these things are annoying." Agreed, comment below. (this post really sucked, sorry, will try not to let it happen again.)