Talk radio host Mark Levin is not very happy with my report yesterday on Christine O'Donnell's $6.9 million gender discrimination lawsuit against her former employer, a conservative group called the Intercollegiate Studies Institute. In the 2005 lawsuit, O'Donnell alleged that ISI caused her to suffer severe "mental anguish" by demoting and firing her. O'Donnell also falsely implied in the lawsuit that she was taking master's degree classes at Princeton.
On his Facebook page, Levin defends O'Donnell on many questions raised by yesterday's report (more on that in a moment), but he remains silent on O'Donnell's claim that Castle supporters may have broken into and vandalized O'Donnell's home and office and stole files in 2008. (There was no police report.)
In response to a round of emails Levin initiated with me last week, I asked Levin, O'Donnell's biggest defender, if he cared to defend her against those who claimed she was "delusional" and "paranoid" on these points. Levin replied: "That's ok."
In response to Levin's criticism on Facebook, I emailed him last night while waiting for Mike Castle to show up at Katherine Rooney's Irish Pub in Wilmington:
I contacted O'Donnell's campaign Saturday afternoon to get a response regarding her claim that she was attending master's degree classes at Princeton and ISI's actions prevented her from attending, thereby costing her $150,000 in earning power. The campaign responded by saying that in fact she took one undergraduate class and was not in the master's program.
Do you think it is acceptable for O'Donnell to claim she was in the master's program at Princeton, when in fact she only took one undergraduate [non-matriculated] class?
Does O'Donnell's claim that her house was burglarized and vandalized in 2008, perhaps by Castle supporters, lead you to question her honesty at all? Do you find that story plausible? Do you find it concerning that she did not call the police about this burglary?
Levin's response, in full:
Lol. I think you're an ass. You can quote me.
Sent from my iPhone
Since that doesn't offer much to work with, I'll address the rest of his Facebook post. He writes:
Should O'Donnell win Tuesday's primary, the Democrat will be trolling for opposition dirt to use against her, and he need only Google the Weekly Standard and McCormack in particular. There the Democrats will find all the poison they could ever want...
Does Levin really think that this information wouldn't have come to light if I hadn't reported it? Does he think voters don't have the right to know the details of the lawsuit filed by O'Donnell before going to the polls?
Levin goes on:
Should Castle win the primary and the general, then Castle will be just as liberal in the Senate as he was in the House, which is very liberal, where he'll join Snowe, Collins, Lugar, Graham, and others, in a Gang of Whatever. But it's an outcome the Weekly Standard and McCormack dearly desire, as they've spent a great deal of effort to accomplish this goal.
It's a judgment call for conservatives as to how liberal a Republican can get before reasonable conservatives would want to toss said RINO overboard (see Chafee, Lincoln; Weicker, Lowell). Is Castle more of a Lincoln Chafee or a Scott Brown, who would vote to repeal Obamacare and vote to confirm Supreme Court justices like Samuel Alito? Castle seems to be closer to the latter, but that's not entirely clear.
Of course, ideology isn't all that matters. So does character. And O'Donnell has history of having trouble telling the truth, which brings me to Levin's next point:
McCormack emphasizes that O'Donnell's claim that she was to have attended or attempted to attend Princeton's masters program was bogus because she had not received her B.A. yet. I assume if O'Donnell and her attorney knowingly provided false information in a complaint, that ISI, the organization she sued, successfully filed an ethics complaint against her counsel and successfully sought sanctions against O'Donnell from the court for such a deliberate lie.