Glenn Reynolds, at 8:58 this morning, writing about the aftermath of the Delaware Republican Senate primary, in which his preferred candidate, Christine O’Donnell, questioned the masculinity of her opponent, Mike Castle. (She called him “un-manly” and told him to “get your man-pants on” while a team of her former campaign consultants invented a rumor that he was “cheating on his wife with a man.”)
Try to avoid the personal infighting. People forgive disagreements, but they never forget personal insults, and it makes it harder to work together in the future, even on things where you agree. That’s quite damaging to a party or movement over time.
LOSER: Castle Will Not Endorse O’Donnell. See, everyone said the Tea Party folks would be the angry spoilers, but again and again its the insider GOP types who are taking their balls and going home.
UPDATE: “What balls?” write a whole bunch of readers. And one adds: “Sorry. Low hanging fruit, I know. Oops. Did it again. I better stop!”
This sort of stuff always puzzles me. One day before his lecture on civility, Reynolds calls Castle a “loser.” Shortly thereafter, he decides to quote reader comments mocking Castle (who is married and apparently straight) as a eunuch and a “fruit.”
All I can think of is that someone told Reynolds that consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds, and he’s trying to provide a counter-example. But he can’t really think that gay-baiting is funny. Can he?
Update Post corrected per reader comment to fix an error about timing.