A little while ago I did a piece on tweeting the fear card, and the attempts of certain supporters of the Democrats in this year’s elections to persuade dissatisfied and angry progressives that severe damage will be done to the country if the Republicans take over the House, the implication being that severe damage will not also be done if the Democrats retain control of the House. As the election has approached the fear card is being supplemented by the guilt card.

We either get past our disappointments over Obama to help elect the best possible candidates between now and November, or cede even more power to the most destructive interests in America.

The latest television ad for Tea Party backed Senatorial candidate, Christine O’Donnell starts with the candidate stating: “I’m not a witch, I’m you.” Oh yeah, hardly.

One can only marvel at the extreme cynicism evident in the Republican Party’s bizarre 21-page “Pledge to America.” The document is only the tip of the iceberg and masks the real agenda of Republican leaders. That agenda remains what it has been for the past generation: transferring more of the nation’s wealth from working families to the wealthiest people in the country.

Christine O’Donnell, one of the Tea Party’s newly minted stars has revealed that she will forgo any further national media coverage so as to” focus on Delaware.” Her last-minute cancellation of two Sunday show appearances two days ago garnered her widespread criticism, see the sources below. O’Donnell said her decision was motivated by advice that she received from Sarah Palin.

Well now that the last of the “Tea Party” primaries is over, one can only wonder what people on the right were thinking when they voted for Christine O’Donnell in Delaware. Didn’t William F. Buckley, the scion of the post World War II conservative movement lecture the faithful on the need to nominate the most electable conservatives?

In two previous articles, “Maintain Tax Cuts for the Rich? Americans Don’t Seem to Buy the Conservative Argument” and the “Efficacy of Tax Cuts Is now Questioned” I laid out two basic premises. One was that a majority of the American people did not buy into the conservative argument that tax cuts had to be maintained for the richest among us. The second was that the use of tax cuts in this type of economic downturn had been called into question by some very prominent economists and that those same economists just happen to be on the right side of the political spectrum.

Tea Party candidate Christine O’Donnell’s victory over nine-term Rep. Mike Castle in Delaware’s Republican Senate primary Tuesday night may have been a signal that a significant number of Delaware citizens are willing to support candidates who like to preach to Americans on what they should and should not do sexually.

The other day, in one of their e-mails, Democracy For America (DFA) posed the choice for me in the 2010 elections this way:

This election, the choice is clear:

* Republicans like John Boehner and Mitch McConnell want to retain the Bush-Cheney reckless tax cuts for the wealthy that created out of control budget deficits and lead America into a jobs-losing recession.

* Democrats like Barack Obama and Patrick Leahy want to return to the booming Clinton-Gore economy that led to balanced budgets and created over 22 million new jobs.

Thanks to advances in Internet technologies, the obstacles the major parties and their special interest backers have erected to prevent voters from ousting their incumbents can be circumvented by voters who leverage the large scale collective action power of the Internet via the web application described in this series to get control of U.S. electoral processes. This application, the Interactive Voter Choice System (IVCS), enables dissatisfied voters to self-organize and build voting blocs and electoral coalitions that can run winning candidates in local Congressional elections without special interest funding. The voting blocs and coalitions will be able to run candidates who can defeat special interest-backed candidates, wealthy self-funded candidates, and candidates run by special interest-backed voting blocs, such as the Tea Party, because they will be able to set transpartisan agendas that appeal to a broader-cross section of voters. These voters will decide who they want to run and what their candidates’ agendas will be.