Political experts from Governor Chris Christie (conservative) to commentator Joe Scarborough (not so conservative) have all decided that Sarah Palin and Jim DeMint are responsible for the Republicans failing to take the Senate in this election because they backed more conservative candidates like Sharron Angle and Christine O'Donnell.

It's interesting that neither feel the need to point out that without them, the Republicans wouldn't have controlled the Senate because they would have lost in more conservative states.  It's a peculiar omission to say the least.

But I understand the logic behind their frustration.  I just don't agree with it.

Neither does Jedediah Bila:

O'Donnell wasn't a "perfect" candidate?and I defy anyone to find someone who is?but she was definitely the only conservative running in the Delaware Senate race. One can't help but ponder why any self-proclaimed conservative would have endorsed Castle, who has consistently received an F rating from the NRA and Gun Owners of America, a 0 from the National Right to Life, and a perfect 100% from Planned Parenthood and NARAL. He also earned a 43% from Club for Growth for 2009. In fact, as RedState pointed out in September, "In every year, Castle has had the most liberal voting record of any member of the 175+ Republican [CFG] caucus."

One also can't help but wonder who would fit into [another anti-Palin voice, former George W. Bush speechwriter Michael] Gerson's label of "serious, mainstream Republican Senate candidates." Does he mean "serious" and "mainstream" as in pro-bailout, pro-abortion, pro-cap-and-tax, pro-amnesty "Republican" Lisa Murkowski? Last I checked, plenty of "serious, mainstream" Republicans helped get us into the economic and Constitution-bashing mess we're in.

Neither does conservative radio host Mark Levin, who offered perhaps one of the best explanations of why principle matters more than party: 

"Mike Castle would've been a disaster. He's been a disaster. And now at least Delaware can work hard to find a candidate to defeat this guy Coons in two years and keep trying. You may not succeed, but you can keep trying. Arnold Schwarzenegger was a Republican Governor of California. He was a disaster. I mean, he ruled like a Democrat. This is the problem. You cannot advance core principles; you cannot take a fundamental stand against this kind of radicalism, if you're all over the map and yet pretend not to be. And I'm discussing this because we have a long way to go. This battle's gonna be very, very difficult within the Republican Party, within the conservative movement, and in the general society. And there are gonna be those who contribute to it and those who basically don't."

 

 

...

 

"And so, what's needed is perspective. [In] 1976 . Ronald Reagan was running against Gerald Ford. There were conservatives all over the country who were lining up behind Gerald Ford. ?Reagan's too extreme, Reagan is a B actor, Reagan is this, Reagan is that, he can't win, he can't win.' He almost beat Ford."

 

...

 

"He [Reagan] had no stomach for the Republican fraternity?and that's what he'd call it, none. He had to overcome them in order to get the nomination and get elected as President. . When Reagan lost in '76, the Republican establishment opposed him in 1980 again. They threw four, five candidates at him, including George H. W. Bush. It didn't work. Almost worked, by the way, but it didn't work. It didn't work. These are the sort of battles we're gonna have to continue to fight."

One of the major reasons Republicans lost the majority, thereby ushering in this most disastrous socialist movement, was because unprincipled Republicans began siding with the left and betraying the foundations that birthed their majority in the first place.  Had people like Castle and Murkowski and others been embraced by the Party simply to get a majority, it would only have ensured the same thing would happen again.

It's not purity.  It's principle.