Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Anderson Cooper reminds Christine O'Donnell that if she is going to run on her expertise concerning the Constitution, that indeed that "expertise" ought to actually exist.
It seems to me that ALL of these Teabaggers are running on their "bring America back to its Constitutional roots" platform when I would be willing to bet that almost every one of them is as ignorant of that particular document as Christine O'Donnell has demonstrated herself to be.
I think that every candidate running on this theme needs to be asked, on camera, questions about their understanding of the Constitution and which amendments they would like to see repealed.
That sounds fair to me. Don't you agree?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
http://gawker.com/5669077/watch-sarah-palin-desecrate-a-flag
ReplyDeleteAnd not just answer what amendments the want to repeal and add but discuss in a detailed manner what the impact would actually be.
ReplyDeleteThings like if you want a government that forces a religion on people what would that religion be?
Christians can't agree among themselves, Catholics slaughtered each other with as much enthusiasm as they did the "infidels" for almost 2000 years. Jews can't agree among themselves and they slaughtered each other for a couple thousand years.
Hell, the Christians that insist on mandationing prayer in school can't even come up with a prayer that doesn't offend some bunch or other of Christians.
Yes. It's downright scary what these amateur wingnuts are ignorant of...
ReplyDeleteDred Scott? Really?
Also, too, love the snark in the closing question from the article - she did ask for a hint. Haha.
Anonymous @ 2:29PM
ReplyDeleteBingo.
I say rather than amending the Constitution, or altering U.S. Government to accept a single state religion - just continue, in a more robust manner, the current methods. Home-schooling, church-schooling, etc.
Oh, and hey teatard morons! Good luck getting a good 21st century job with your anachronistic academic backgrounds. FTW!
Here we go:
ReplyDeleteStart Talking, Joe
On the Ed Show tonite, it stated that no charges would be brought against the guards who handcuff the reporter. And he is not pressing charges.
ReplyDeleteYeah well she can't even spell her own name.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.blameitonthevoices.com/2010/10/major-fail-of-day-electchristineodonnel.html
absolutely fair. these are some of the many questions that need asking. not all this mumbo jumbo on the periphery, except where character and ethical living are concerned. we have a right to know whether a candidate really lives their values. or just expects us to, like sir newt gingrich and granny palin.
ReplyDeleteThese reactionary twits only seem to care for the 2nd Amendment. Perhaps we should, literally, thank God that "Thou shall bear arms" never found it's way into the Ten Commandments.
ReplyDeleteThank God, also, for all the Freemason and Deist Founding Fathers!
IF you really spend more than ten seconds, most of it laughing yourself into a stupor, thinking about the line that Ms. O'Donnell has painted for herself it's actually nerve-end numbing...
ReplyDeleteThe BASICS of what she is saying is that since the founding of the country and the issuance OF the Bill or Rights and the US Constitution that NONE, NONE of the LAW that has been ruled on, fought over and blood spilled in almost every state within our boarders for, means NOTHING.. She stipulates (if we're splitting technicalities here) that ALL ESTABLISHED LAW has no meaning... If every decision she makes is based strictly on the Constitution, her understanding of what a Nation is, explodes her basic ignorance of reality into full blown, glaring stupidity..
How on earth people can actually support this loon is stunning.
Hey Gryphen,
ReplyDeleteOT...Did you see this on HP today? It's about how the Tea Party was hijacked by corporate interests. Very interesting....
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/20/karl-denninger-tea-party_n_770108.html
rachel maddow and anna marie cox had some insights, that christine thought he had "gotten" coons on his silly liberal separation of church and state thingy, and she was laughing at him with the audience, nearly doing a palin wink. then she persisted, trying to further walk coons into his crazy sep of church and state corner. after watching some of her politically incorrect (the maher show) performances, i have to say that i agree with them that she thought she had triumphed over coons.
ReplyDeletethe stupidity never stops with sarah as the fairy godmother from the north.
Even if by some slim chance she had latched on the the fact that the words "separation of church and state" isn't in the first amendment, why didn't she actually say that? Instead, she kept repeating "that's in the first amendment?" This is the "constitutional government expert?"
ReplyDeleteThank you, Anderson Cooper for so clearly stating the truth, COD is a dipshit grifter.
I think they all need to be asked about the Constitution, too--after they've all had a thorough mental health evaluation!
ReplyDeletesallyngarland,tx
COD's so moronic I couldn't listen to all of it. It is distressing that she actually won her Primary (also Joe Miller). The Tea Party has turned themselves into a global joke. Come November, I hope the electorate does the right thing and defeats all these TP imbeciles.
ReplyDeleteI read Rush Limbaugh's asinine defense of her--which basically focused on the fact that the words "separation of church and state" don't appear in the First Amendment. But I don't see how anyone could watch the video and think that's what she meant. She clearly has no idea what the First Amendment says, and it's almost like she'd never even heard it before Coons started quoting it.
ReplyDelete@Newmom - in the debate, COD said "What I will support in Washington, D.C. is the ability for the local school system to decide what is taught in their classrooms and what I was talking about on that show was a classroom that was not allowed to teach creationism as an equal theory as evolution. That is against their constitutional rights and that is an overreaching arm of the government."
ReplyDeleteUmmm ... no.
In Edwards v. Aquillard, 107 S. Ct. 2573 (1987)
The justices ruled that it was "unconstitutional for state to require teaching of "creation science" in all instances in which evolution is taught. Statute had a clear religious motivation."
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/church-state/decisions.html
PA_John
that clip is priceless and i hope lots of people see it, especially those in her state.
ReplyDeleteNot only is Palin and COD a joke to the world as Americans, but a horrible representation of women.
Thanks, PA_John
ReplyDelete