- Joined
- Mar 27, 2009
- Messages
- 11,963
- Reaction score
- 3,543
- Location
- Naperville, IL
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Coons said that creationism, which he considers "a religious doctrine," should not be taught in public schools due to the Constitution's First Amendment. He argued that it explicitly enumerates the separation of church and state.
"The First Amendment does?" O'Donnell asked. "Let me just clarify: You're telling me that the separation of church and state is found in the First Amendment?"
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," Coons responded, reciting from memory the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
"That's in the First Amendment...?" O'Donnell responded.
Christine O'Donnell: "Where in the Constitution is the Separation of Church and State?"
There really are no words... No wonder Karl R. was so pissed when this nitwit O'Donnell got the nomination.
Only the water wings saved her.but she's not a witch.
She doesn't just question the "separation of church and state," she questions the establishment clause itself. Let's make that very clear. It is obvious that she is completely oblivious to the nuanced distinction between "separation" and and "establishment." Why people keeping making this about the meaning of the establishment clause is beyond me. She doesn't know about it at all. Here are her exact words.
O'Donnell: "You're telling me that separation of church and state is found in the first amendment?"
Coons: "Government shall make no establishment of religion."
O'Donnell: "That's in the first amendment?"
The tea-partiers are just going to have to face up to the fact that they've got a candidate who's even more clueless than Palin.
She doesn't just question the "separation of church and state," she questions the establishment clause itself. Let's make that very clear. It is obvious that she is completely oblivious to the nuanced distinction between "separation" and and "establishment." Why people keeping making this about the meaning of the establishment clause is beyond me. She doesn't know about it at all. Here are her exact words.
O'Donnell: "You're telling me that separation of church and state is found in the first amendment?"
Coons: "Government shall make no establishment of religion."
O'Donnell: "That's in the first amendment?"
The tea-partiers are just going to have to face up to the fact that they've got a candidate who's even more clueless than Palin.
She doesn't just question the "separation of church and state," she questions the establishment clause itself. Let's make that very clear. It is obvious that she is completely oblivious to the nuanced distinction between "separation" and and "establishment." Why people keeping making this about the meaning of the establishment clause is beyond me. She doesn't know about it at all. Here are her exact words.
O'Donnell: "You're telling me that separation of church and state is found in the first amendment?"
Coons: "Government shall make no establishment of religion."
O'Donnell: "That's in the first amendment?"
The tea-partiers are just going to have to face up to the fact that they've got a candidate who's even more clueless than Palin.
Nah, I think you're reaching. Listen, I don't like Christine O'Donnell at all and I don't think she's very smart. But she's been a conservative for a long time and it's been drilled into her brain that the founding fathers never meant to separate church and state. She's making that point here. Did you listen to the audio? She's not saying "the first amendment does?" as if to say: "really, are you sure?" She's saying it as an "oh really, I beg to differ" kind of thing.
There are better things to attack her on. I sincerely doubt that she's unaware of the establishment clause.
But she said it right there. I understand that she has had talking points drilled into her
You're right, she's asking it in an "I beg to differ" kind of way. And that just makes it worse for her, because she's trying to say "Gotcha" to Coons when, in fact, Coons had just quoted the first amendment almost verbatim. Look at the transcript. Coons says "Government shall make no establishment of religion." Then O'Donnell comes in with the "Oh really?" Yeah, really, the first amendment really says that the government shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion. O'Donnell did not understand that the establishment clause exists, all she understands is that the words "separation of church and state" aren't in the Constitution. In this cartoonist's opinion, that just ain't good enough for a senator.
There are plenty of better things to attack her on, I agree, but this is one that needs to be hammered home to the Tea-Partiers for their own good. This is the type of person they are voting for, and they don't know that Africa is a continent or that the Establishment Clause is contained in the first amendment.
hammering it home just makes you look like a mouth foaming hack. Coon gaffed right after her. To come after ALL of the tea party for her arguable gaffe reeks of partisan hackery.
Nonsense. Coons didn't gaffe, he just made an argument you don't agree with. I personally don't agree with Coons either, he didn't look like a Constitutional law scholar out there but at least he didn't look like a moron. He knew the basics of what he was talking about, whether you agree with him or not you have to at least concede that much (or maybe a mouthfoamer like the good Rev can't be objective enough for that?).
O’Donnell was later able to score some points of her own off the remark, revisiting the issue to ask Coons if he could identify the “five freedoms guaranteed in the First Amendment.”
Coons named the separation of church and state, but could not identify the others — the freedoms of speech, press, to assemble and petition — and asked that O’Donnell allow the moderators ask the questions.
“I guess he can’t,” O’Donnell said.
Read more: Christine O?Donnell questions First Amendment, separation of church and state - Andy Barr - POLITICO.com
O'Donnell, on the other hand, is clearly out of her depth just talking about the constitution. There's a big difference. O'Donnell has lowered the bar for serious senatorial candidates. The Tea-Partiers should just change their name to the Know-Nothing party and be done with it.
But she said it right there. I understand that she has had talking points drilled into her
You're right, she's asking it in an "I beg to differ" kind of way. And that just makes it worse for her, because she's trying to say "Gotcha" to Coons when, in fact, Coons had just quoted the first amendment almost verbatim. Look at the transcript. Coons says "Government shall make no establishment of religion." Then O'Donnell comes in with the "Oh really?" Yeah, really, the first amendment really says that the government shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion. O'Donnell did not understand that the establishment clause exists, all she understands is that the words "separation of church and state" aren't in the Constitution. In this cartoonist's opinion, that just ain't good enough for a senator.
There are plenty of better things to attack her on, I agree, but this is one that needs to be hammered home to the Tea-Partiers for their own good. This is the type of person they are voting for, and they don't know that Africa is a continent or that the Establishment Clause is contained in the first amendment.
Nah, I think you're reaching. Listen, I don't like Christine O'Donnell at all and I don't think she's very smart. But she's been a conservative for a long time and it's been drilled into her brain that the founding fathers never meant to separate church and state. She's making that point here. Did you listen to the audio? She's not saying "the first amendment does?" as if to say: "really, are you sure?" She's saying it as an "oh really, I beg to differ" kind of thing.
There are better things to attack her on. I sincerely doubt that she's unaware of the establishment clause.
Who you calling a mouth foamer. The gaffe is right there for all to see and only one of you even has acknowledged it. Again, I am not a fan of O'donnell but the partisan hackery of the usual suspects seems even more rabid if at all possible.
What she reveals is a complete ignorance for constitutional law precedent, and over 25 SCOTUS rulings, etc.
She may be able to point out the word 'establishment' in the first amendment, but she can't even begin to explain what it means or why it's important.
Teabaggers sure know how to pick 'em... :roll: Everyday another Teabag idiot candidate steps in it.
Yeah if you watch the video it tells you a lot more. Christine O'Donnell says she isn't familiar with the 15th or 16th amendments. She knows the 14th and 17th.
I can't find the part of the debate where she asks him about the five freedoms found in the first amendment. But until you've seen it, I wouldn't assume that he was stumped. Even if you don't like him, he's not stupid, he's definitely read the constitution and probably knows it better than you or I. So it may not have been that he was "stumped," he probably just refused to answer. But find the video or the audio for proof and we'll see.
You want to bet a forum donation on it?
It's too subjective, there's a chance we'd disagree. But count me in for future forum donation bets, that's a great idea.
Coons named the separation of church and state, but could not identify the others — the freedoms of speech, press, to assemble and petition — and asked that O’Donnell allow the moderators ask the questions.
Who you calling a mouth foamer. The gaffe is right there for all to see and only one of you even has acknowledged it. Again, I am not a fan of O'donnell but the partisan hackery of the usual suspects seems even more rabid if at all possible.
it appears the mouth foamer comment was in reference to you; isn't that an expression you commonly use?
so, point out the portion of the video where coons committed the gaffe you insist he made:
YouTube - Christine O'Donnell ignorant of the Constitution (go to 7:03, 2:37, 3:35) fameappeal.com
How about you chief, you want to put a forum donation bet on it? The whole thing will be up any day, as will the transcript.... put your money where your mouth is.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?