Election 2010: Teabaggin' the Ds & Rs

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Up until the last point, she's on solid ground. The First Amendment says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...." It doesn't say that church and state shall be separate.

On the last point, maybe she stepped in it, but it depends on what Coons said, which Forbes doesn't tell you.

I think the real issue here is that a lot of people think the phrase, "the separation of church and state," comes from the Constitution, rather than an 1802 letter from Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association. Do you think Coons wasn't one of them?

eta: I will agree that the exchange shows that O'Donnell gets all of her information from the fringe, and doesn't understand how most people think about the issue, but that doesn't mean the fringe is necessarily wrong here.

Did you watch the debate? Maybe she has an aide who understands the subtleties you are outlining. She, quite clearly, does not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miwSljJAzqg

TM

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Did you watch the debate? Maybe she has an aide who understands the subtleties you are outlining. She, quite clearly, does not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miwSljJAzqg

TM

True, but in her defense it appears she finally read some SCOTUS decisions. Notably, the ones where they have always said that it is up to local school boards to decide whether they want to teach Creationism. I mean "intelligent design."

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Did you watch the debate? Maybe she has an aide who understands the subtleties you are outlining. She, quite clearly, does not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miwSljJAzqg

TM

Okay, I just watched that whole thing. Holy shit. Holy fucking shit, this woman could end up a Senator. Hell, she could end up as the next R candidate for President, at this rate.

She actually contested the statement that the First Amendment says Congress shall make no establishment of religion. She actually suggested that the First Amendment doesn't say that. And she sat there, smiling and nodding smugly, as if she'd made some brilliant point, even as everyone was laughing at her.

O'Donnell, 175. Reality, 0.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

You're suggesting that she had an argument about what "establishment" means when it seems that she didn't have a clue that there was an establishment clause.

Please read what she said again. Coons said something about the separation of church and state, so she asked, "Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" The audience then laughed, because she is a joke and they thought they'd heard a punchline, but she was correct: "separation of church and state is not in the Constitution." The phrase apparently originates a few years later (in the next century!) with Thomas Jefferson, in a letter he wrote in 1802.

The Establishment Clause is widely understood to require the separation of church and state, but that is a question of doctrine and interpretation, not something that's in the First Amendment.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

Okay, I just watched that whole thing. Holy shit. Holy fucking shit, this woman could end up a Senator. Hell, she could end up as the next R candidate for President, at this rate.

She actually contested the statement that the First Amendment says Congress shall make no establishment of religion. She actually suggested that the First Amendment doesn't say that. And she sat there, smiling and nodding smugly, as if she'd made some brilliant point, even as everyone was laughing at her.

O'Donnell, 175. Reality, 0.

Just to be clear, I'm not defending her there. Clearly, she remembered being told by that Claremont group that "separation of church and state" is not in the Constitution, and she was right. She just didn't understand why.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Did you watch the debate? Maybe she has an aide who understands the subtleties you are outlining. She, quite clearly, does not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miwSljJAzqg

TM

I didn't see the debate, only the Forbes article I quoted. I agree that she is in way, way over her head.

I think Democrats are having fun paying attention to the Delaware Senate race because it allows them to ignore briefly the coming onslaught everywhere else.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Please read what she said again. Coons said something about the separation of church and state, so she asked, "Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" The audience then laughed, because she is a joke and they thought they'd heard a punchline, but she was correct: "separation of church and state is not in the Constitution." The phrase apparently originates a few years later (in the next century!) with Thomas Jefferson, in a letter he wrote in 1802.

The Establishment Clause is widely understood to require the separation of church and state, but that is a question of doctrine and interpretation, not something that's in the First Amendment.

Watch the video. She is right the first time. She is wrong the second time when Coons paraphrases the establishment clause - a bit clumbsily, but essentially correctly - and she responds "that's in the first amendment? Really?" (paraphrasing) and sits there with an extended smug grin.

And even the first time she isn't as right as she thinks she is as Coons makes clear that the phrase comes from the Supreme Court's interpretation (leaving aside that they borrowed it from Jefferson), and that settled law should be respected.

[Penske 2.0]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I didn't see the debate, only the Forbes article I quoted. I agree that she is in way, way over her head.

I think Democrats are having fun paying attention to the Delaware Senate race because it allows them to ignore briefly the coming onslaught everywhere else.

2. I'm not sure why anyone cares about this race. She is a goner, although she will certainly cash on her 15 minutes of fame.

Also, just in case anyone had any doubts, I would sexxxx her, if for no other reason than my fantasy to do a witch.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Please read what she said again. Coons said something about the separation of church and state, so she asked, "Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" The audience then laughed, because she is a joke and they thought they'd heard a punchline, but she was correct: "separation of church and state is not in the Constitution." The phrase apparently originates a few years later (in the next century!) with Thomas Jefferson, in a letter he wrote in 1802.

The Establishment Clause is widely understood to require the separation of church and state, but that is a question of doctrine and interpretation, not something that's in the First Amendment.

Then Chris recited the establishment clause for her and she said something to the effect of, "That's in the first amendment?".

Ty, you're working WAY too hard to avoid the conclusion that she's THAT stupid. Did you sleep with her?

[Penske 2.0]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

I'll grant you that one.

Tried a Croatian wine the other night, that I'd bought on a whim. 2003 Bura. Heavy, but damn good. I may have to buy some more, it'd go well with a serious meat dish (venison, lamb, roadkill, something like that).

Rite on! I will look for that. I am always game, npi, for expanding my geographic horizons.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Adder

Watch the video. She is right the first time. She is wrong the second time when Coons paraphrases the establishment clause - a bit clumbsily, but essentially correctly - and she responds "that's in the first amendment? Really?" (paraphrasing) and sits there with an extended smug grin.

And even the first time she isn't as right as she thinks she is as Coons makes clear that the phrase comes from the Supreme Court's interpretation (leaving aside that they borrowed it from Jefferson), and that settled law should be respected.

OK. I'm not currently in a position to watch the video, so I will take your word for it. She well deserves to be mocked for other things she has said, but she was right when she said it the first time, but she lacks the ability to explain her out-there views to others who aren't true believers.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Just to be clear, I'm not defending her there. Clearly, she remembered being told by that Claremont group that "separation of church and state" is not in the Constitution, and she was right. She just didn't understand why.

That's right, and unlike her Coons understood it exactly. He didn't claim that the First Amendment says "there must be separation of church and state," he paraphrased the Establishment Clause and talked about how it's been applied by the Supreme Court.

She wasn't attacking Supreme Court decisions. She was attacking an overreaching Congress, claiming that they were going well beyond what the Supreme Court has allowed and claiming that the Supreme Court has said that decisions on teaching creationism should be made by local school boards. When he tried to engage on that discussion, she went into her "it says that?" mode.

It was like watching someone explain quantum mechanics to a drunk who keeps saying "Quark? Isn't he the guy on Star Trek?"

[Penske 2.0]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

Try a Georgian white sometime.

Had some. Good stuff.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

OK. I'm not currently in a position to watch the video, so I will take your word for it. She well deserves to be mocked for other things she has said, but she was right when she said it the first time, but she lacks the ability to explain her out-there views to others who aren't true believers.

Ty, she wasn't right. If she had meant what you seem to want to think she meant, then she would have been right. But she was claiming that the notion of separation of church and state has no constitutional basis.

[Penske 2.0]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Ty, you're working WAY too hard to avoid the conclusion that she's THAT stupid. Did you sleep with her?

Sloppy seconds to another PB Mod are a deal breaker for me. No offence.