Christine O'Donnell doesn't know the first amendment

video

I haven't really been paying attention to her. I kinda figured it was just Palin M.II, but....wow.

There's also the problem of not knowing the difference between a scientific theory and a "theory" as used by a layman, but that's almost expected.|||Some people need to die in a fire.|||She's a real winner.

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

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/...ntary-11651412|||She only talks over the other guy...|||Quote:




video




Fail.




Quote:




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




Seems to be her belief, fine by me; even if she put on a campaign against it.

...

(I Rachel Maddow)


Quote:




http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/...ntary-11651412




What is the problem (?) with politicians and the English language? It became "un-funny" for me a while back now.|||Wow, just wow. There should be a minimum requirement of IQ or CV or something to get into leadership positions.|||Day late and a dollar short, as usual?


Quote:








Amazing. Delaware senatorial candidate, Chris Coons, couldn’t name the freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment in a recent debate – so, naturally, his opponent, Christine O’Donnell, was labeled ignorant by the mainstrea media.

Not surprising. In fact, I believe that most journalistic stylebooks define “ignorant” as “a conservative Christian who refuses to sit down and be quiet.” Same with “crazy,” “unhinged,” and “dangerous.” In fact, I’ve heard that it’s a pre-programmed macro on every word processor at the New York Times.

The most recent avalanche of O’Donnell bashing started when Coons cited separation of church and state to justify big fat federal government interfering in the business of local school boards. Since James Madison couldn’t be there to backhand him, O’Donnell rose to the challenge.

She demanded a specific constitutional reference, and was promptly punished with derisive snickers from the audience and a renewed frenzy of gleeful name-calling throughout the blogosphere.

**********************

Of course, this makes Coons the golden boy, despite his definitely creepy response to O’Donnell’s question: that case law nullifies much of the First Amendment, making previously “inalienable” rights contingent on age, location, and wantedness; and chucking the notion of “free exercise” of religion – in short airily reducing the crown jewel of our liberty into a permission slip to muzzle Christians and incinerate the tiny, helpless, and unwanted.




Considering her opponent didn't even know the five freedoms it guarantees, the dishonesty in all the claims (and responses here) is staggering. But not at all unexpected. Wank away.


Quote:








Some people need to die in a fire.




Ah, Leftist tolerance, what would the world be without it?|||YAWWWWN!

Sorry, whatwasat?



-Art|||Quote:








Wow, just wow. There should be a minimum requirement of IQ or CV or something to get into leadership positions.




Oh, but we can't have THAT! Go die in a fire, evil elitist oppressor! Democracy means everyone can be a leader, together! As long as I'm more leader than everyone else.





On a somewhat less sarcastic note, who is Christine O'Donnell? (And yes, she is an idiot.)|||I don't think she realized that people were laughing at her and not with her.

Palin-O'Donnell 2012, Baby!