O'Donnell (O'Donnell Bush Master Thread)

[Kat Kid]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miwSljJAzqg&feature=player_embedded#!

Apparently she didn't get the memo from Palin and Angle that you should only speak to an audience of your own choosing.

[Testy Westy]

I love how she thinks people are laughing with her.

[Jeffy]

And to think that she's by far the better candidate in that district is quite disturbing.

[Rage Against the McKee]

And to think that she's by far the better candidate in that district is quite disturbing.

Somebody that stupid is never the better candidate. You are just as bad as the people who keep voting for Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi.

[Kat Kid]

And to think that she's by far the better candidate in that district is quite disturbing.

On what grounds?

[Sugar Dick]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miwSljJAzqg&feature=player_embedded#!

Apparently she didn't get the memo from Palin, Angle, Obama, Pelosi, and every other politician known to man, that you should only speak to an audience of your own choosing.

FYP

I'm actually kind of glad Obama quit having those phony "town hall" meetings.  It was really embarrassing for everyone from the Pres., to the media, to the country in general.  Quite insulting to the general public.  But then again what do you expect from that ass clown?

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

I love how she thinks people are laughing with her.

What's funny is she is she was right.

[Jeffy]

And to think that she's by far the better candidate in that district is quite disturbing.

On what grounds?

Chris Coons.

[Testy Westy]

I love how she thinks people are laughing with her.

What's funny is she is she was right.

ok....

[mortons toe]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miwSljJAzqg&feature=player_embedded#!

Apparently she didn't get the memo from Palin, Angle, Obama, Pelosi, and every other politician known to man, that you should only speak to an audience of your own choosing.

FYP

I'm actually kind of glad Obama quit having those phony "town hall" meetings.  It was really embarrassing for everyone from the Pres., to the media, to the country in general.  Quite insulting to the general public.  But then again what do you expect from that ass clown?

something along these lines, maybe?

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

I love how she thinks people are laughing with her.

What's funny is she is she was right.

ok....

You are welcome to find the specific phrase in the Constitution and post it here.

[Testy Westy]

I love how she thinks people are laughing with her.

What's funny is she is she was right.

ok....

You are welcome to find the specific phrase in the Constitution and post it here.

You really think that is what she was arguing?  That it literally does not say that.  She was clueless and didn't think there was anything in the constitution remotely tied to it.  I mean, she didn't even know what two amendments were (not including the first).

[Kat Kid]

I love how she thinks people are laughing with her.

What's funny is she is she was right.

ok....

You are welcome to find the specific phrase in the Constitution and post it here.

She didn't make that argument.  Conceding that there is language that liberals often argue means there is a separation would be a good opener to a point about why she thinks that is wrong, or why it has been perverted by activist judges.  If she did understand that, she did a horrific job of illustrating a grade school, middle school or high school level of understanding.

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

I love how she thinks people are laughing with her.

What's funny is she is she was right.

ok....

You are welcome to find the specific phrase in the Constitution and post it here.

She didn't make that argument.  Conceding that there is language that liberals often argue means there is a separation would be a good opener to a point about why she thinks that is wrong, or why it has been perverted by activist judges.  If she did understand that, she did a horrific job of illustrating a grade school, middle school or high school level of understanding.

Since you want to guess what she was thinking, I am going to guess that the gasping, laughing audience believes it is written in black and white within the constitution. I am not apologist for her, but this is another non-story dredged up by a blogger.

[Rage Against the McKee]

I love how she thinks people are laughing with her.

What's funny is she is she was right.

ok....

You are welcome to find the specific phrase in the Constitution and post it here.

She didn't make that argument.  Conceding that there is language that liberals often argue means there is a separation would be a good opener to a point about why she thinks that is wrong, or why it has been perverted by activist judges.  If she did understand that, she did a horrific job of illustrating a grade school, middle school or high school level of understanding.

Since you want to guess what she was thinking, I am going to guess that the gasping, laughing audience believes it is written in black and white within the constitution. I am not apologist for her, but this is another non-story dredged up by a blogger.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

So how, exactly, do you interpret this statement?

It's also ridiculous that she belongs to a party that wants to repeal the 14th, 16th, and 17th amendments, and she doesn't even know what those amendments are.

[Kat Kid]

I love how she thinks people are laughing with her.

What's funny is she is she was right.

ok....

You are welcome to find the specific phrase in the Constitution and post it here.

She didn't make that argument.  Conceding that there is language that liberals often argue means there is a separation would be a good opener to a point about why she thinks that is wrong, or why it has been perverted by activist judges.  If she did understand that, she did a horrific job of illustrating a grade school, middle school or high school level of understanding.

Since you want to guess what she was thinking, I am going to guess that the gasping, laughing audience believes it is written in black and white within the constitution. I am not apologist for her, but this is another non-story dredged up by a blogger.

Ok.  I mean the Constitution is kind of her thing.  I just would've expected her to have a better command of the Bill of Rights.

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

I love how she thinks people are laughing with her.

What's funny is she is she was right.

ok....

You are welcome to find the specific phrase in the Constitution and post it here.

She didn't make that argument.  Conceding that there is language that liberals often argue means there is a separation would be a good opener to a point about why she thinks that is wrong, or why it has been perverted by activist judges.  If she did understand that, she did a horrific job of illustrating a grade school, middle school or high school level of understanding.

Since you want to guess what she was thinking, I am going to guess that the gasping, laughing audience believes it is written in black and white within the constitution. I am not apologist for her, but this is another non-story dredged up by a blogger.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

So how, exactly, do you interpret this statement?

It's also ridiculous that she belongs to a party that wants to repeal the 14th, 16th, and 17th amendments, and she doesn't even know what those amendments are.

I think I interpret it in the same way the founders did. They came to this country to escape the national church of England, and specifically included your quote to make sure there would never be a national church here. I am all for separation of church and state, by the way, and the supreme court has ruled on the issue, but it is not specifically covered in the constitution.

[Rage Against the McKee]

I love how she thinks people are laughing with her.

What's funny is she is she was right.

ok....

You are welcome to find the specific phrase in the Constitution and post it here.

She didn't make that argument.  Conceding that there is language that liberals often argue means there is a separation would be a good opener to a point about why she thinks that is wrong, or why it has been perverted by activist judges.  If she did understand that, she did a horrific job of illustrating a grade school, middle school or high school level of understanding.

Since you want to guess what she was thinking, I am going to guess that the gasping, laughing audience believes it is written in black and white within the constitution. I am not apologist for her, but this is another non-story dredged up by a blogger.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

So how, exactly, do you interpret this statement?

It's also ridiculous that she belongs to a party that wants to repeal the 14th, 16th, and 17th amendments, and she doesn't even know what those amendments are.

I think I interpret it in the same way the founders did. They came to this country to escape the national church of England, and specifically included your quote to make sure there would never be a national church here. I am all for separation of church and state, by the way, and the supreme court has ruled on the issue, but it is not specifically covered in the constitution.

So you don't think that a state-funded school teaching religious beliefs is in any way establishing that religion?

[Rage Against the McKee]

I think I interpret it in the same way the founders did.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State.

[Sugar Dick]

I think I interpret it in the same way the founders did.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State.

this helps John Doug

[Dave Wooderson]

I love how she thinks people are laughing with her.

Still looking for the "separation of church and state" in the US Constitution.  Can't seem to find it anywhere.  Those people laughing are the idiots.

[Paul Moscow]

I love how she thinks people are laughing with her.

Still looking for the "separation of church and state" in the US Constitution.  Can't seem to find it anywhere.  Those people laughing are the idiots.

Yes, Dave you won't be able to find the words "separation of church and state" in the first amendment. You can stop looking now, but thanks for checking.

To O'donnell, let's give her the benefit of the doubt and suppose that this is what she was trying to express - that congress shall make no law that would encumber the growth of religion from the government. Not to keep religion out of government as so many claim (however inartfully expressed). And she did a horrendous job - the whole scene was awkward and it is obvious to anyone that she was being laughed at by the audience, as such, it's surprising she didn't make clear her point and instead sat there grinning back at them.

Having said this, O'donnell doesn't understand the first amendment. Suggesting that the same federal standards shouldn't be applied to states, counties or cities suggests that she is ignoring subsequent amendments on the matter, or is in contempt of them.

[Rage Against the McKee]

I love how she thinks people are laughing with her.

Still looking for the "separation of church and state" in the US Constitution.  Can't seem to find it anywhere.  Those people laughing are the idiots.

While the first amendment does not contain the phrase "separation of church and state", it certainly does create that separation.

[LickNeckey]

"Still looking for the "separation of church and state" in the US Constitution.  Can't seem to find it anywhere.  Those people laughing are the idiots."

not sure if i should       or 

[Dave Wooderson]

I love how she thinks people are laughing with her.

Still looking for the "separation of church and state" in the US Constitution.  Can't seem to find it anywhere.  Those people laughing are the idiots.

While the first amendment does not contain the phrase "separation of church and state", it certainly does create that separation.

I didn't realize the first amendment was in the Constitution.  Show me where in the Constitution it has separation of church and state.  Still waiting for you to educate me, otherwise you are in need of education.  First person to show me that phrase in the Constitution get's $1,000,000,000.