O' Donnell Does't Understand 1st Amendment - Video Included!!

At least one seat is a sure Democratic lock.
The chick doesn't understand the 1st amendment separation of church and state.

WILMINGTON, Del. â?? Republican Senate nominee Christine O'Donnell of Delaware on Tuesday questioned whether the U.S. Constitution calls for a separation of church and state, appearing to disagree or not know that the First Amendment bars the government from establishing religion.

The exchange came in a debate before an audience of legal scholars and law students at Widener University Law School, as O'Donnell criticized Democratic nominee Chris Coons' position that teaching creationism in public school would violate the First Amendment by promoting religious doctrine.

Coons said private and parochial schools are free to teach creationism but that "religious doctrine doesn't belong in our public schools."

"Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him.

When Coons responded that the First Amendment bars Congress from making laws respecting the establishment of religion, O'Donnell asked: "You're telling me that's in the First Amendment?"

Her comments, in a debate aired on radio station WDEL, generated a buzz in the audience.

"You actually audibly heard the crowd gasp," Widener University political scientist Wesley Leckrone said after the debate, adding that it raised questions about O'Donnell's grasp of the Constitution.

Christine O'Donnell Questions Separation Of Church & State (VIDEO)

Jump right in at about 2:50 where she asks where in the constitiution covers separation of church and state and again about 6 minutes in where he schools her.

I love this.....you truly are a dailykossy huh? This HILARIOUS story is all over the internet today.....this is gonna be fun.

LMAO.....NOWHERE IN THE FIRST AMENDMENT is the seperation of CHURCH AND STATE. NOWHERE.

This was COONS who couldnt figure it out. NICE TRY

They have a new ad in Nevada encouraging Latinos not to vote, do you agree with that considing you claim to me married to one?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


Actually she is right. Its not part of the constitution its in the bill of rights which was penned later.
I think the tea party has been hoodwinked by the carpet baggers at the christian coalition. That seems to be the main thrust of the party now that christians are right everyone else is wrong.

Amendments such as the bill of rights are still part of the constitution.


If you argue originalism, which is bs imho, most of us wouldn't be citizens nor have a right to vote.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Islandborn

I love this.....you truly are a dailykossy huh? This HILARIOUS story is all over the internet today.....this is gonna be fun.

LMAO.....NOWHERE IN THE FIRST AMENDMENT is the seperation of CHURCH AND STATE. NOWHERE.

This was COONS who couldnt figure it out. NICE TRY

---

I'll take Huffpo and MotherJones over newsmax and brietbart anyday.

I'll explain it slowly.
Public schools are public taxpayer funded and the public and our funds can't favor or be used to favor one religion or any religion over another.
Private schools like my Catholic school background are private so they are free to teach what they teach. No state aid is involved other than vouchers.
The fact the 1st amendment says no establishment of a state religion, is where separation of church ans state arise.

Arg you beat me east on posting this didn't see your post, too funny still tho

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Islandborn

I love this.....you truly are a dailykossy huh? This HILARIOUS story is all over the internet today.....this is gonna be fun.

LMAO.....NOWHERE IN THE FIRST AMENDMENT is the seperation of CHURCH AND STATE. NOWHERE.

This was COONS who couldnt figure it out. NICE TRY

---

The only folks who think she was right are Rushbot Einsteins like you. It was at a law school and they were laughing at her.

Nice Try

So seems suffice to say 'Thats in the first amendment....?" is a correct question, Because its not. Coons was presenting a "version" of whats in the cases INTERPRETING the text.....NOT THE LITERAL TEXT OF THE CONSTITUTION. Sooooo, thats NOT an incorrect statement.

The two were trying to set each other up. Everyone who actually watched the entire debate and lives in Delaware already knows this. Thats why the DNC is now having to pour money and time into the Vice President former senate seat. The part about it being at a law school makes it even scarier since clearly these students of law dont know the actual text of the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION. Yea.....thats pretty funny alright chuckle chuckle. Seriously......if this is the best the entire leftwing blogosphere can come up with you guys are gonna lose more seats than anyone can imagine. 2 weeks ladies.

Party like its 1773 is also a correct statement. The liberal blogosphere grows more desperate everyday as their own internal polls show the storm brewing.

perhaps you should read the news again
Republicans put 99 Democrat-held House seats in danger - Alex Isenstadt - POLITICO.com

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Islandborn

So seems suffice to say 'Thats in the first amendment....?" is a correct question, Because its not. Coons was presenting a "version" of whats in the cases INTERPRETING the text.....NOT THE LITERAL TEXT OF THE CONSTITUTION. Sooooo, thats NOT an incorrect statement.

The two were trying to set each other up. Everyone who actually watched the entire debate and lives in Delaware already knows this. Thats why the DNC is now having to pour money and time into the Vice President former senate seat. The part about it being at a law school makes it even scarier since clearly these students of law dont know the actual text of the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION. Yea.....thats pretty funny alright chuckle chuckle. Seriously......if this is the best the entire leftwing blogosphere can come up with you guys are gonna lose more seats than anyone can imagine. 2 weeks ladies.

Party like its 1773 is also a correct statement. The liberal blogosphere grows more desperate everyday as their own internal polls show the storm brewing.

perhaps you should read the news again
Republicans put 99 Democrat-held House seats in danger - Alex Isenstadt - POLITICO.com

---

Keep wishing Fantasyland man.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Islandborn

So seems suffice to say 'Thats in the first amendment....?" is a correct question, Because its not. Coons was presenting a "version" of whats in the cases INTERPRETING the text.....NOT THE LITERAL TEXT OF THE CONSTITUTION. Sooooo, thats NOT an incorrect statement.

---

You can only spin so much.

She is a constitutional expert based on 7 days of attending a Claremont Institute fellowship. :thumbsup:

LOL, fine....dont argue with me about it, argue with the esteemed Clinical Law Professor at Cornell University.
Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion: What If Christine O'Donnell Were Right About The First Amendment?

This is a mere distraction the liberal blogosphere is attempting to run. Coons does NOT have a big lead in Delaware anymore. Bet ya that. Who knows if O'Donnel can win, not me......but its gonna be close cause the Dems are sweatin it BIG TIME.

Get your early vote on:thumbsup:

There is even broken down examples of how the media tried to manipulate this one and got BUSTED. Here is just one you can find online now.

Nice try though
http://patterico.com/2010/10/20/wapo...-a-correction/

LMAO......the WASHINGTON POST gets BUSTED. And all the suckers that tried to spread this LAME unfactual story:pimp: