I think the Tea Bagger Candidate's Staff are now fair game.

[Motown_Johnny]

O'Donnell said in a interview that she was "literally high fiving" with her staff after the debate because they all thought she had showed that Coons didn't know what is in the First Amendment. Then they were all surprised when they read the media reports that Coons had won that exchange.


This means many things but 2 jump out at me


1) Nobody on her staff knows what is in the First Amendment

2) Nobody on her staff thought to read the First Amendment to find out what is in it (even though they read the media reports about the debate)

{OR.. nobody wanted to tell her the truth, but I am ignoring that possibility for this post and taking her at her word that they all thought she was right.}




Shouldn't Mr. Coons now bring her staff's incompetence into the discussion and shouldn't we all forward assumptions based on this about who would go to D.C. with people like Angle, Miller and Whitman?

[Bonhomme Richard]

1. The most ignorant surround themselves with.....

those that are on the same channel.

[ljm2002]

2. They have all accepted the premise...

...that since the literal phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear in the First Amendment, then there is no separation of church and state in our Constitution.

Of course, Constitutional originalists look for the intended meaning of things by reading what the framers wrote about the various parts of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Since Thomas Jefferson was involved in writing the Bill of Rights, it makes sense to look at his writings on the topic. And sure enough, in his letter to the Danbury Baptists, we find that he used the phrase "separation of church and state" to convey the intent of the First Amendment.

The law students and professors at that debate obviously already knew that, while Ms. O'Donnell and her minions did not know that, do not know that, and do not want to know that. In fact they do not want to know anything that conflicts with their contorted version of reality.

Well at least in her case, it appears she'll be going down in flames on election day. Good riddance.

[RC]

3. Going down in flames?

You mean there is enough substance to burn?

[Catshrink]

4. Well she is a witch.