This is Christine O'Donnell ~ One too many dunks of that tea bag, me thinks
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-10-2010, 07:33 PM
 
This is Christine O'Donnell ~ One too many dunks of that tea bag, me thinks
Christine O'Donnell ignorant of the Constitution (This is sad at these time marks: 2:37, 3:35, 7:03) fameappeal.com
(From The Description: clip was taken October 18 2010, in my law school's court room. To the left is Democrat Chris Coons, to the right is Tea Party candidate Christine O'donnell

-topics: first amendment, church v. state)



Keeping in mind this is a debate at a Widener Law!Confused
Quote this message in a reply
19-10-2010, 07:49 PM
 
RE: This is Christine O'Donnell ~ One too many dunks of that tea bag, me thinks
This is just plain SCARY. And just think ... it takes someone dumber than her to actually vote for her!
Quote this message in a reply
19-10-2010, 08:08 PM
 
RE: This is Christine O'Donnell ~ One too many dunks of that tea bag, me thinks
(19-10-2010 07:49 PM)athnostic Wrote:  This is just plain SCARY. And just think ... it takes someone dumber than her to actually vote for her!
There's more than one of them, since they got her past the primary. Oh, that's just sad. And she's never had a job. That makes her prime to represent the working class. /sarcasm
Quote this message in a reply
19-10-2010, 09:42 PM
RE: This is Christine O'Donnell ~ One too many dunks of that tea bag, me thinks
I laughed and cried...sometimes at the same time
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2010, 07:40 AM (This post was last modified: 20-10-2010 07:43 AM by BnW.)
RE: This is Christine O'Donnell ~ One too many dunks of that tea bag, me thinks
I'm not a fan of O'Donnell by any definition but I think the characterization of her here, as well as the hatchet job by CNN on this topic, are off base.

I don't want to break this down step by step because it will take too long but speaking generally, the US Constitution means whatever the 9 Supreme Court justices says it means. No more and no less. The idea that there are clear, unequivocal concepts set forth is largely wrong. There are a few, to be sure. For example, the Constitution mandates there how old the President must be, that there must be a Supreme Court, the 3 branches of government, and other administrative things. But, substantively it is very vague.

Hitting a few of the high notes of that video, O'Donnell is correct that the Constitution does not at any point say there is a separation of church and state. I firmly believe there is and Constitutional law has long held there is, but not everyone in the US agrees with that interpretation. We are probably 1 conservative Supreme Court justice from blowing the whole current structure apart, too. O'Dpnnell is not in any way unique or original in questioning the current application of the First Amendment. Her arguments are not really her arguments but the positions that have been put forth by certain conservative and religious groups over the past 10 - 20 years. And, while those arguments have failed to date, that could all change with a change in the make up of the Supreme Court. But, to say she does not know what the Constitution says because she fundamentally disagrees with the current interpretation is ridiculous.

On the issue of her not recalling the 14th and 16the Amendments right off, she clearly knew what they said but just needed her memory jogged. Maybe that is a fair shot because she holds herself out as a Constitutional expert, and I can't believe anyone forgets the 14th Amendment given how much press it's gotten lately, but I think that is a minor slip. She was able to answer the question and put forth a position. Whether you agree with her view is a different matter.

We have serious problems in the US and one of the biggest is our inability to have rational debates on topics. Instead, what we do is ridicule our opponents as simply being too stupid to undertand the most basic things and what is so obvious to us. Where that leads us is into firmly divided camps of "us" and "them" with no ability to reach reasonable compromises and take steps that are best for the country as a hole. The attacks on O'Donnell are mostly just that: attacks on O'Donnell. Not attacks on her positions but attacks on her personally.

Personally, I think she is bat shit crazy and some of her views are impossible to reconcile with my views (and I hope the views of a majority of people in Delaware). However, I think you are fooling yourself if you think she's just vacuous and is not putting forth a legitimate argument. She clearly is not experienced enough, and maybe not bright enough, to articulate her arguments in a persuasive manner, which is all the better. There are those with a lot more experience, though, who can frame these arguments properly and are working to build a consensus with voters. Keep laughing, sneering and ignoring them at your own peril.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2010, 02:40 PM
 
RE: This is Christine O'Donnell ~ One too many dunks of that tea bag, me thinks
(20-10-2010 07:40 AM)BnW Wrote:  I'm not a fan of O'Donnell by any definition but I think the characterization of her here, as well as the hatchet job by CNN on this topic, are off base...


...Personally, I think she is bat shit crazy and some of her views are impossible to reconcile with my views (and I hope the views of a majority of people in Delaware). However, I think you are fooling yourself if you think she's just vacuous and is not putting forth a legitimate argument. She clearly is not experienced enough, and maybe not bright enough, to articulate her arguments in a persuasive manner, which is all the better. There are those with a lot more experience, though, who can frame these arguments properly and are working to build a consensus with voters. Keep laughing, sneering and ignoring them at your own peril.
What is confusing here is your flip flop on O'Donnell. You first claim the characterization of her is off base. And then, you go further than the characterization so as to impugn her character even more so by calling her bat shit crazy. While moments later in defending that all of that, which clearly makes her unfit to hold office, you say we're fooling ourselves if we think she's just vacuous (and is not putting forth a legitimate argument.) . While "all of that" contributes to the observation she is indeed vacuous. Unless bat shit crazy is an example of intelligence.

So that in the end, per your assesment, she's bat shit crazy and mindless. But regardless of the characterizations of her as being mindless, (and bat shit crazy) we're fooling ourselves to think bat shit crazy and mindless isn't putting forth a legitimate argument in the OP?
That's just odd.

Ms.O'Donnell was taken to school on the Constitution at a law school, failing to put forth a legitimate argument, but in having the knowledge of four amendments in the Constitution. (1st, 14th, 16th, 17th)
She's suppose to be a Constitutional expert? Being flustered in front of a room full of people throws her off her expertise? What's she going to do when she's in front of a room full of people behind the desk as a Senator of Delaware, if she can't handle a forum at Widener University School of Law.

And this posting was about Christine O'Donnell, not her political rivals. With no laughing, sneering or ignoring of them included, so that projection was unwarranted.
Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2010, 03:00 PM
RE: This is Christine O'Donnell ~ One too many dunks of that tea bag, me thinks
The thing that worries me about O'Donnell and other tea partiers such as Rand Paul is that they cull qualified conservatives from the ballot. Which, while ostensibly good for democrats such as myself since it should guarantee my side a win, is still worrisome because of the anti-Obama fever which is gripping the nation for some bizarre reason. Potentially, if the dems are not motivated to vote and the indies and Goopers vote a strict not-the-democrat party line, these moonbats could wind up setting our national agenda.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2010, 03:06 PM
RE: This is Christine O'Donnell ~ One too many dunks of that tea bag, me thinks
You're missing the point.

Whether or not Christine O'Donnell is smart, stupid, etc. is irrelevant. Whether or not she is able to concisely articulate her argument to an audience is also irrelevant. Finally, whether or not she, personally, is fit to be a US Senator is irrelevant. All of this is besides the point I'm making.

What is relevant is that people with a lot more credibility and ability to articulate a position are making many of the same arguments she is stumbling through. These people are working to put together a groundswell of support for their positions, or at least for their candidacy while obscuring some of their more extreme positions, and are riding a wave of discontent into office.

Christine O'Connell most likely was never going to take that seat in Delaware irrespective of how good she presented her argument. The state is just not that conservative. However, other candidates making those arguments are absolutely going to win office at the national level this coming Election Day. You can absolutely bank on that. And, they are going to push to do exactly what they campaigned on. If the only rebuttal you (not you personally, obviously) are able to offer to their positions is scorn and ridicule, then you've already lost the fight because they have anger and support on their side now.

And this posting was about Christine O'Donnell, not her political rivals. With no laughing, sneering or ignoring of them included, so that projection was unwarranted.

I'm not sure what is unwarranted about it. And, I disagree with your assessment of her position. That she struggled to properly articulate her point, or that she was laughed out by what I suspect is the more liberal leaning members of the audience, does not serve to discredit her basic argument. In fact, her position that the document does not explicitly provide for a separation of Church and State is exactly right. The rules that currently exist that make that distinction are based on a judicial interpretation that can be at some point overturned. You watch that video and think she does not know what the 1st Amendment says. I watch and I think her point is that she does know what it says, and it does not say what her opponent claims. He even concedes that it's an interpretation but not the actual language. You may disagree with her point of view - I certainly do - but to say she simply does not know what the Amendment says because she disagrees with the historical jurisprudence is incorrect.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2010, 07:58 PM
 
RE: This is Christine O'Donnell ~ One too many dunks of that tea bag, me thinks
I find that people in general all very hypocritical. I hear a lot these days that people (many my friends) are tired of career politicians running the government. I hear why doesn't just an ordinary law abiding person run for office, who really means well, and is not corrupt. However if an ordinary joe the plumber would run we'd annihilate him/her as unfit to govern because they didn't know how to say the leader of Iran's name, or they don't completely understand the social security system, etc... My point is we say we want something that we really don't want. There is no way I could be a congressman. Hell just with the little bit I get as a curious citizen I think congress is out of their gourd, imagine if I knew the whole story. What does this have to do with O'donnel? Well people got her this far by her being the non politician, but now that she's there she's suddenly expected to be as well versed as a lifelong politician or else she's stupid. I don't like her one bit and disagree with her of most counts, but I don't condemn her for the dumb shit she did ten years ago, and I don't think she's dumb.
Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2010, 11:10 PM
 
RE: This is Christine O'Donnell ~ One too many dunks of that tea bag, me thinks
She did call evolution "just a theory" (in the fundie sense) which automatically equals stupid in my book.
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: