Watch this bit from the Delaware Senate candidate debate and the priceless, unbridled laughter after the gaffe. 

 

In all seriousness, this batshit crazy, ignorant buffoon is the candidate of a major political party to serve in the United States Congress.  George Washington wept.

Update: To head any clever snipers off at the pass, yes, I realize that there are nuanced arguments about the phrase “separation of church and state” that someone who knew what the fuck they were talking about could have made.  Daniel Larison has a great summary if you’re interested.

  1. Gherald says:

    "I have a graduate fellowship from the Claremont Institute in Constitutional Government and that is a deep analysis of the constitution that has helped me to analyze and have an opinion on what`s going on today and be able to determine that, our leaders in Washington have lost their way."

  2. ChristopherTK says:

    We can relax now, right? She can't possible win. Though if she does, I'm rearranging my backwards states in the U.S. that I don't want to visit list.

    • dandalion says:

      You would like to think that everyone will see this for what it is. The ones that cheer on Palin will also cheer her on. We just need to make sure all the level headed ones vote.

      • Metavirus says:

        maddow made a great point on this. in all probability, o'donnell isn't mainly interested in winning -- she's interested in becoming a darling of the wingnut welfare circuit. the more she gets ridiculed (like palin), the more the teatards will rally around her. being mocked for being an idiot is a badge of honor among their set. and she will cash in bigtime with lots of speaking fees, a paid slot on fox news, etc.

      • ChristopherTK says:

        I don't know if there are enough level headed voters to balance the scales. I became even more aware of this fact after participating in a recent political focus group that left me a little frustrated. But, a strong showing is needed, so any left to moderate vote will do.

        Here in Illinois we have some good, to fairly good choices for voters on the right and the left running under the Libertarian and Green party banners.

        And… I liked the spirits display. http://dandalionsworld.blogspot.com/2010/10/had-t… Nice play on the event.

        • dandalion says:

          Thanks! I enjoyed making it especially when it drove one of my coworkers crazy because she is the ultimate right winged extreme Christian and I had some 'spirits' my self and wrote the poem (all in haiku too)

          • Metavirus says:

            wingnut coworkers are the worst, especially when they won't shut up about it. on the one hand you want to keep your job, but on the other hand screaming at them and making them cry would feel sooooooo good.

            • dandalion says:

              That's the thing, I ran it by my GM first and she was all for it and my coworker couldn't say or do anything about it. Aaannndd because it got her hopping I threw some tarot cards on the table! It was awesome!

  3. Gherald says:

    Anyway, as funny as O'Donnell's naive-sounding question was, I think it's pretty clear she's aware of the constitutional issue of separation and church and state. She's been taught the conservative point of view on this (which btw I agree with) but sounded ridiculous trying to convey the nuanced point.

    • Metavirus says:

      true to a point, although she kept at him about it many times and even sneered at him over the notion that the precise language that he quoted ("make no law respecting the establishment of religion…") is in the first amendment. o'donnell and palin are what you get when you program in a mountain of stale conservative tropes into a robot brain with limited storage capacity and no critical thinking capability.

    • Metavirus says:

      p.s., it's a good thing that the entire federal judiciary and the vast bulk of legal academia has disagreed with you and o'donnell for the past 200 years. as the supreme court has said over and over again, a myopic and narrow reading of the establishment clause (i.e., it's only effect is to prevent the federal government from declaring a state religion) would be to eviscerate the meaning, purpose and intent of the clause and render it worthless.

      • Gherald says:

        Eh? I thought we were talking about unidirectionality here, not a 'no establishment of national religion' interpretation.

        (and no it's not limited to the federal government, the 14th incorporated it)

        • Metavirus says:

          oh no my darling, o'donnell appears to be (especially since she's a hardcore christianist) of the school that believes that the establishment clause does absolutely nothing more than prevent the federal government from declaring a state religion. that is what you see indicated in her insistence that the "separation of church and state" is "not in the constitution". if she were to make a unidirectionality or 14th amendment argument, that line of attack wouldn't be necessary.

          and yes, to your second point, although the teabaggers and tenthers need to be told that :)

          • Gherald says:

            > that is what you see indicated in her insistence that the "separation of church and state" is "not in the constitution"

            I don't think so. O'Donnell may well believe other stuff, but I take "separation doesn't appear" as a point that too many people overinterpret it to mean e.g. religious groups can't participate in politics and government.

            • Metavirus says:

              i just realized that have spent a goodly amount of time on trying to parse the madness in christine o'donnell's brain. no more! :) it burns!

            • ChristopherTK says:

              I just wanted to add that I don't see the argument being that "religious groups can't participate in politics and government," rather than stating that religious groups can't dictate politics and government.

              Participation becomes a problem when it progresses to domination leading to dictation, diminishing our freedom and creating religious interference.

  4. aPALINDROME4IDIOTS says:

    I would like to know where the Claremont Institute is located, just in case I run for the Senate myself. It will really look good on my resume.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>