Go ahead, ask her about the First Amendment to the Constitution.The BackBenchers in Social Studies class now run the Tea Party.bb
I would sooner ask my seven year old nephew his opinion on the Scopes decision than ask Ms. O'donnell her thoughts about the First Admendment.I weep for my sons.
All in all, a really frightening mess. She claims to have extensively studied the Constitution (was a seven day seminar at a right wing institute), and then babbles with her own idea of what it involves. She repeatedly says that all her decisions will be straight out of the Constitution, failing to understand that the Constitution is an overarching framework, not a code od statutory law.All this crap about the "intent of the Founding Fathers" is just that - crap. The Founding Fathers knew the Constitution was capable of being flawed, and thus included Article V. In fact, they had to use the provisions of Article V only four years after the Constitution was ratified to correct shortcomings in the original document.Hell, if Mrs O'Donnell is so hot to adhere to the wishes of the Founding Fathers, then let her abstain from any voting, as women were never envisioned as being able to vote when the Constitution was written.
Aviator, O'Donnell said afterward that she and her staff were celebrating her victory over Coons on that point, and were flabbergasted to read the official take the day after.Constitutional matters are just like interpreting the Bible. Everyone has an opinion, everyone is sure they are right, have the correct belief and then comes the schism and condemnations and more often than not, religious war.The solution to keeping correct Religious interpretations intact is something you and I know about, you most likely more than me, and the same is true for the interpretation of the Constitution. O'Donnell flouted that tradition.And so too we have Constitutional war born through this same type of heresy, like we had a century and a half ago.She and her ilk are Constitutional heretics, self-righteous, fanatic in their heresy. Unless, of course, they're in it to make money. Which could also account for more than a few religious heresies, IMO.Slightly OT, but again IMO Obama is not defending said Constitution as "fiercely" as he might. In fact, he seems to be actively gnawing at some important pillars.bb
Tbogg, which all should read religiously:http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2010/10/21/idiot-america/
Are we here yet?http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/