This is just painful. I think US Far-Right politicians might be trying to disprove evolution by getting dumber and dumber year by year. O’Donnell (Republican) is playing out to be a bigger embarrassment than Sarah Palin. Palin, on the other hand, completed an amazing feat that I don’t think anyone saw coming: she made Bush appear to be relatively intelligent and informed.
Here is video of O’Donnell debating electoral opponent Chris Coons (Democrat).
This is actually unbelievable. She literally – LITERALLY – did not know about the Establishment Clause. It’s at the core of the First Amendment. She’s claiming to be all about the Constitution, and this display suggests to me that she doesn’t even have a firm grasp of the first page of it! She also needed to have her memory jogged, as you saw, on the Sixteenth Amendment. Now, okay, “C’mon, who’s gonna remember every one of them?”, one might ask. Here’s who: a politician who claims to be all about the Constitution and isn’t completely full of crap. “Well, okay, but come on, still. There’s like over 2 dozen Amendments and she was on the spot.” Fair enough. But it was the income income tax Amendment. Y’know, redistribution of wealth. SOCIALISM! BIG GOVERNMENT! TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY! This is Priority One on the Right. And, for the record, I’m not necessarily criticizing ire regarding progressive taxation. I’m a progressive, but I can see the merit behind arguments against progressive taxation. But if you’re going to champion a cause, and if you’re going to wrap yourself in the Constitution, maybe try reading at least the relevant parts of the Constitution before going on stage for a political debate… Just a thought…
And then there was her repetition of the nonsense cover story that Intelligent Design is meaningfully distinct from Creationism. However, to her credit she did say that if local school boards want to teach evolution, they can! As Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks would say, is she not merciful! I was almost gonna give her some begrudging credit for slick trickery – begrudging because of its deceitfulness – when she framed the issue of exclusive teaching of evolution as Coons imposing his views on others. But after proving that she doesn’t know the relevant basics of the Constitution – let alone science or the history of Intelligent Design and traditional Creationism, I get the impression that she actually believes what she said, which is almost as sobering as the aforementioned ignorance of the very foundations of her platform. But on the plus side, at least she’s not a witch.