Maybe we’re not all as stupid or defeated as we appear.

ThinkProgress » Christine O’Donnell Not Sure If Separation Of Church And State Is In The Constitution

Yesterday, in a debate with Democratic opponent Chris Coons at Widener University Law School in Delaware, O’Donnell accused Coons of “constitutional ignorance,” saying “perhaps they didn’t teach you Constitutional law at Yale Divinity School.” But when Coons defended his position against teaching creationism by citing the First Amendment’s prohibition against establishment of religion, O’Donnell inquired, “that’s in the First Amendment?“:

Coons said that creationism, which he considers “a religious doctrine,” should not be taught in public schools due to the Constitution’s First Amendment. He argued that it explicitly enumerates the separation of church and state.

“The First Amendment does?” O’Donnell asked. “Let me just clarify: You’re telling me that the separation of church and state is found in the First Amendment?”

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,” Coons responded, reciting from memory the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

“That’s in the First Amendment…?” O’Donnell responded.

Later in the debate, O’Donnell stumbled when asked whether or not she would repeal the 14th, 16th, or 17th Amendments if elected. She asked the questioner to define the 14th and 16th amendments, adding: “I’m sorry, I didn’t bring my Constitution with me.”

“You actually audibly heard the crowd gasp,” said Widener University political scientist Wesley Leckrone, adding that her responses “raised questions about O’Donnell’s grasp of the Constitution.”

ThinkProgress » Christine O’Donnell Not Sure If Separation Of Church And State Is In The Constitution

E.J. Dionne Jr. – GOP’s election strategy lets others do its dirty work

By E.J. Dionne Jr.

Monday, October 18, 2010

PORTSMOUTH, N.H. The Republican Party is running a three-level campaign this year that gives its candidates a wealth of advantages — in flexibility, deniability and determination.

At the first level are the party’s candidates, who can be as reasonable or as angry, as moderate or as conservative, as their circumstances require.

Next come the outside groups that refuse to disclose their donor lists. They are doing the dirty work of pounding their Democratic opponents in commercials for which no one is accountable. The Republican candidates can shrug an innocent "Who, me?" Deniability is a wonderful thing.  [mjh: Thank the “Conservatives” on the Supreme Court for this.]

And then, on the far right, Glenn Beck and his allies cast President Obama as the central figure in a conspiracy against America itself, fueling participation by the most extreme 10 percent or 15 percent of the electorate.

Their crackpot ideas, as the historian Sean Wilentz documented in the New Yorker recently, originated in the 1950s and ’60s, in the paranoid theorizing of the John Birch Society. But whereas responsible conservatives such as William F. Buckley Jr. denounced the Birchers and the rest of the lunatic fringe back then, Republicans this time are riding the radical wave. In some cases (think Sharron Angle in Nevada), the extremists are their standard-bearers.

It’s quite brilliant in its way, and judging by the polls, it’s working out rather nicely for the Republicans. They are also profiting from the discontent bred by an economic downturn that began on their watch. …

E.J. Dionne Jr. – GOP’s election strategy lets others do its dirty work

Having had 14 to 18 years – hell, 30, if you want to go back to Raygun – to screw everything up, “Conservatives” now scream that every attempt to fix their own fuck-ups is a failure in less than 2 years. Assholes.