Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

O'Donnell is correct in her observation that the words "separation of church and state" appear nowhere in the establishment clause or anywhere else in the constitution. Sadly, nobody would call her a master of rhetoric, any more than our Tea Party candidate Paladino, who also tanked in the NY debates. But then so did Caroline Kennedy when she tried an interview with that snide CBS creep who also tripped up Sarah Palin - and most of New York, including most of Republican NY, would have supported Caroline in her candidacy for the senate seat being vacated by that other creepy quasi-treasonous interloper, Mrs Clinton. The "macaca moment" that brought down Allen of Virginia is instructive - never get into a real-time instant-media event unless you control the medium and all its distribution channels in real time.

There is the issue of "reading comprehension" rather than specific phrases at play here.

Constitutional experts going back to Madison and Jefferson - continuing with Story, whose interpretation of the establishment clause was later set aside by the Supreme Court, possibly erroneously - have had grave doubts on allocation of public funds to support religion(s).

With respect, Olga, Dyslexia was correct in pointing out that O'Donnell does know as much about the constitution as she needs to know. Separately, your signature line is traceable to some internet poster identifying himself only as "Arthur Anonymous" and not a Cree Indian.

You should have known that alleged quote couldn't possibly be "Cree teaching" by thinking that tribes had no concept of "money" until our ancestors arrived bearing beads and trinkets. The phrase originated with the above-mentioned "Arthur" on a recent "Earth Day" online event.

I listened to the entire last two debates and the "separation of church and state" as used by Jefferson was not the issue(it was a sidebar). The actual issue had been that the Constitution DOES NOT allow for any local school district to decide whether or not it should teach Creationism along side evolution. She was totally ill informed and was doing a bad job of it when she stated the line "Show me where the Constitution has a line about separation of church and state" She was trying to duck not enlighten. Even if Jefferson had not written to the BAptist Conference on the "wall of separation...', the Constitution would still contain the Establishment and Free Exspression clauses, upon which ALL of the USSC decisions had been made. (The Constitution contains enough direction).

The two final debates were mixed and clipped by the news services and thats unfortunate.Coons was quite generous in what he didnt do to slap her down. THere is a fine line in which a debator either appears as well informed or, is just arrogant. Coons tried to walk that line without slamming hard on ODonnell. That way shed get some "Audience pity" which could transfer into votes. Coons took many of her wild accusations and dismissed them (she appeared as a hysterical stentorian candidate who, apparently has no real platform or ideas other than savaging her opponent). He did take on the more serious ones and the issue of Creationism did arise from his responses.
The mere fact that she stated that the Supreme Court has upheld local schools "right"to teach Creationism is where she got it wrong from the beginning. The audience knew , because they started this underscore of hooting and laughing when she was cumulatively compiling her ignorant statements.

With respect, High Seas, I thought I made it clear (in my post) that I was responding to her (fumbling) performance on the video wandel posted.
She wasn't exactly great. As someone who claimed she would base her political actions on the constitution (wikipedia quote) her grasp of the constitution came across quite wobbly. In fact she sounded quite confused.



I took that quote from a long ago, long-lost (US environmental ) site.
I liked it very much. Still do.
If they got the source wrong, then I've got it wrong as well.
In that case, I'll find another quote to use.
Problem solved.

Anything else you'd like to straighten me out about?

Everything you say is true and not in dispute. O'Donnell's handlers got large sums from Tea Party central as well as money from many small donors and should have been replaced - they've done a lousy job briefing her. Somewhere I have Ed Rollins's 20 rules for political advisers....
Edit: can't find my own summary just now, but you can access the 20 rules by entering "rules" in the search box in his book link
http://www.amazon.com/Bare-Knuckles-Back-Rooms-American/dp/0553067311
and O'Donnell's handlers don't seem to have followed any of them - she's most probably a goner, but not for any misunderstanding of the establishment clause. Btw, I'm a great admirer of Ed Rollins - have known him since the 1st Reagan administration. He's never been wrong.

No, she doesn't, and HS is dead wrong that she knows enough. Learning the constitution is not that difficult for someone of average intellect. I can only quote from memory the exact wording of a few passages (such as Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . . --that's egraved on my memory from the number of times i've had to quote it to some right-wing idiot ranting about a document they seemingly had never actually read). But i know it well enough that i know what to look for and generally where to find it.

What's even more hilarious and pathetic is that O'Donnell is supposed to be a Tea Party candidate, and she wasn't even familiar with the amendments that crew wants to repeal. Given that the purpose of running for representative office is to serve the agenda of those to whom you appeal to to be elected, i think it is not too much to expect that you know what their agenda is.

Coons explained in the debate that the separation of church and state doctrine developed through supreme court decisions on the first amendment.

Also, I just read your post about the Cree proverb. I too have seen that proverb originating in the Jackson Photography manual (from Jacksons photos as he accompanied Russell on a journey of discovery and art into the plains Indian territories. SO my reference has s indicated that this proverb existed iin the 19th century at least. (Sort of predates the internet a bit). Perhaps the internet duide just did a handy job of paleo " cut and paste"


More on topic, ODonnell was using the "Swhow me where the Constitution says that there is a separation of Church and state". That showed , to me, abysmal ignorance because anyone reasonably informed would have already known about the Danbury quote.
So Coons, more to the point stated that
'"The Constitution really doesnt allow you to teach religion in science class in public schools"

THEN, ODonnell, (In a grand summary of ignorance)stated .
"You mean to say that the Constitution says That?"

Coons didnt even say "Yeh dummy!!, it does". He just turned to the audience and had a look on his face as if to imply'I cant do anything with this kind of ignorance" (of course Im only inserting my own staging of this )

All in all though, ODonnell did not come across as a "Constitutional Scholar"

And that's important, because in other venues she has been touting herself as a constitutional scholar.

The 19th century Crees had already been exposed to quite a lot of our "beads and trinkets" monetary theory, so whatever they may have had to say at that point hardly qualifies as original native tribe wisdom, or whatever the online "earth day" event called Ms. Olga's motto.

To the point: have you considered O'Donnell may just be a tactical throw-away, someone long classified as a goner but useful in garnering opposition fire while the real battle continues on other fronts? What Clausewitz called Spiegelgefecht (battling a mirror image) to distract opponents' attention? I certainly don't speak for the Tea Party, but it's my distinct impression that this is what's happening with her - they've cut off her funding completely at this stage. The sheer brutality of this campaign is something I, personally, haven't witnessed before. But whoever controls governorships and congress gets to gerrymander electoral districts until the next census in 2020.

And more than most of her potential constituents. She's still a goner - either ill-advised by her political "experts" or genuinely incapable of keeping the constitutional amendments and portions of the civil rights legislation the Tea Party wants repealed straight in her mind.

... or maybe she's not particularly bright?

Uhh, the teabaggers are guilty for whatever stupidity they may have added to this entire election cycle. In Delaware , they could have had a very good entry into Congress witha popular pst governor and legislator as a candidate. Mike Castle was not a RINO, he was a true conservative who, in a fit of logic, voted for the TARP (all in Bush;s [residency). He was tarred by the emerging teabag party and was involved in a bitter primary battle where Odonnells skills as a dirty fighter were helpful . The teabaggers came out to vote and she won a slim plurality.

That lkeft almost half of the GOP very pissed off and vengeful.
Coons major strategy was just to sit and watch this clash of Titans play out and, as a result of the brilliant strategy of the teabag orgnization, the new Senator will be a Dem.

As far as Gerrymandering, we are talking about DELAWARE. There are only 2 Senators per state and they are elected AT LARGE.

I live in radio distance from the whole speactacle and I think, from hearing the speeches of late, now the actual debacle of ODonnells candidacy is only sinking in to the teabaggers.

Where did you hear that her funding has been cut off? She is doing a fantastic job of raining money from her internet collections. Shes adopted the Dean/Obama strategy in the "downstate rural areas of Delaware"

Yes , but I believe that your comment originally was one of initial attribution. I was merely saying that the entire proverb has been attributed to the "Mighty 5" proverbs of the Crees , and was in existence at least 100 years before the internet. (In fact, the very proverb was quoted by a famous western photographer after the Civil War, in his book of collected photographs that he made of Yellowstone and the Grand CAnyon ,)

Whether 'wavy gravy" or any other 60's figure quoted it is immeterial. The proverb was coined over 150 years ago. WHether it was Cree Creek or Cherokee, I dont know, but Ive got a book (by Deloria PhD) who attempts a scholarly analyses of various proverbs and prophecies and he attributes the quote to the Crees.

My favorite one under any dispite is
"We dont inherit the land from our anccestors, we rent it from our children" The reason this one had always been in dispute was the concpt of "Own and rent" were mostly unknown to Native AMericans " (but the concept was known in the Southern lands from the Maya all the way down to theMoche.)

I personally don't buy the claim that concepts of money (barter) and property ownership were unknown to aboriginal Americans. The evidece is very much to the contrary. That whole line of **** was cobbled together by activists in the 1960s to retroactively vilify white men for cheating the poor, innocent red men. Like most bullshit of its ilk, it serves to make the aboriginals look like a bunch of idiot-children--it's an insult to them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mAtvRA4MBAScience AND pretty colours....that swayed me....what did I agree to ?

I find that very hard to believe....God makes mistakes, but evolution couldnt make that many.

That should be the Clinton Presidency...he got head jobs in the oval office and lost the nuclear strike codes. Now THAT is a relaxed man.