tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24005214.post1457109031957062632..comments2023-10-19T12:25:15.143+01:00Comments on The Osterley Times: Christine O'Donnell flounders and errs in debate.Kelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14466059072530968330noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24005214.post-86369480867198439952010-10-21T16:27:11.130+01:002010-10-21T16:27:11.130+01:00Oh there's no victory, SP. You were simply mor...Oh there's no victory, SP. You were simply more willing than I was to give her enough rope to hang herself. And, as expected, she complied.Kelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14466059072530968330noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24005214.post-82163803716993608162010-10-20T19:51:53.289+01:002010-10-20T19:51:53.289+01:00Ok, you win.
If after all she's been through,...Ok, you win.<br /><br />If after all she's been through, she still doesn't know the First Amendment and admitted such in a debate, she isn't qualified for much of anything.Steel Phoenixhttp://www.theallegator.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24005214.post-50544012547033667502010-10-16T17:50:05.301+01:002010-10-16T17:50:05.301+01:00Thanks for that, SP. She opened the clip claiming ...Thanks for that, SP. She opened the clip claiming that the US fought the Russians in Afghanistan, when we all know that it was the Mujahideen.<br /><br />And I do think we have a right to know what anyone running for office believes, even though - as you rightly state - in the US wacky religious beliefs make one more likely to be elected, rather than less.<br /><br />And, as she is talking about allowing creationism to be taught in school alongside evolution, "as an equal theory", we don't even need to ask what she believes. Anyone making that argument is, as far as I am concerned, a religious nut case.Kelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14466059072530968330noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24005214.post-45316054940035261052010-10-15T23:37:34.966+01:002010-10-15T23:37:34.966+01:00Whoops. Lets try that again: http://www.youtube.co...Whoops. Lets try that again: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwhYgf--bKw<br /><br />I'm not sure you have a right to know what someone believes. An expectation before you vote for them perhaps. She's certainly not under any legal requirement to state her religious beliefs before holding office. The question was fair game, but the answer should stand.<br /><br />Intelligent design is an interesting issue. I think schools should deal in fact rather than conjecture. Science will occasionally get something wrong, but evolution is a theory in much the same sense as gravity.<br /><br />I'm sorry to say that she isn't at all out of the mainstream here. We still have our children pledging allegiance to one nation under God in our public school systems. Our money still says In God we Trust. If pressed on their personal beliefs, someone who claims Jesus speaks to them every morning through their cat and tells them how to vote would still likely beat an atheist into office.Steel Phoenixhttp://www.theallegator.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24005214.post-37748066379426963392010-10-15T06:31:12.230+01:002010-10-15T06:31:12.230+01:00I tried to watch the clip, SP, but the link didn&#...I tried to watch the clip, SP, but the link didn't work.<br /><br />I found it interesting that you thought the Guardian took what she said out of context. Perhaps they went looking for a story which was already in their own heads.<br /><br /><i>If she tried to pass a law making it illegal to have sex before marriage, or to not eat meat on Sundays, I'd have a problem with it, but I support her right to believe it.</i><br /><br />Of course she has a right to believe whatever she wants. But I think I also have a right to make a value judgement on someone based on what they believe. If someone believes in crazy bullshit, I have a right to know that. As people who believe in crazy bullshit tend to be crazy.Kelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14466059072530968330noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24005214.post-42374644533718555112010-10-15T02:59:47.869+01:002010-10-15T02:59:47.869+01:00I disagree. I did watch the debate. She's been...I disagree. I did watch the debate. She's been portrayed in the media is being another Sarah Palin. Form what I saw in the debate, she would demolish Palin. I think she and her opponent both did fine in regards to both their base and moderates.<br /><br />I think he Guardian has taken the comments from the debate very deliberately out of context, especially on the matter of who was pushing the comedy as truth agenda. If you want to see the parts most relevant to what was written about, that section is in this clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwhYgf<br /><br />"And it's a bad day when any person running for high office is reduced to stating, "What I believe is not relevant." Really? Then why should we elect her? I have always thought that we elected people precisely because of what they believed."<br /><br />I highly disagree with this. People are quite capable of keeping their religious beliefs out of the legislating, which is the context of the quote. If she tried to pass a law making it illegal to have sex before marriage, or to not eat meat on Sundays, I'd have a problem with it, but I support her right to believe it.<br /><br />My impression from the debate is that this is a person worthy of attacking for her individual beliefs rather than general incompetence.Steel Phoenixhttp://www.theallegator.com/noreply@blogger.com