Christine O'Donnell & the first amendment

As much as the left would love to hear Mrs. O'Donnell misspeak and reveal lack of understanding of the first amendment, it didn't happen! Sorry mainstream media. She was MORE informed than her liberal opponent. He thought "separation of church and state" was found in the first amendment, when in fact the "establishment of religion" was prohibited by the amendment. The "separation of church and state" is an INTERPRETATION that the Supreme Court has used in several decisions. But like the "right to privacy" that has been used to support "right" to abortion, those words, and some would say, even the principle, does not exist in the Constitution. It's time to revisit the founding documents of this country, in which case Christine O'Donnell, and conservatism as an ideology, will be upheld, defended, and preserved. With conservatism comes protection of the rights that are found in the Constitution. Now is the time. A conservative victory is a victory for all Americans and our beloved nation.

Debates, Debates, Debates, do we know anything?

So this has been a week of many congressional debates. This is the time of the election season when the electorate gets to see and hear exactly what the candidates stand for without the media's spin cycle.

In Nevada, Harry Reid looked like an skeleton with nothing new to say. So Harry tell me what is so wrong with "privatizing" many of the national programs that you Congress has proven they can't run? And still, the old line, we could save millions if we got rid of all the waste; so do it already! All talk and no action that is what the liberals dems are all about, that and getting rich on the public's dime. Harry must have been a damn good lawyer to make so much money so quickly, but of course, his bogus land deals had nothing whatsoever to do with his making millions, all while on a "fixed income". Come on Harry, do you really think anyone is buying what you are selling? Keep up the good fight Sharon Angle.

In Delaware, Coons had to go all the way back to 1973 to find a Supreme Court Case that he thought O'Donnell would object to. And then he got the actual decision wrong, the case was not specifically about abortion, but about states having the right to make their own decisions about abortion, very similar to the health care litigation that states are pushing through the courts right now. And if you gave money to a campaign, would you want the opposition to know that? Is that right? What is to stop the opposition candidate from harassing the other sides supporters? We all know the so-called "tolerant" Dems are not above doing just that, look at all the hate mail that conservative talk shows get from these "tolerant" liberals.

And although the race is not for the senate, I loved it when Jerry Brown had no idea how a job is created. So, he is right now in Congress writing "job creation" legislation and he has no idea how jobs are created? What a bunch of wieners, and whiners, they all need to go back home and face the people they screwed while they were in D.C. Maybe that is the main reason they don't want to go home.

As a small afterthought, wouldn't it be great if the first act the new Congress takes is to order an investigation of every member of the past congress to find any wrong doing on their parts, you know like extortion, bribery, misappropriation of funds, hiring illegals, tax fraud, insider trading, ponzi schemes, etc (the list is too long to be exhaustive), and then put every one of them on trial.

If we let these criminals get away with this, it will be our own fault, we have no one to blame but ourselves. Just because they write the laws, doesn't mean they get to break them willy-nilly. They need to be held accountable.

11ef7d41-98a8-4838-bc11-cf3769297958

1.03.01