She needs to clarify the antecedent for “that’s” when she replied to Coons second statement. In his second statement he quoted the establishment clause. She replied “You’re telling that’s in the Constitution.” If “that’s” referred to his quoting of the establishment clause, then she’s wrong. If “that’s” referred back to his original “separation” claim, she’s right. She needs to clarify the “that’s.”
Someone who has access to the video needs to check whether “You’re telling me that’s in the Constitution” followed immediately upon Coon’s quoting of the establishement language or whether something came in between to which her “that’s” might refer. If the AP journalista omitted part of the dialogue, muddying the antecedent, the journalista should be fired. But if O’Donnell was replying directly to Coons’s establishment language but intended to refer to his earlier separation language, then she messed up with an unclear antecedent and needs to clarify.
Except that damage is done. They’ve got their latest gotcha.
She may have been incautious. But it’s extremely difficult to guard against media misinterpretation all the time, without sounding pretty stilted.
It’s clear from the earlier part of the discussion that she knows what’s in the Constitution (establishment of religion) and what’s not (separation of church and state).
Moreover, although it didn’t come up here, the Constitution did NOT originally forbid establishment of religion within the states. Massachusetts had an established religion for years, and so did several other states.
Well, Christine is right. If they want to call it a gotcha, well, they’re liars.
Here’s from a cbs news article
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20020015-503544.html
“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?”
“Government shall make no establishment of religion,” Coons responded, reciting from memory the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. (Coons was off slightly: The first amendment actually reads “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”)
“That’s in the First Amendment...?” O’Donnell responded.
I will say that there’s a real difference between what the 1A says “make no establishment” is much different from “respecting an establishment”
States and localities CAN establish under the constitution.
Congress can’t pass a law repecting that establishment.
I believe that’s basic Constitution 101 - Federalism. Small Federal Government. Letting the states decide.
Christine WAS RIGHT. No “Gotcha”. We need our people on the TV MOCKING those who disagree with Christine. She was 100% right.