By Jake Weinraub
Thu Aug 18, 2011 3:33pm EDT
LOS ANGELES (TheWrap.com) - Christine O'Donnell, who stormed off "Piers Morgan Tonight" on Wednesday, insists it was not the gay marriage question that set her off.
Quote:
"He had a decidedly inappropriate line of questions leading up to that, that "many people -- bloggers --" [Right Wing] are saying was just border-line creepy," she told Fox's Steve Chenevey Thursday morning. "I was not there to talk about sex -- and he would not stop trying to talk about sex."
During his Wednesday talk show, Morgan asked O'Donnell to share her stance on gay marriage, a political topic covered in her new book, "Troublemaker," which the tea party darling was promoting on the show.
"I don't think it's relevant. It's not a topic that I chose to embrace, it's not what I'm championing right now -- I've been there, done that, gone down that road," O'Donnell said -- then she left the studio mid-show.
Morgan took to Twitter following O'Donnell's exit, telling his 1,142,270 followers that her reaction to the questions was his "first ever walk-out in 25 years of interviews."
O'Donnell said to Chenevey Thursday that her stance on gay marriage is on record the same as Barack Obama's, Rudy Giuliani's, Hillary Clinton's and Michelle Bachmann's.
"I'm not a 20-year-old on MTV right now," she added. "So let's get back to the political issues that I lay out in the book -- and he wouldn't let up."
The former Delaware Senate candidate continued that she had other places to be the night of the CNN airing. "I was already late for a Republican Women's event that was being covered by C-Span, and so there is a room full of women wondering where I am, and I'm getting the wrap-up signal on the sidelines?enough here Piers."
"He's a cheeky bugger -- I wish him well," O'Donnell finished.
A spokesperson for O'Donnell did not immediately respond to TheWrap's request for comment.
__________________
__________________
I'll believe corporations are persons when Texas executes one.: LBJ's Ghost
Yup, those plots were old before I turned 4. I moved on to mythology which is pretty much folk tales. Better plots though.
Politics seemed tame back with Ike & Adlai Stevenson. No wiccans, fewer whackos and people like Bill Buckley & Mark Hatfield were powers in the GOP.
Gasp--JFK was a Catholic.
A family in our Methodist church had an older daughter that married a Catholic. Many men and I suppose women were certain that this was the end of the world.
Recently, there have been similar concerns. Someone is posting admonitions to 'others' of extreme Conservative beliefs to scrutinize the religious beliefs of the current POTUS more thoroughly. If that is possible.
How can we really, really know---if anyone is adequately developed in religious beliefs to hold this office. ?Thomas Jefferson---he was a radical---and he had slaves.
No--there has been only one found to be exemplary--Reagan. He cannot run--and what are we going to do? Wringing my hands.
Maybe we could write in Bill Clinton--I believe he recently performed a marriage ceremony---he has a law degree--perhaps it wasn't a religious ceremony. We know BC has had religious experiences---everyone seems to forgive him and admire him. So let's just ask him.
~~~
New Book--'Dick and Jane Learn About the Presidents'
Bozell: O'Donnell's reaction to Piers Morgan was 'downright bizarre'
Quote:
It's time to weigh in on the Christine O'Donnell v. Piers Morgan dust-up Wednesday.
In short, O'Donnell's behavior was beyond indefensible. It was downright bizarre.
The questions Piers Morgan put forward may have been trite, even seemingly silly, but given to whom they were being posed, they were not inappropriate. He asked if in her heart O'Donnell has committed lust.
He asked her views on gay marriage. He asked her views on witchcraft and on masturbation. Titillating questions? Sure, but O'Donnell has staked out public opinions on all these fronts and it is those public statements she's made that invite questions like his. She had to know she'd be asked these things when she accepted the interview invitation. If she didn't then she's living in a parallel universe. Moreover, Morgan was neither Chris Matthews rude nor Keith Olbermann offensive. He simply asked the questions.
O'Donnell had no right to reject the questions. Even worse, in declaring them inappropriate she made an ass of herself.
She answered the gay marriage question by declaring, over and over, that the answer could be found in her book, which book she was there to promote, except she refused to discuss her position on gay marriage, which was in the book. She declared she was there to "talk about the issues I chose to talk about in the book," and when asked by Morgan, "Do you answer that question in the book?" she answered, "I talk about my religious beliefs, yes. I absolutely do." But she wouldn't answer his question about gay marriage, and instead accused him of being rude to her.
Nonsensical is too kind. She is a buffoon.
O'Donnell had no right to walk off the set. But in a sense I'm glad she did -- if it means she'll never come back. Conservatives do themselves no favors by defending this woman and she is doing conservatives no favors by going on national television programs to talk about -- God only knows what she'll talk about, or not talk about, next. Please, Christine O'Donnell, call it a day.
__________________
I'll believe corporations are persons when Texas executes one.: LBJ's Ghost
In that same October 13 debate, O'Donnell challenged Coons on the topic of the separation of church and state, asking, "Where in the Constitution is separation of church and state?" Coons responded, "The First Amendment establishes the separation and the fact that the federal government shall not establish any religion, and decisional law by the Supreme Court over many, many decades clarifies and enshrines that there is a separation of church and state that our courts and laws must respect." O'Donnell replied, "Let me just clarify. You're telling me that the separation of church and state is found in the First Amendment?" To which Coons said, "Government shall make no establishment of religion." O'Donnell replied, "That's in the First Amendment?" [117]
The phrase "separation of church and state" is not found in the U.S. Constitution, but is derived from the establishment clause. The phrase itself first appears in a private letter from then-President Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802.[118]
In a later interview, O'Donnell said that she and her team "were high-fiving each other" after the debate, "thinking that we had exposed [that Coons] doesn't know the First Amendment. And then we read the reports that said the opposite, we were all like 'what?'" She stated, "Well, I think it says exactly what it says: that the government will not create -- will not dictate -- that every American has to believe a certain way, but it won't do anything to prevent the free exercise thereof." [119]
~~~~~~~~~~
I don't know what she has said this time but from the above comment--no. just no.
Yup, those plots were old before I turned 4. I moved on to mythology which is pretty much folk tales. Better plots though. 
Linear Mode
