I had read two articles today about Angle that made me question not only her intelligence, but her integrity, viability as a candidate, and pretty much everything else that accompanies a person seeking higher office.
The first article I saw was in response to Angle making a claim that Shariah Law was taking a hold of certain communities in America, which Angle saw as a fundamentalist and militant attack on American soil that must be remedied.
In a recording of the rally provided to The Associated Press by the Mesquite Local News, a man is heard asking Angle : "I keep hearing about Muslims wanting to take over the United States ... on a TV program just last night, I saw that they are taking over a city in Michigan and the residents of the city, they want them out. They want them out. So, I want to hear your thoughts about that."Angle has shown her ignorance of Islam, demonstrating her intolerance for certain ethnic groups in America, singling out an entire city in her statement. I expect stories of hate crimes to surface in Dearborn, Michigan in the coming week. Maybe Angle should watch MTV's The Real World to get a better grasp of what's going on - last season featured a young American girl who happened to be Muslim and who happened to be from Dearborn, Michigan, and guess what? She was just like everyone else!
Angle responds that "we're talking about a militant terrorist situation, which I believe it isn't a widespread thing, but it is enough that we need to address, and we have been addressing it."
"My thoughts are these, first of all, Dearborn, Michigan, and Frankford, Texas are on American soil, and under constitutional law. Not Sharia law. And I don't know how that happened in the United States," she said. "It seems to me there is something fundamentally wrong with allowing a foreign system of law to even take hold in any municipality or government situation in our United States."
Dearborn, Mich., has a thriving Muslim community. It was not immediately clear why Angle singled out Frankford, Texas, a former town that was annexed into Dallas around 1975.
Responding to the same question, she also drew comparisons between the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and the Nazi Holocaust. She said the property owners behind the proposed Islamic community center near ground zero should move it in deference to the people who died there.
The second story I read today involved Mike Huckabee and Sean Hannity, where Huckabee decided to go against the grain and disagree with Hannity over a Sharron Angle political advertisement where Angle insists her Democratic opponent voted for legislation that would use tax payer money to purchase erectile disfuntion medications for sexual predators.
While Hannity fawned over the advertisement, Huckabee sounded rational in his criticisms pointing out that the ad was not good, and definitely not believable (he failed to indicate whether or not the ad was true, which it wasn't).
Sam Stein wrote the following for The Huffington Post:
In fact, Reid didn't do that. The bill in question was not a bill at all. It was an amendment offered by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) in an effort to trip up health care reform. The Oklahoma Republican introduced the most politically palatable, non-objectionable piece of legislation in hopes that Democrats would relent, pass it, and change the content of the health care law they were hoping to pass through reconciliation. If Democrats didn't bite, the GOP would have ammo for the type of attack ad that Angle has now aired. Only the Nevada Republican got the details wrong. Coburn's amendment didn't provide taxpayer funds for Viagra; it prevented sexual predators from being able to use government subsidies or money to buy the drug (and other ED pills).Let me point out what Stein points out - it was not a bill, but an amendment to health care reform. Hannity and Huckabee referred to this as a bill in their interview.
Huckabee, in the end, was restrained in his effort to balance out the ad's allegations. What mattered, he was saying, was not that the charge was true (he had no clue if it was or wasn't), merely that it was believable. But his pushback against Hannity's enthusiasm for the spot was noticeable and fairly rare for the show where the exchange took place.
Here is what Andy Barr wrote for Politico:
Angle's ad basically lies to the public, and as you see with Hannity and Huckabee, they were fooled into believing that such a bill existed. Remember, they did not discuss whether or not Angle's claims were true - only believable. Angle was probably hoping voters would be as stupid as shee is and fall for her lies, which sadly will be the case for a good percentage of the electorate in Nevada.
I wonder how advertisements like this are legal when they blatantly lie.
As these two articles point out, Angle has no problem lying, deceiving and acting off her own stupidity. Maybe she would be perfect for Washington...