Doug Mataconis · · 28 comments

There’s much that can be said about tonight’s Delaware Senate debate between Chris Coons and Christine O’Donnell, but there’s one segment that ‘s likely to get a lot of play tomorrow:

NANCY KARIBJANIAN: What opinions, of late, that have come from our high court, do you most object to?

O’DONNELL: Oh, gosh. Um, give me a specific one. I’m sorry.

KARIBJANIAN: Actually, I can’t, because I need you to tell me which ones you object to.

O’DONNELL: Um, I’m very sorry, right off the top of my head, I know that there are a lot, but I’ll put it up on my website, I promise you.

WOLF BLITZER: We know that you disagree with Roe v. Wade.

O’DONNELL: Yeah, but she said a recent one.

BLITZER: That’s relatively recent.

O’DONNELL: She said “of late.” But yeah. Well, Roe v. Wade would not put the power — It’s not recent, it’s 30-something years old —

BLITZER: But since then, have there been any other Supreme Court decisions?

O’DONNELL: Well, let me say about Roe v. Wade — If that were overturned, would not make abortion illegal in the United States, it would put the power back to the states.

BLITZER: But besides that decision, anything else you disagree with?

O’DONNELL: Oh, there are several when it comes to pornography, when it comes to court decisions — not to Supreme Court, but federal court decisions to give terrorists Mirandize rights. There are a lot of things I believe — This California decision to overturn Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. I believe there are a lot of federal judges legislating from the bench.

BLITZER: That wasn’t the Supreme Court. That was a lower —

O’DONNELL: That was a federal judge. That’s what I said. In California.