Michelle Bachmann (1 Viewer)

[Maurile Tremblay]

Taibbi's article on Bachmann was plagiarism at worst; laziness at best:

The Atlantic

It looks like there's no allegation of plagiarism, but Taibbi's editor definitely shouldn't have removed Taibbi's citation to the paper he got a lot of the info from. (Which doesn't excuse any laziness on Taibbi's part.)

 

[timschochet]

I'd like to think someone like this would get roasted in the primaries, but she's a more effective candidate than Huckabee was and he did very well. So it scares me that she might actually come out of this thing as the nominee.

I'd love to see her as President, where I think she'd be a fine leader. But she has no chance of winning against Obama in the general. The only arrows Obama has in his quiver are the demonization of his opponents, and Bachmann's got a lot of targets Obama can take aim at.

The goal in 2012 is the ouster of Obama. The very #1 criteria of the candidate the Republicans put up against him must be "can that person win?". I don't think she can.

See my above post. According to my brother, as well as other Tea Partiers I have read and spoken to, the primary goal in 2012 is for the Tea Party to take over the Republican party and remove its "establishment" leadership. So long as this is accomplished, winning the general is secondary.

 

[Buddy Ball 2K3]

I'd like to think someone like this would get roasted in the primaries, but she's a more effective candidate than Huckabee was and he did very well. So it scares me that she might actually come out of this thing as the nominee.

I'd love to see her as President, where I think she'd be a fine leader. But she has no chance of winning against Obama in the general. The only arrows Obama has in his quiver are the demonization of his opponents, and Bachmann's got a lot of targets Obama can take aim at.

The goal in 2012 is the ouster of Obama. The very #1 criteria of the candidate the Republicans put up against him must be "can that person win?". I don't think she can.

See my above post. According to my brother, as well as other Tea Partiers I have read and spoken to, the primary goal in 2012 is for the Tea Party to take over the Republican party and remove its "establishment" leadership. So long as this is accomplished, winning the general is secondary.

Didn't this already happen but the other way around?

 

[jamny]

I'd like to think someone like this would get roasted in the primaries, but she's a more effective candidate than Huckabee was and he did very well. So it scares me that she might actually come out of this thing as the nominee.I'd love to see her as President, where I think she'd be a fine leader. But she has no chance of winning against Obama in the general. The only arrows Obama has in his quiver are the demonization of his opponents, and Bachmann's got a lot of targets Obama can take aim at.The goal in 2012 is the ouster of Obama. The very #1 criteria of the candidate the Republicans put up against him must be "can that person win?". I don't think she can.

I think Iowa is her only highlight. Romney must be loving it since she may have knocked Pawlenty out of the race before it even gets off the ground.eta: I wouldn't want her as President and question whether she'd be a fine leader.

 

[timschochet]

I'd like to think someone like this would get roasted in the primaries, but she's a more effective candidate than Huckabee was and he did very well. So it scares me that she might actually come out of this thing as the nominee.

I'd love to see her as President, where I think she'd be a fine leader. But she has no chance of winning against Obama in the general. The only arrows Obama has in his quiver are the demonization of his opponents, and Bachmann's got a lot of targets Obama can take aim at.

The goal in 2012 is the ouster of Obama. The very #1 criteria of the candidate the Republicans put up against him must be "can that person win?". I don't think she can.

See my above post. According to my brother, as well as other Tea Partiers I have read and spoken to, the primary goal in 2012 is for the Tea Party to take over the Republican party and remove its "establishment" leadership. So long as this is accomplished, winning the general is secondary.

Didn't this already happen but the other way around?

We'll see. If you, Jamny, and Stat are right, then this will be the case and Romney will win the nomination. I hope you guys are right. But right now I'm not sure about it.

 

[Orange Crush]

I'd like to think someone like this would get roasted in the primaries, but she's a more effective candidate than Huckabee was and he did very well. So it scares me that she might actually come out of this thing as the nominee.I'd love to see her as President, where I think she'd be a fine leader. But she has no chance of winning against Obama in the general. The only arrows Obama has in his quiver are the demonization of his opponents, and Bachmann's got a lot of targets Obama can take aim at.The goal in 2012 is the ouster of Obama. The very #1 criteria of the candidate the Republicans put up against him must be "can that person win?". I don't think she can.

It's interesting to me that winning is given such a priority over ideological purity on the Republican side, considering that the mantra for the last couple years has been "Bush wasn't a true conservative," and "We need to return to standing by our principles."

 

[bigbottom]

Her latest flub is insisting the founders fought slavery, they didn't. And she added to it by insisting the John Quincy Adams was a founding father, he wasn't. His father was but he wasn't. And of course just like Palin she's right and history is wrong. Again. Darn history.

Do some research on the writings of Franklin, Hamilton, Jefferson, Gadsden and Mather. Then look into the debates that had A1S9 written into the constitution.

Franklin the slave owner? Jefferson the slave owner? Maybe we should look to Washington. Oh yeah he had teeth pulled from slaves mouths and implanted in his as he was nearly toothless. Now Franklin eventually came around and released his slaves as did Washington in his will, better late then never. And Franklin went on to found the Pennsylvania Anti-Slavery Society. Nice change for him and I applaud it. But to claim that the founders fought slavery when they were pretty much all slave owners and they signed off on a document that dehumanized a race for profit is ridiculous.

You're wrong here NCC. Jefferson, Franklin, Adams, and others all tried to get slavery banned right from the beginning of the Republic. Jefferson's ideals were always beautiful, even though he was a wreck when it came to living up to those ideals. A more accurate statement from Bachmann would have been that "some" or even "several" Founding Fathers fought the institution of slavery.

I didn't see that Bachmann defended her statement by insisting she was referring solely to John Quincy Adams, because even though he was only 9 years old when the Declaration was signed, he "worked as his father's secretary." This, apparently, means that the Founding Fathers fought slavery. Oof.

Wow.She stuck by bad facts. Avoiding answering questions. And who says "good morning" other than a greeting?

Stephanopoulos: In your announcement you said 'my voice is part of a movement to take back our country.' From whom?

Bachmann: Well, from the people all across the nation.

 

[Statorama]

Conversation with my Tea Party, Bachmann-loving brother last night:ME: Have you read where most experts believe that if she were nominated she would have no chance of winning the general election?HIM: I don't believe that, but even if it were true, I don't care about that either. Our goal is to reshape the Republican party; that comes first. The rest of the nation comes later.

Someone didn't learn his CO'D lesson.The reshaping of America has to start at the ground floor. For too long, conservatives have ignored most local elections. That's why school boards are filled with union activists and former teachers (but I repeat myself) instead of people that bring fiscally sound ideas to the table. That has to change. Conservatives need to be involved in changing the flow from the bottom up. Get a conservative alderman elected. Work hard for your conservative state senators. Make your state a conservative stronghold. Now, I love the Tea Partiers, but they have to realize this is a marathon, not a sprint. They also have to realize that some battles just have to be won, instead of worrying about winning it "the right way". Obama must be defeated. Would I love Bachmann replacing him? Sure. But I also would also be fine with a guy like Huntsman replacing him. Is Huntsman my ideal conservative? Hell no, he's the Republican candidate for people that don't like conservatives. But I agree with him on 85% of things, which works for me.There's this current troubling groundswell that Obama isn't so bad, and that *maybe* he should be given 4 more years to be fair. The people that believe that are jaw-droppingly ignorant. Obama has had to hold back in order to get re-elected in 2012. Once he becomes a lame duck, watch out. Every liberal nightmare you can dream of will become a reality. He will preside over an economic tsunami that will make Greece look like a bake sale. This is like going back in time and getting all the passengers off the Hindenberg or waking up Smith and letting him know an iceberg was on the horizon. We all have the opportunity, nay, the responsibility to prevent a catastrophe in 2012. Obama must not serve a second term.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I'd like to think someone like this would get roasted in the primaries, but she's a more effective candidate than Huckabee was and he did very well. So it scares me that she might actually come out of this thing as the nominee.I'd love to see her as President, where I think she'd be a fine leader. But she has no chance of winning against Obama in the general. The only arrows Obama has in his quiver are the demonization of his opponents, and Bachmann's got a lot of targets Obama can take aim at.The goal in 2012 is the ouster of Obama. The very #1 criteria of the candidate the Republicans put up against him must be "can that person win?". I don't think she can.

It's interesting to me that winning is given such a priority over ideological purity on the Republican side, considering that the mantra for the last couple years has been "Bush wasn't a true conservative," and "We need to return to standing by our principles."

But teabagers - the hard right of the GOP hated McCain; and in fact in order to get their vote they got him to add Palin as his running mate.

 

[Statorama]

I'd like to think someone like this would get roasted in the primaries, but she's a more effective candidate than Huckabee was and he did very well. So it scares me that she might actually come out of this thing as the nominee.I'd love to see her as President, where I think she'd be a fine leader. But she has no chance of winning against Obama in the general. The only arrows Obama has in his quiver are the demonization of his opponents, and Bachmann's got a lot of targets Obama can take aim at.The goal in 2012 is the ouster of Obama. The very #1 criteria of the candidate the Republicans put up against him must be "can that person win?". I don't think she can.

It's interesting to me that winning is given such a priority over ideological purity on the Republican side, considering that the mantra for the last couple years has been "Bush wasn't a true conservative," and "We need to return to standing by our principles."

Oh, don't get me wrong. I would vote for Obama instead of someone less conservative (like Nancy Pelosi for example). But we need to have someone at least a little conservative in the White House to build the foundation for the conservative revolution. Like I said before, it's a marathon not a sprint. It's chess, not checkers. Be smart, win over the hearts and minds of "independents" at a pace they're ready for. I don't think "moderates" are ready for someone that's conservatively pure like Bachmann. They need to be "romanced" if you will. Start with a guy like Huntsman or Romney and then take it to the next level.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I'd like to think someone like this would get roasted in the primaries, but she's a more effective candidate than Huckabee was and he did very well. So it scares me that she might actually come out of this thing as the nominee.

I'd love to see her as President, where I think she'd be a fine leader. But she has no chance of winning against Obama in the general. The only arrows Obama has in his quiver are the demonization of his opponents, and Bachmann's got a lot of targets Obama can take aim at.

The goal in 2012 is the ouster of Obama. The very #1 criteria of the candidate the Republicans put up against him must be "can that person win?". I don't think she can.

See my above post. According to my brother, as well as other Tea Partiers I have read and spoken to, the primary goal in 2012 is for the Tea Party to take over the Republican party and remove its "establishment" leadership. So long as this is accomplished, winning the general is secondary.

This would make sense and I can see the actions of the tea party in a new light.They want to make the GOP more religious and even more socially conservative by being more anti-abortion , tougher on immigration, basically the southern strategy on steroids.

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

I'd like to think someone like this would get roasted in the primaries, but she's a more effective candidate than Huckabee was and he did very well. So it scares me that she might actually come out of this thing as the nominee.

I'd love to see her as President, where I think she'd be a fine leader. But she has no chance of winning against Obama in the general. The only arrows Obama has in his quiver are the demonization of his opponents, and Bachmann's got a lot of targets Obama can take aim at.

The goal in 2012 is the ouster of Obama. The very #1 criteria of the candidate the Republicans put up against him must be "can that person win?". I don't think she can.

It's interesting to me that winning is given such a priority over ideological purity on the Republican side, considering that the mantra for the last couple years has been "Bush wasn't a true conservative," and "We need to return to standing by our principles."

Oh, don't get me wrong. I would vote for Obama instead of someone less conservative (like Nancy Pelosi for example). But we need to have someone at least a little conservative in the White House to build the foundation for the conservative revolution. Like I said before, it's a marathon not a sprint. It's chess, not checkers. Be smart, win over the hearts and minds of "independents" at a pace they're ready for. I don't think "moderates" are ready for someone that's conservatively pure like Bachmann. They need to be "romanced" if you will. Start with a guy like Huntsman or Romney and then take it to the next level.

Man, that's rich.

 

[Clifford]

This is an image most Hollywood horror script writers would be proud of

Right now, we are looking at reaching down the throat and ripping the guts out of freedom.

Just imagine that for a second. Jesus, what is wrong with this woman. Glad we had that national talk about not whipping up the crazies.

This really is a problem with politics. Using rhetoric like this just to whip up a crowd so the TV shows people cheering at your rally. This is so beyond any form of reasonable debate I don't think she can be brought back. If she manages to win the nomination, I think that's it for the Republican party.

 

[Statorama]

I'd like to think someone like this would get roasted in the primaries, but she's a more effective candidate than Huckabee was and he did very well. So it scares me that she might actually come out of this thing as the nominee.I'd love to see her as President, where I think she'd be a fine leader. But she has no chance of winning against Obama in the general. The only arrows Obama has in his quiver are the demonization of his opponents, and Bachmann's got a lot of targets Obama can take aim at.The goal in 2012 is the ouster of Obama. The very #1 criteria of the candidate the Republicans put up against him must be "can that person win?". I don't think she can.

It's interesting to me that winning is given such a priority over ideological purity on the Republican side, considering that the mantra for the last couple years has been "Bush wasn't a true conservative," and "We need to return to standing by our principles."

But teabagers - the hard right of the GOP hated McCain; and in fact in order to get their vote they got him to add Palin as his running mate.

She was a single bad interview from becoming Vice President, even though she was dragging the McCain campaign carcas toward the finish line. He would have lost by Mondalian numbers had he not had Governor Palin with him.I learned in a very hard way that the uneducated "moderates" were not prepared for conservative purity at it's highest levels when CO'D lost. They need to be eased into it on a national level, which is annoying but we'll deal with it. At the local level, however, people are HUNGRY for conservative change. Look what happened in Wisconsin. VERY conservative governor, state senate, and house of reps. Heck, they even ousted a long term liberal from the US Senate.On a national level, we have to have a more conservative person in the White House than Barack Obama in 2012. If it's someone a little bit more conservative (Huntsman) or a lot more conservative (Bachmann/Perry) is inconsequential. Obama must not serve a second term for the safety and long term health of the country.

 

[Statorama]

They want to make the GOP more religious and even more socially conservative by being more anti-abortion , tougher on immigration, basically the southern strategy on steroids.

Media spin. The Tea Party movement has always been about a smaller, leaner, more efficient government and that will continue to be the primary core message long after all of you moochers and ankle biters give up trying to spin it otherwise. It's a big tent movement and all are invited, as long as they believe in a smaller, leaner, more efficient government.

 

[Clifford]

I've seen the word "purity" a lot in your posts. Interesting.

 

[Jackstraw]

I'd like to think someone like this would get roasted in the primaries, but she's a more effective candidate than Huckabee was and he did very well. So it scares me that she might actually come out of this thing as the nominee.

I'd love to see her as President, where I think she'd be a fine leader. But she has no chance of winning against Obama in the general. The only arrows Obama has in his quiver are the demonization of his opponents, and Bachmann's got a lot of targets Obama can take aim at.

The goal in 2012 is the ouster of Obama. The very #1 criteria of the candidate the Republicans put up against him must be "can that person win?". I don't think she can.

It's interesting to me that winning is given such a priority over ideological purity on the Republican side, considering that the mantra for the last couple years has been "Bush wasn't a true conservative," and "We need to return to standing by our principles."

Oh, don't get me wrong. I would vote for Obama instead of someone less conservative (like Nancy Pelosi for example). But we need to have someone at least a little conservative in the White House to build the foundation for the conservative revolution. Like I said before, it's a marathon not a sprint. It's chess, not checkers. Be smart, win over the hearts and minds of "independents" at a pace they're ready for. I don't think "moderates" are ready for someone that's conservatively pure like Bachmann. They need to be "romanced" if you will. Start with a guy like Huntsman or Romney and then take it to the next level.

Man, that's rich.

Thats going to be a tall order when you are actively working towards evisceration of the poor and middle class. Take a look at the approval ratings of some of these new governors after only a few months in office. The florida guy is at like 29%. You can't win on populism while you are actively screwing the population.

 

[Statorama]

I've seen the word "purity" a lot in your posts. Interesting.

I'm speaking of an ideological purity. Which candidate best represents the Tea Party movement's core values of a smaller, leaner, more efficient government? Huntsman is probably in that 85% ballpark, which is far greater than what we currently have putting boots on the oval office desk. While Bachmann is the most ideologically pure candidate (as long as Sarah doesn't get in), she doesn't have a reasonable chance of fighting off the pro-Obama media blitz once it starts attacking her full force. Looking ahead, she can't win without some moderate support.I hate that the great unwashed aren't ready for a true conservative as President, but that's the reality of the situation we're faced with. My main goal is to help save America, and that's impossible with Barack Obama serving a second term.

 

[Jackstraw]

They want to make the GOP more religious and even more socially conservative by being more anti-abortion , tougher on immigration, basically the southern strategy on steroids.

Media spin. The Tea Party movement has always been about a smaller, leaner, more efficient government and that will continue to be the primary core message long after all of you moochers and ankle biters give up trying to spin it otherwise. It's a big tent movement and all are invited, as long as they believe in a smaller, leaner, more efficient government.

EVERYONE believes in a "smaller, leaner, more efficient" government. But its all code for fundamentally abandoning a large swath of the American public. Once you get past the platitudes there are serious consequnces. For what? Do we can continue down the failed supply side road? That the republicans won;t bend a single inch on revenues is telling to me.

 

[Statorama]

Thats going to be a tall order when you are actively working towards evisceration of the poor and middle class. Take a look at the approval ratings of some of these new governors after only a few months in office. The florida guy is at like 29%. You can't win on populism while you are actively screwing the population.

Polls can be spun to show whatever outcome the pollster wants.Elections are what count. We recently had a Supreme Court election in Wisconsin, which was supposed to be a referendum of Governor Scott Walker. Turns out, even with all of the media pushing the liberal candidate and all of the union money going to the liberal candidate, the voters chose the more conservative candidate.

 

[snogger]

Conversation with my Tea Party, Bachmann-loving brother last night:

ME: Have you read about these gaffes by Bachmann?

HIM: Sure. I don't care.

ME: Did you read where she said The Lion King was a form of homosexual indoctrination?

HIM: Sure. I don't care.

ME: Have you read where most experts believe that if she were nominated she would have no chance of winning the general election?

HIM: I don't believe that, but even if it were true, I don't care about that either. Our goal is to reshape the Republican party; that comes first. The rest of the nation comes later.

So no different than talking to a Ron Paul supporter. Neither one has a chance to win the nomination, but both will do al that is possible to be in the spotlight while it is still near them.Bachmann will probably win Iowa, much like Huckabee won it in 2008. It didn't mean a thing back then and it won't matter this time either.

Romney, or a "yet to declare" candidate(Dream would be Christie) will be your Republican to choose from.

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

They want to make the GOP more religious and even more socially conservative by being more anti-abortion , tougher on immigration, basically the southern strategy on steroids.

Media spin. The Tea Party movement has always been about a smaller, leaner, more efficient government and that will continue to be the primary core message long after all of you moochers and ankle biters give up trying to spin it otherwise. It's a big tent movement and all are invited, as long as they believe in a smaller, leaner, more efficient government.

Seems like small government is a ways down the list:

NON-NEGOTIABLE CORE BELIEFS OF THE TEA PARTY1. Illegal Aliens Are Here Illegally.2. Pro-Domestic Employment Is Indispensable.3. Stronger Military Is Essential.4. Special Interests Eliminated.5. Gun Ownership Is Sacred.6. Government Must Be Downsized.7. National Budget Must Be Balanced.8. Deficit Spending Will End.9. Bail-Out And Stimulus Plans Are Illegal.10. Reduce Personal Income Taxes A Must.11. Reduce Business Income Taxes Are Mandatory.12. Political Offices Available To Average Citizens.13. Intrusive Government Stopped.14. English As Core Language Is Required.15. Traditional Family Values Are Encouraged."Common Sense Constitutional Conservative Self-Governance Is Our Mode Of Operation"(Yes, We Are A Christian Nation) You don't have to be a Christian to enjoy freedom. The Tea Party welcomes all Red Blooded U.S. Citizens.

Some of those items coincide with my desire for what government should be, but when you prop up Michelle Bachmann as your leader, I'm out x1000.

 

[Clifford]

I've seen the word "purity" a lot in your posts. Interesting.

I'm speaking of an ideological purity. Which candidate best represents the Tea Party movement's core values of a smaller, leaner, more efficient government? Huntsman is probably in that 85% ballpark, which is far greater than what we currently have putting boots on the oval office desk. While Bachmann is the most ideologically pure candidate (as long as Sarah doesn't get in), she doesn't have a reasonable chance of fighting off the pro-Obama media blitz once it starts attacking her full force. Looking ahead, she can't win without some moderate support.I hate that the great unwashed aren't ready for a true conservative as President, but that's the reality of the situation we're faced with. My main goal is to help save America, and that's impossible with Barack Obama serving a second term.

Please define "ideologically pure." That is a very vague and scary sounding concept. Also, "the great unwashed?" Seriously? Who are they? Seems like it would be a pretty apt description of a Bachmann/Palin rally.

 

[Statorama]

EVERYONE believes in a "smaller, leaner, more efficient" government.

No they're not. Some would have you believe that the cure is higher taxes on an already depressed American populace and it's industrial leaders. That government needs more revenue to continue growing and everything will be fine.Members of the Tea Party movement feel that all aspects of the Government are bloated and wasteful. They belive that ALL departments could continue to provide quality output with a 6% trim of their budgets. Military or Social, doesn't matter. Don't lump chicken-neck Republicans in with the Tea Party movement.

 

[Statorama]

Seems like small government is a ways down the list:

When you have a big tent, there's a lot of big voices in the room. Doesn't shake the core message.

 

[Clifford]

They want to make the GOP more religious and even more socially conservative by being more anti-abortion , tougher on immigration, basically the southern strategy on steroids.

Media spin. The Tea Party movement has always been about a smaller, leaner, more efficient government and that will continue to be the primary core message long after all of you moochers and ankle biters give up trying to spin it otherwise. It's a big tent movement and all are invited, as long as they believe in a smaller, leaner, more efficient government.

Seems like small government is a ways down the list:

NON-NEGOTIABLE CORE BELIEFS OF THE TEA PARTY1. Illegal Aliens Are Here Illegally.2. Pro-Domestic Employment Is Indispensable.3. Stronger Military Is Essential.4. Special Interests Eliminated.5. Gun Ownership Is Sacred.6. Government Must Be Downsized.7. National Budget Must Be Balanced.8. Deficit Spending Will End.9. Bail-Out And Stimulus Plans Are Illegal.10. Reduce Personal Income Taxes A Must.11. Reduce Business Income Taxes Are Mandatory.12. Political Offices Available To Average Citizens.13. Intrusive Government Stopped.14. English As Core Language Is Required.15. Traditional Family Values Are Encouraged."Common Sense Constitutional Conservative Self-Governance Is Our Mode Of Operation"(Yes, We Are A Christian Nation) You don't have to be a Christian to enjoy freedom. The Tea Party welcomes all Red Blooded U.S. Citizens.

Some of those items coincide with my desire for what government should be, but when you prop up Michelle Bachmann as your leader, I'm out x1000.

Sorry but #s 3, 7, 8, 10, and 11 are impossible to achieve at the same time. But number 3 is all I need to know that the tea party DOES NOT in fact believe in leaner, more efficient government. They want to spend more on the biggest waste of money our country currently engages in. Also, what in the hell does #15 have to do with a leaner, more efficient less intrusive government.Further proof that this "movement" is nothing more than gut reaction against social change sprinkled with a few handpicked libertarian ideals (the ones that don't conflict with #s 2, 3, and 15). Also, #12? Are they saying there shouldn't be campaign budgets?

 

[rolyaTy]

Ah, gotcha politics, political bickering...

It's beginning to look a lot like spin time, every where you go....

 

[Statorama]

Please define "ideologically pure." That is a very vague and scary sounding concept.

It's how you fall ideologically along the core Tea Party movement baseline of a smaller, leaner, more efficient government.Take for example a government program like social security. Do you feel Social Security is run like a Ponzi scheme that is due to fail if not reformed, or do you think that it's just fine and everyone needs to shut up about it. That's a very broad spectrum. Now in between, there are those that feel with varying degrees of tweaks that the program can be sustained long term. How you fit within that spectrum is your level of conservative ideological purity.

I don't have a scale or anything for you, but as candidates get more wishy-washy on fiscal issues caused by big government waste the more their 'purity' level goes down.

As for unwashed masses, I can never keep up with what the Democrats are calling moderates these days. It used to be "flyover states". Oh right, now it's those with "low sloping foreheads".

Edit to add /url tag

 

[MasterofOrion]

I really don't care about Bachmann's inaccuracies, except to the extent that many of them represent evangelical conservative teaching over the last several years. These people really don't believe in evolution, they don't believe in global warming, they think homosexuality is evil, they believe the government and media is lying to them. Master of Orion is a poster in this forum who is probably the most representative of Michele Bachmann's essential viewpoints. If you find Master of Orion's posts to be credible and agreeable, then you probably should cast your vote for Bachmann.

Please stop speaking for me because you always distort my POV. For example, I do not hate Homosexuals and I don't think government is always lying to me. Please link or respond to a specific post. You do this often and I find it a rather shady debate tactic.

 

[rolyaTy]

Seems like small government is a ways down the list:

When you have a big tent, there's a lot of big voices in the room. Doesn't shake the core message.

Big tents also attract clowns, strange animals, and grotesque human specimens.

 

[Statorama]

But number 3 is all I need to know that the tea party DOES NOT in fact believe in leaner, more efficient government.

That's why that list is bunk. It's a very loud Tea Partier that means well, but doesn't have a grasp of the core principles.

 

[FavreCo]

Members of the Tea Party movement feel that all aspects of the Government are bloated and wasteful. They belive that ALL departments could continue to provide quality output with a 6% trim of their budgets. Military or Social, doesn't matter.

Will that get us to a balanced budget?

 

[Mario Kart]

NON-NEGOTIABLE CORE BELIEFS OF THE TEA PARTY

1. Illegal Aliens Are Here Illegally.

2. Pro-Domestic Employment Is Indispensable.

3. Stronger Military Is Essential.

4. Special Interests Eliminated.

5. Gun Ownership Is Sacred.

6. Government Must Be Downsized.

7. National Budget Must Be Balanced.

8. Deficit Spending Will End.

9. Bail-Out And Stimulus Plans Are Illegal.

10. Reduce Personal Income Taxes A Must.

11. Reduce Business Income Taxes Are Mandatory.

12. Political Offices Available To Average Citizens.

13. Intrusive Government Stopped.

14. English As Core Language Is Required.

15. Traditional Family Values Are Encouraged.

Some of these are downright scary. One thing that is brought up a lot is how the Dem's do not have a solution to any problem. What are the solutions the Tea Party is offering up to these 15 goals commandments?

 

[Statorama]

Members of the Tea Party movement feel that all aspects of the Government are bloated and wasteful. They belive that ALL departments could continue to provide quality output with a 6% trim of their budgets. Military or Social, doesn't matter.

Will that get us to a balanced budget?

If not, it's a great start.

 

[rolyaTy]

The number one problem our country faces isn't one of budgets or taxes, it's about representation and political influence, and how the average person in America is being sold out by politicians who cater to those who have money, who can help them win elections.

The biggest thing our country needs to focus on is re-balancing the effect of money on politics, and corporate influence on politicians. We need meaningful reform of our political system and the influence that money buys.

That'd go a long way to fixing our problems on wall street too, as they are related issues.

 

[Statorama]

NON-NEGOTIABLE CORE BELIEFS OF THE TEA PARTY

1. Illegal Aliens Are Here Illegally.

2. Pro-Domestic Employment Is Indispensable.

3. Stronger Military Is Essential.

4. Special Interests Eliminated.

5. Gun Ownership Is Sacred.

6. Government Must Be Downsized.

7. National Budget Must Be Balanced.

8. Deficit Spending Will End.

9. Bail-Out And Stimulus Plans Are Illegal.

10. Reduce Personal Income Taxes A Must.

11. Reduce Business Income Taxes Are Mandatory.

12. Political Offices Available To Average Citizens.

13. Intrusive Government Stopped.

14. English As Core Language Is Required.

15. Traditional Family Values Are Encouraged.

Some of these are downright scary. One thing that is brought up a lot is how the Dem's do not have a solution to any problem. What are the solutions the Tea Party is offering up to these 15 goals commandments?

Which one(s) of those do you disagree with?

 

[Statorama]

The number one problem our country faces isn't one of budgets or taxes, it's about representation and political influence, and how the average person in America is being sold out by politicians who cater to those who have money, who can help them win elections. The biggest thing our country needs to focus on is re-balancing the effect of money on politics, and corporate influence on politicians. We need meaningful reform of our political system and the influence that money buys.That'd go a long way to fixing our problems on wall street too, as they are related issues.

I'd join your cause.

 

[Orange Crush]

The number one problem our country faces isn't one of budgets or taxes, it's about representation and political influence, and how the average person in America is being sold out by politicians who cater to those who have money, who can help them win elections.

The biggest thing our country needs to focus on is re-balancing the effect of money on politics, and corporate influence on politicians. We need meaningful reform of our political system and the influence that money buys.

That'd go a long way to fixing our problems on wall street too, as they are related issues.

Because of Citizens United and other related Supreme Court decisions, it will take a new Constitutional Amendment to remedy that problem.

 

[Statorama]

Because of Citizens United and other related Supreme Court decisions

Had to have something to balance out all of the illegal foreign money that guys like Obama take in. Don't get me started on the money funneled to Democrats by unions.

 

[rolyaTy]

The number one problem our country faces isn't one of budgets or taxes, it's about representation and political influence, and how the average person in America is being sold out by politicians who cater to those who have money, who can help them win elections.

The biggest thing our country needs to focus on is re-balancing the effect of money on politics, and corporate influence on politicians. We need meaningful reform of our political system and the influence that money buys.

That'd go a long way to fixing our problems on wall street too, as they are related issues.

Because of Citizens United and other related Supreme Court decisions, it will take a new Constitutional Amendment to remedy that problem.

Well, as we're in a tea party thread, let's put it in their language:Git r done.

 

[roadkill1292]

NON-NEGOTIABLE CORE BELIEFS OF THE TEA PARTY

1. Illegal Aliens Are Here Illegally.

2. Pro-Domestic Employment Is Indispensable.

3. Stronger Military Is Essential.

4. Special Interests Eliminated.

5. Gun Ownership Is Sacred.

6. Government Must Be Downsized.

7. National Budget Must Be Balanced.

8. Deficit Spending Will End.

9. Bail-Out And Stimulus Plans Are Illegal.

10. Reduce Personal Income Taxes A Must.

11. Reduce Business Income Taxes Are Mandatory.

12. Political Offices Available To Average Citizens.

13. Intrusive Government Stopped.

14. English As Core Language Is Required.

15. Traditional Family Values Are Encouraged.

Why is it so important to the Tea Party for us to have maids and butlers?

 

[rolyaTy]

Because of Citizens United and other related Supreme Court decisions

Had to have something to balance out all of the illegal foreign money that guys like Obama take in. Don't get me started on the money funneled to Democrats by unions.

Money has bought and paid for many elections and candidates for years, on both sides, resulting in a huge pro-business bias in the laws that have been coming out for decades, and we see the results in bubble burst after bubble burst. There will be more, until we decide to actually force our leaders to represent all of us, not just those of us with money./hijack

 

[Mario Kart]

NON-NEGOTIABLE CORE BELIEFS OF THE TEA PARTY

1. Illegal Aliens Are Here Illegally. (our country was founded by illegals. This, as the top goal, is very minor compared to others. And, what is the implementation plan here?)

2. Pro-Domestic Employment Is Indispensable. (okay, so stop allowing outsourcing? Is that not against our capitalist economy? Again, implementation?)

3. Stronger Military Is Essential. (we spend the most and have the best military right now. If anything we could lessen our military presence elsewhere which will strengthen us locally. Not sure if that is the outlook though.)

4. Special Interests Eliminated. (special interests unless they favor us? How to implement this, why so important)

5. Gun Ownership Is Sacred. (no its not. Guns need to be taken off the market. We have too much gun violence as is yet we want to make it "sacred". That terminology is scary.)

6. Government Must Be Downsized. (great, how?)

7. National Budget Must Be Balanced. (great, should this not be more important though?)

8. Deficit Spending Will End. (great, lower taxes, lower spending, how?)

9. Bail-Out And Stimulus Plans Are Illegal. (great, how?)

10. Reduce Personal Income Taxes A Must. (okay, what is the long term goal here?)

11. Reduce Business Income Taxes Are Mandatory. (okay, what is the long term goal here?)

12. Political Offices Available To Average Citizens. (should this not be more important?)

13. Intrusive Government Stopped. (what is considered intrusive? #15 seems to contradict this)

14. English As Core Language Is Required. (is this not government intrusion?)

15. Traditional Family Values Are Encouraged. (say again? I hope they are not serious)

Some of these are downright scary. One thing that is brought up a lot is how the Dem's do not have a solution to any problem. What are the solutions the Tea Party is offering up to these 15 goals commandments?

Which one(s) of those do you disagree with?

Not that I agree with or disagree with any of them. How are those goals going to be achieved? I would like every American to live a prosperous life. That is a good goal until my implementation of it is to blow everyone else up in the world. After I achieve that, we will have so much more land and beach front property. That is a good thing, no?

 

[Clifford]

But number 3 is all I need to know that the tea party DOES NOT in fact believe in leaner, more efficient government.

That's why that list is bunk. It's a very loud Tea Partier that means well, but doesn't have a grasp of the core principles.

Thats the whole problem: too many freaking loudmouths, not enough direction. That's why the party is so fractured and seems to flit from one set of principles to the next every time you read about one of the chapters/groups.Here is what I hear from the Tea Party:They hate government entitlement programs and want to stop those. They don't think anyone should be living off their dollar without pitching in. I get that.They have no problem with spending huge amounts of money on a world-police size force.They oppose foreign wars under Barack Obama. They had no opposition to them under GWB.They "want their country" back from forces conspiring to take it away from them, loosely assembled from the ranks of the liberals, gays, communists, intellectuals, democrats, welfare recipients (read blacks), illegal aliens (read hispanics legal or not), and ACORN.They had no interest in politics before the election of Barack Obama.They believe that lower taxes and deregulation of the nation's industries will stimulate the economy. The see no irony in this and the economic collapse that spurred their interest in economics.They believe that a document penned 200+ years ago is all we need for governance.They believe in government interference if it reinforces conservative values and right-wing social positions.Similarly, they have no problem with a police state so long as they cracking down on the druggies, regardless of whether constitutional rights are routinely trampled in the process.So what you essentially have is a collection of political neophytes who are pissed off and listening to people whose only intention is to get them even madder. And these people are not particularly well-informed themselves, either about the current, past, or future state of our nation and economy. Thus the whole is no more than the sum of its parts, which don't add up to anything remotely coherent that could be called a platform or a strategy.

 

[babydemon90]

NON-NEGOTIABLE CORE BELIEFS OF THE TEA PARTY

3. Stronger Military Is Essential.

6. Government Must Be Downsized.

Curious about this...exactly what is a 'stronger' military essential to? Stronger then what? What it is now? Stronger them Mexico? And it would seem that increasing the military is at odds with downsizing the government...

 

[urbanhack]

Seems like small government is a ways down the list:

When you have a big tent, there's a lot of big voices in the room. Doesn't shake the core message.

lol

 

[roadkill1292]

NON-NEGOTIABLE CORE BELIEFS OF THE TEA PARTY

3. Stronger Military Is Essential.

6. Government Must Be Downsized.

Curious about this...exactly what is a 'stronger' military essential to? Stronger then what? What it is now? Stronger them Mexico? And it would seem that increasing the military is at odds with downsizing the government...

 

[ericttspikes]

The number one problem our country faces isn't one of budgets or taxes, it's about representation and political influence, and how the average person in America is being sold out by politicians who cater to those who have money, who can help them win elections. The biggest thing our country needs to focus on is re-balancing the effect of money on politics, and corporate influence on politicians. We need meaningful reform of our political system and the influence that money buys.That'd go a long way to fixing our problems on wall street too, as they are related issues.

I'd join your cause.

Your beloved "conservative" judges don't agree with you, and have been busy as hell stacking the deck for the big $$$$$$$$$$$.http://www.kingmandailyminer.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubsectionID=1&ArticleID=45384

 

[ericttspikes]

The number one problem our country faces isn't one of budgets or taxes, it's about representation and political influence, and how the average person in America is being sold out by politicians who cater to those who have money, who can help them win elections.

The biggest thing our country needs to focus on is re-balancing the effect of money on politics, and corporate influence on politicians. We need meaningful reform of our political system and the influence that money buys.

That'd go a long way to fixing our problems on wall street too, as they are related issues.

Because of Citizens United and other related Supreme Court decisions, it will take a new Constitutional Amendment to remedy that problem.

Or stop appointing conservative judges who are bought and paid for. They should be forced to wear patches on his gowns like NASCAR drivers with all the crazy rulings they have laid down recently. They don't even try to hide that they are bought anymore.

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

They want to make the GOP more religious and even more socially conservative by being more anti-abortion , tougher on immigration, basically the southern strategy on steroids.

Media spin. The Tea Party movement has always been about a smaller, leaner, more efficient government and that will continue to be the primary core message long after all of you moochers and ankle biters give up trying to spin it otherwise. It's a big tent movement and all are invited, as long as they believe in a smaller, leaner, more efficient government.

Seems like small government is a ways down the list:

NON-NEGOTIABLE CORE BELIEFS OF THE TEA PARTY1. Illegal Aliens Are Here Illegally.2. Pro-Domestic Employment Is Indispensable.3. Stronger Military Is Essential.4. Special Interests Eliminated.5. Gun Ownership Is Sacred.6. Government Must Be Downsized.7. National Budget Must Be Balanced.8. Deficit Spending Will End.9. Bail-Out And Stimulus Plans Are Illegal.10. Reduce Personal Income Taxes A Must.11. Reduce Business Income Taxes Are Mandatory.12. Political Offices Available To Average Citizens.13. Intrusive Government Stopped.14. English As Core Language Is Required.15. Traditional Family Values Are Encouraged."Common Sense Constitutional Conservative Self-Governance Is Our Mode Of Operation"(Yes, We Are A Christian Nation) You don't have to be a Christian to enjoy freedom. The Tea Party welcomes all Red Blooded U.S. Citizens.

Some of those items coincide with my desire for what government should be, but when you prop up Michelle Bachmann as your leader, I'm out x1000.

Sorry but #s 3, 7, 8, 10, and 11 are impossible to achieve at the same time. But number 3 is all I need to know that the tea party DOES NOT in fact believe in leaner, more efficient government. They want to spend more on the biggest waste of money our country currently engages in. Also, what in the hell does #15 have to do with a leaner, more efficient less intrusive government.Further proof that this "movement" is nothing more than gut reaction against social change sprinkled with a few handpicked libertarian ideals (the ones that don't conflict with #s 2, 3, and 15). Also, #12? Are they saying there shouldn't be campaign budgets?