Question about Michele Bachmann/tea party

fife

First off want to say sorry to Kat. i don't usually make treads so i am sorry but the last one. i had a discussion with another person here who i won't named in case it breaks any rules. we were talking about Michele bachmann and i had some question concerning her. if there is any people who know the answer to these questions i would like to know them.

what makes you think that bachmann/tea party will be able make government smaller?

give 2 examples of how she is a free thinker? ( this is due to an answer i got from said person at another tread)


and to be fair you can ask me any question you may have about Canadian politics?

unsung

She voted for the PATRIOT Act, any TEA party that would support her has no credibility.

fife

unsung wrote:

She voted for the PATRIOT Act, any TEA party that would support her has no credibility.

ok fair but i notice that you support ron paul. what makes you think he would be able to make government smaller?

the joke about him being shorter was funny

CJMST3K

fife wrote:

unsung wrote:

She voted for the PATRIOT Act, any TEA party that would support her has no credibility.

ok fair but i notice that you support ron paul. what makes you think he would be able to make smaller?

Ron Paul is shorter.

JTH

unsung wrote:

She voted for the PATRIOT Act, any TEA party that would support her has no credibility.

She voted for it? The USA PATRIOT Act was signed into law in October of 2001. Wasn't she still a state senator at the time?

http://epic.org/privacy/terrorism/hr3162.html

arthurdent

JTH wrote:

unsung wrote:

She voted for the PATRIOT Act, any TEA party that would support her has no credibility.

She voted for it? The USA PATRIOT Act was signed into law in October of 2001. Wasn't she still a state senator at the time?

http://epic.org/privacy/terrorism/hr3162.html

technically, she voted for the extension of the Patriot Act

JTH

arthurdent wrote:

JTH wrote:

unsung wrote:

She voted for the PATRIOT Act, any TEA party that would support her has no credibility.

She voted for it? The USA PATRIOT Act was signed into law in October of 2001. Wasn't she still a state senator at the time?

http://epic.org/privacy/terrorism/hr3162.html

technically, she voted for the extension of the Patriot Act

Ah, of course.

Never mind.

Jason P

There is a reason why the Patriot Act keeps getting extended ... it works. And both democrats and republicans know this, otherwise it would have been repealed the first chance Obama had. It's not popular, and I wish it didn't have to exist, but it's not coincidence that America has not been hit with another major terrorist act in a decade.

Sleeper cells used tactics to communicate that were allowed by a sane person's interpretation of the constitution and law prior to 9/11. They can no longer do it and they have been silenced. The only close calls we have had are lone wolfs that don't quite have the technical experience and support to succeed in their missions.

Smellyman

don't know about that.

It's not like a terrorist attack was common place before the patriot act.

What if one person acts like tim mcveigh? would the patriot act help? no. or the fort hood shooting or shoe and underwear bombers?

it is an excuse to keep tabs on all people and both parties love it.

mickeyrat

Jason P wrote:

There is a reason why the Patriot Act keeps getting extended ... it works. And both democrats and republicans know this, otherwise it would have been repealed the first chance Obama had. It's not popular, and I wish it didn't have to exist, but it's not coincidence that America has not been hit with another major terrorist act in a decade.

Sleeper cells used tactics to communicate that were allowed by a sane person's interpretation of the constitution and law prior to 9/11. They can no longer do it and they have been silenced. The only close calls we have had are lone wolfs that don't quite have the technical experience and support to succeed in their missions.

So what you are saying is , it takes an INsane persons interpretation of the constitution and these laws post 9-11.

It makes sooo much more sense now. Bloated budget = inpart because of "homeland security"

Prince Of Dorkness

Quite honestly, most of the Tea people say they believe in freedom but few of them actually do.

Oh they want "freedom" as in "I don't want to be accountable for anything I do" like pollute the ocean or give children cancer with their carcinogenic breakfast cereal packaging. They want to be "free" of having to pay taxes and "free" of any moral obligations.

But those same people who harp on about "freedom" are the same ones who want to force kids to pray in school in a way they personally find acceptable, they want to force women to look at sonograms of their rapist's fetuses, they want to force their religion to be taught in school and they want to force schools to stop teaching science or anything that flies in the face of their personal religions.

Oh, they also want to take away the freedoms of people who aren't like them... people with darker skin, gays, people with other religions...

So when Michele Bachmann talks about supporting freedom, you know she's full of crap.

Jason P

Smellyman wrote:

don't know about that.

It's not like a terrorist attack was common place before the patriot act.

What if one person acts like tim mcveigh? would the patriot act help? no. or the fort hood shooting or shoe and underwear bombers?

it is an excuse to keep tabs on all people and both parties love it.

I'm glad you brought up Tim Mcveigh and the Fort Hood shooting as examples. These are lone wolf scenarios and there isn't a whole lot we can do except hope they are sloppy in their execution.

The Patriot Act is meant to stop coordinated attacks.

In my opinion, I think it a narcissistic part of our human nature to be outraged by the threat of our government keeping tabs on us. The Patriot Act allows law enforcement to cut through red tab that would normally prevent them from being effective.

The government does not care about 99.99% of the U.S. public ... unless you don't file taxes ... then they are in your face big-time. The government gives us a social security number at birth ... so that they can make sure you pay in when time comes. They are not just keeping a database of every U.S. citizen ... does anyone think they are capable of that???

But when they get a lead on a possible threat, I don't want anything getting in the way of that investigation.

The U.S., since we are a civilized society, has rules. An enemy of the U.S. is looking to see how they can exploit these rules, much like a tax loop-hole.

Smellyman

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

Quite honestly, most of the Tea people say they believe in freedom but few of them actually do.

Oh they want "freedom" as in "I don't want to be accountable for anything I do" like pollute the ocean or give children cancer with their carcinogenic breakfast cereal packaging. They want to be "free" of having to pay taxes and "free" of any moral obligations.

But those same people who harp on about "freedom" are the same ones who want to force kids to pray in school in a way they personally find acceptable, they want to force women to look at sonograms of their rapist's fetuses, they want to force their religion to be taught in school and they want to force schools to stop teaching science or anything that flies in the face of their personal religions.

Oh, they also want to take away the freedoms of people who aren't like them... people with darker skin, gays, people with other religions...

So when Michele Bachmann talks about supporting freedom, you know she's full of crap.

agreed.

The hypocrisy from the Tea people knows no bounds.

Smellyman

Jason P wrote:

Smellyman wrote:

don't know about that.

It's not like a terrorist attack was common place before the patriot act.

What if one person acts like tim mcveigh? would the patriot act help? no. or the fort hood shooting or shoe and underwear bombers?

it is an excuse to keep tabs on all people and both parties love it.

I'm glad you brought up Tim Mcveigh and the Fort Hood shooting as examples. These are lone wolf scenarios and there isn't a whole lot we can do except hope they are sloppy in their execution.

The Patriot Act is meant to stop coordinated attacks.

In my opinion, I think it a narcissistic part of our human nature to be outraged by the threat of our government keeping tabs on us. The Patriot Act allows law enforcement to cut through red tab that would normally prevent them from being effective.

The government does not care about 99.99% of the U.S. public ... unless you don't file taxes ... then they are in your face big-time. The government gives us a social security number at birth ... so that they can make sure you pay in when time comes. They are not just keeping a database of every U.S. citizen ... does anyone think they are capable of that???

But when they get a lead on a possible threat, I don't want anything getting in the way of that investigation.

The U.S., since we are a civilized society, has rules. An enemy of the U.S. is looking to see how they can exploit these rules, much like a tax loop-hole.

but now you put blind faith in gov? I thought GOP didn't like big gov?

Now they can investigate and monitor anything. you say they don't care about 99.9% of people and only those who are "enemies" of the US are investigated? it is a slippery slope of investigating you for anything they damn well please.

aerial

Smellyman wrote:

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

Quite honestly, most of the Tea people say they believe in freedom but few of them actually do.

Oh they want "freedom" as in "I don't want to be accountable for anything I do" like pollute the ocean or give children cancer with their carcinogenic breakfast cereal packaging. They want to be "free" of having to pay taxes and "free" of any moral obligations.

But those same people who harp on about "freedom" are the same ones who want to force kids to pray in school in a way they personally find acceptable, they want to force women to look at sonograms of their rapist's fetuses, they want to force their religion to be taught in school and they want to force schools to stop teaching science or anything that flies in the face of their personal religions.

Oh, they also want to take away the freedoms of people who aren't like them... people with darker skin, gays, people with other religions...

So when Michele Bachmann talks about supporting freedom, you know she's full of crap.

agreed.

The hypocrisy from the Tea people knows no bounds.

I disagree. Why lump all Tea Party people as if they are one. You do not appreciate it when the gay community is treated that way.
Personally, I am tired of being persecuted because I believe in God. Where is the tolerance from you for others?
I am not asking you to like it or even accept it, just tolerate it, without all the hate. :idea:

arthurdent

aerial wrote:

Personally, I am tired of being persecuted because I believe in God. Where is the tolerance from you for others?
I am not asking you to like it or even accept it, just tolerate it, without all the hate. :idea:

Personally, I am tired of being persecuted because I Don't believe in god. I am tired of Christians trying to impose their values on me and the rest of our diverse society.

JOEJOEJOE

Imagine how much publicity Bachman-Turner Overdrive would get if she made a serious run!

"You ain't seen nothing yet" and "taking care of business" - perfect songs for a campaign!

(this post is not an endorsement for or against a political figure!)

Cosmo

Its not Bachmann's looks that worry me... it is her brain and her mouth that make me think he's unfit to serve:
http://www.factcheck.org/2011/06/factchecking-bachmann/

Earlier this year, Bachmann falsely claimed that $105 billion in spending was "hidden" in the federal health care law and that this was done "secretly, unbeknownst to members of Congress." But Congress had debated several items Bachmann referred to as "hidden," such as $40 billion to fund the Children's Health Insurance Program for two years, $11 billion for community health centers and $5 billion to set up high-risk insurance pools.

In March, she wrongly said that the Obama administration had only issued one new oil drilling permit since the president took office. The real number was 276, according to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement’s online database, as of the day of Bachmann's speech. It's now 296.

In a response speech to Tea Party Express activists after this year's State of the Union address, Bachmann said the bailout, or Troubled Asset Relief Program, signed into law by President George W. Bush, had cost taxpayers $700 billion. Actually, the net cost at the time was $25 billion. The Congressional Budget Office has since updated its estimate to $19 billion.

Last year, Bachmann made the greatly exaggerated claim that "now we have the federal government … taking over ownership or control of 51 percent of the American economy." But total government expenditures were 20.6 percent of gross domestic product in 2009, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. You have to go back to 1944 to find a time when government spending was close to 50 percent of GDP.

She twisted a report on Medicaid recipients and abortion into a bogus statistic when talking about the potential impact of the federal health care law on abortions. She said that "if there is taxpayer funding of abortion, there will be 30 percent more abortions." That would be about 360,000 more abortions each year. But the congresswoman was actually referring to an unrelated report from the Guttmacher Institute that said if Medicaid provided coverage for all abortions, there would be a 28 percent increase in the number of abortions among Medicaid beneficiaries in states that don't already pay for abortions beyond what federal law allows. Besides, the health care law doesn't change Medicaid rules on abortion funding.

Bachmann also has done her fair share of spreading false Internet-fueled rumors, like the off-base claim that Rep. Nancy Pelosi ran up a $100,000 "bar tab for alcohol" on congressional trips, and the highly doubtful assertion that Obama's trip to India last year cost $200 million per day. On the president's trip, Bachmann told CNN's Anderson Cooper that "these are the numbers that have been coming out in the press," but the unsupported figure came from one India news report based on an anonymous "top official" in Mumbai. She also was wrong when she said in June 2009 that the community group ACORN "will be in charge of going door-to-door and collecting data from the American public" as part of the census. ACORN was just one of more than 30,000 "partners" the Census Bureau had recruited to help publicize the 2010 census to encourage participation.

Smellyman

aerial wrote:

Smellyman wrote:

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

Quite honestly, most of the Tea people say they believe in freedom but few of them actually do.

Oh they want "freedom" as in "I don't want to be accountable for anything I do" like pollute the ocean or give children cancer with their carcinogenic breakfast cereal packaging. They want to be "free" of having to pay taxes and "free" of any moral obligations.

But those same people who harp on about "freedom" are the same ones who want to force kids to pray in school in a way they personally find acceptable, they want to force women to look at sonograms of their rapist's fetuses, they want to force their religion to be taught in school and they want to force schools to stop teaching science or anything that flies in the face of their personal religions.

Oh, they also want to take away the freedoms of people who aren't like them... people with darker skin, gays, people with other religions...

So when Michele Bachmann talks about supporting freedom, you know she's full of crap.

agreed.

The hypocrisy from the Tea people knows no bounds.

I disagree. Why lump all Tea Party people as if they are one. You do not appreciate it when the gay community is treated that way.
Personally, I am tired of being persecuted because I believe in God. Where is the tolerance from you for others?
I am not asking you to like it or even accept it, just tolerate it, without all the hate. :idea:

How, in my short little post am I persecuting you for believing in god?

arthurdent

Cosmo wrote:

Its not Bachmann's looks that worry me... it is her brain and her mouth that make me think he's unfit to serve:
http://www.factcheck.org/2011/06/factchecking-bachmann/

They say the eyes are the window to a person's soul. That's the only thing that worries me about her eyes. Which pretty much goes along with worrying about her brain and her mouth.

arthurdent

JOEJOEJOE wrote:

Imagine how much publicity Bachman-Turner Overdrive would get if she made a serious run!

"You ain't seen nothing yet" and "taking care of business" - perfect songs for a campaign!

(this post is not an endorsement for or against a political figure!)

Imagine the $$$$ BTO would get when they sue her for unauthorized use of their songs.