Michelle Bachmann gets it wrong AGAIN..

Prince Of Dorkness · June 2011

Stephanopoulos: But that’s not what you said. You said that the Founding Fathers worked tirelessly to end slavery.

Bachmann: Well if you look at one of our Founding Fathers, John Quincy Adams, that’s absolutely true. He was a very young boy when he was with his father serving essentially as his father’s secretary. He tirelessly worked throughout his life to make sure that we did in fact one day eradicate slavery...

Stephanopoulos: He wasn’t one of the Founding Fathers – he was a president, he was a Secretary of State, he was a member of Congress, you’re right he did work to end slavery decades later. But so you are standing by this comment that the Founding Fathers worked tirelessly to end slavery?

Asked if she stood by her assertion that the "Founding Fathers worked hard to end slavery given the facts," Bachmann said, "Well, John Quincy Adams most certainly was a part of the Revolutionary War era. He was a young boy but he was actively involved."
________________________________

That happened this morning.

Michelle Bachmann is finding out that the "Gotchya Media" has that pesky "fact checking" and "follow up questions" that sank Sarah Palin.

This is someone who's been caught in SO many lies and mis-statements but when asked about them, she gets that glassed-over look and then starts to recite talking points about something totally different. This is someone who can easily speak to a crowd of her mindless supporters and say things like "the founding fathers fought tirelessly to end slavery" but when she's asked to back up her bullshit, refuses to admit she doesn't know what she's talking about.

How can ANYONE think this person should lead our country?

polaris_x · June 2011

uhhh ... this is the problem ...

someone like michelle bachmann gains much of her popularity because she alienates so called "liberals" ... many of her supporters could care less about facts ... they only care that they hear the things they want to hear ... things related to their ideologies ... the more the "liberal" media attack her, the more popularity she gets ...

all things being equal - she should just be a footnote in the news but the fact she's got like 5 threads on the front of the MT page is another sign of how she gains in popularity ... these "missteps" do not hurt her credibility to her supporters ... all it does is embolden them ...

so ... my point is making another thread about someone who has already 5 threads about her on the front page is exactly what she wants ... more exposure ...

edit: ok ... 4 threads ...

Prince Of Dorkness · June 2011

polaris_x wrote:

edit: ok ... 4 threads ...

Well yes and no.

Yes, it endears her more to the tea baggers. And that's fine. But it will mean she'll get the nomination and the VAST majority of the country would never vote for her. Someone like her will fire up the democratic base out of sheer fear alone.

And her style of "God chose me to be a lawyer for the IRS and take people's houses and God told me to be a Senator" might play well with the extreme right but that's even going to turn off the growing number of fiscal conservatives/social liberals in the party AND it will turn off any independents and swing voters.

Just like Sarah Palin... if you really want to destroy her, all you really need to do is show people video of her talking.

polaris_x · June 2011

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

edit: ok ... 4 threads ...

Well yes and no.

Yes, it endears her more to the tea baggers. And that's fine. But it will mean she'll get the nomination and the VAST majority of the country would never vote for her. Someone like her will fire up the democratic base out of sheer fear alone.

And her style of "God chose me to be a lawyer for the IRS and take people's houses and God told me to be a Senator" might play well with the extreme right but that's even going to turn off the growing number of fiscal conservatives/social liberals in the party AND it will turn off any independents and swing voters.

Just like Sarah Palin... if you really want to destroy her, all you really need to do is show people video of her talking.

i've said it before ... someone like michelle bachmann can win based on your electoral system ...

every election it comes down to the swing states and the swing voters in those states ... the PR companies and the GOP have done a great job of demonizing obama ... the core republicans eat that shit up like it's crack ... that's why he did so poor in the mid-terms ...

all bachmann has to do is win the primaries and run a 100% negative ad campaign on obama and she can win those swing states ... she does not need to actually have any ideas or plans ... all she has to do is say the things republicans like to hear ... tax cuts ...

inlet13 · June 2011

polaris_x wrote:

uhhh ... this is the problem ...

someone like michelle bachmann gains much of her popularity because she alienates so called "liberals" ... many of her supporters could care less about facts ... they only care that they hear the things they want to hear ... things related to their ideologies ... the more the "liberal" media attack her, the more popularity she gets ...

all things being equal - she should just be a footnote in the news but the fact she's got like 5 threads on the front of the MT page is another sign of how she gains in popularity ... these "missteps" do not hurt her credibility to her supporters ... all it does is embolden them ...

so ... my point is making another thread about someone who has already 5 threads about her on the front page is exactly what she wants ... more exposure ...

edit: ok ... 4 threads ...

In a way, we are in agreement. This is what I've been saying. We differ in how we see her. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you see her as a bad candidate for President. I don't see her that way. But, we agree about the exposure that will come from the Press trying to beat her down. It's evident here too.

I think the press will continue to try to over do it with her. This will be the response. I don't think she's Sarah Palin. I think she's more equipped to handle this and at some point the press will step over the line. People are tired of talking about B.S. semantical disagreements on issues like founding fathers. They really are trying to play "gotcha" on trivial issues, it's tired and old and people don't want to hear any more of it.

Instead, they want to discuss issues.... like jobs.

Who Princess · June 2011

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

Michelle Bachmann is finding out that the "Gotchya Media" has that pesky "fact checking" and "follow up questions" that sank Sarah Palin.

This is someone who's been caught in SO many lies and mis-statements but when asked about them, she gets that glassed-over look and then starts to recite talking points about something totally different. This is someone who can easily speak to a crowd of her mindless supporters and say things like "the founding fathers fought tirelessly to end slavery" but when she's asked to back up her bullshit, refuses to admit she doesn't know what she's talking about.

So has this sparked a furious editing war on wikipedia? I understand that's what happened when Ms. Palin said that Paul Revere was warning the British.

gimmesometruth27 · June 2011

whoprincess wrote:

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

Michelle Bachmann is finding out that the "Gotchya Media" has that pesky "fact checking" and "follow up questions" that sank Sarah Palin.

This is someone who's been caught in SO many lies and mis-statements but when asked about them, she gets that glassed-over look and then starts to recite talking points about something totally different. This is someone who can easily speak to a crowd of her mindless supporters and say things like "the founding fathers fought tirelessly to end slavery" but when she's asked to back up her bullshit, refuses to admit she doesn't know what she's talking about.

So has this sparked a furious editing war on wikipedia? I understand that's what happened when Ms. Palin said that Paul Revere was warning the British.

give it time.

these morons are trying to rewrite history. and when history is able to be rewritten like this, there is a problem.

polaris_x · June 2011

inlet13 wrote:

In a way, we are in agreement. This is what I've been saying. We differ in how we see her. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you see her as a bad candidate for President. I don't see her that way. But, we agree about the exposure that will come from the Press trying to beat her down. It's evident here too.

I think the press will continue to try to over do it with her. This will be the response. I don't think she's Sarah Palin. I think she's more equipped to handle this and at some point the press will step over the line. People are tired of talking about B.S. semantical disagreements on issues like founding fathers. They really are trying to play "gotcha" on trivial issues, it's tired and old and people don't want to hear any more of it.

Instead, they want to discuss issues.... like jobs.

you're right - i think she would be a horrible president ...

the thing is tho ... she ISN'T discussing the issues ... she's got no ideas or solutions ... her entire platform is based on regurgitating the talking points that republicans like to hear about obama and rallying her supporters around figureheads and people they relate to (john wayne) ... or the next joe the plumber ...

this is the strategy all right wing parties utilize to win elections these days ... they are a one topic party ... tax cuts ...

the other thing is that these things the media are highlighting are not trivial nor semantics ... they show a clear lack of understanding of history and an inability to be forthcoming when she is called on it ... i would have a little more respect for her if she said i was mistaken to think john wayne was from waterloo ... it's sort of like mark mcgwire ... i'd have a lot more respect for him if he came clean when he was in front of that hearing ... it also shows that she is prepared to spew out mistruths to suit her agenda ... sure, all politicians do it but that doesn't make it right ...

inlet13 · June 2011

polaris_x wrote:

inlet13 wrote:

In a way, we are in agreement. This is what I've been saying. We differ in how we see her. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you see her as a bad candidate for President. I don't see her that way. But, we agree about the exposure that will come from the Press trying to beat her down. It's evident here too.

I think the press will continue to try to over do it with her. This will be the response. I don't think she's Sarah Palin. I think she's more equipped to handle this and at some point the press will step over the line. People are tired of talking about B.S. semantical disagreements on issues like founding fathers. They really are trying to play "gotcha" on trivial issues, it's tired and old and people don't want to hear any more of it.

Instead, they want to discuss issues.... like jobs.

you're right - i think she would be a horrible president ...

the thing is tho ... she ISN'T discussing the issues ... she's got no ideas or solutions ... her entire platform is based on regurgitating the talking points that republicans like to hear about obama and rallying her supporters around figureheads and people they relate to (john wayne) ... or the next joe the plumber ...

this is the strategy all right wing parties utilize to win elections these days ... they are a one topic party ... tax cuts ...

the other thing is that these things the media are highlighting are not trivial nor semantics ... they show a clear lack of understanding of history and an inability to be forthcoming when she is called on it ... i would have a little more respect for her if she said i was mistaken to think john wayne was from waterloo ... it's sort of like mark mcgwire ... i'd have a lot more respect for him if he came clean when he was in front of that hearing ... it also shows that she is prepared to spew out mistruths to suit her agenda ... sure, all politicians do it but that doesn't make it right ...

I actually fully disagree with you. here I think the problem with Sarah Palin was what you mentioned. No offense, but I don't think you've really watched Bachmann. She's not Sarah Palin. It's simplistic for those left-of-center to group Republican/Tea-Party females into one basket. They are not all alike.

Bachmann, unlike a lot of Republicans, doesn't regurgitate talking points. She has a mind of her own, which is one reason she occasionally makes slight mistakes, but it's also the reason she's seen as "real". This is the reason the press is picking on her for mis-statements. They don't like the fact that she's not using a teleprompter or talking points. She's actually fielding questions with her own mind... wow.

I actually think she has a lot of ideas from following her more closely over the past month or so. You can try to generalize with a liberal slant, and say each party is a one trick pony. I'd say you don't know what you're talking about. I could name about 50 issues that she would disagree with the current administration on that are not related to tax cuts.

For your last point, yes they are trivial. The media doesn't like it when a person really can story-tell and use facts that are not talking points. It goes over their collective heads and surprises them. They sit and scratch their heads then wait until next time they see the person to scrutinize on small semantical/trivial arguments, that had very little to do with her underlying point. They play gotcha, and the citizens are on to it. It won't work.

I said it a few weeks back and I meant it.... Bachmann is benefiting from this. She is a serious candidate and I think she could win in a debate with Obama.

polaris_x · June 2011

inlet13 wrote:

I actually fully disagree with you. here I think the problem with Sarah Palin was what you mentioned. No offense, but I don't think you've really watched Bachmann. She's not Sarah Palin. It's simplistic for those left-of-center to group Republican/Tea-Party females into one basket. They are not all alike.

Bachmann, unlike a lot of Republicans, doesn't regurgitate talking points. She has a mind of her own, which is one reason she occasionally makes slight mistakes, but it's also the reason she's seen as "real". This is the reason the press is picking on her for mis-statements. They don't like the fact that she's not using a teleprompter or talking points. She's actually fielding questions with her own mind... wow.

I actually think she has a lot of ideas from following her more closely over the past month or so. You can try to generalize with a liberal slant, and say each party is a one trick pony. I'd say you don't know what you're talking about. I could name about 50 issues that she would disagree with the current administration on that are not related to tax cuts.

For your last point, yes they are trivial. The media doesn't like it when a person really can story-tell and use facts that are not talking points. It goes over their collective heads and surprises them. They sit and scratch their heads then wait until next time they see the person to scrutinize on small semantical/trivial arguments, that had very little to do with her underlying point. They play gotcha, and the citizens are on to it. It won't work.

I said it a few weeks back and I meant it.... Bachmann is benefiting from this. She is a serious candidate and I think she could win in a debate with Obama.

firstly, i didn't say she was sarah palin nor christine o'donnell ... secondly, feel free to point to any new idea she has for any key issue ... that hasn't been heard before and generalized ... sure, she's running on limited gov't and as a constitutional conservative but what ideas does she have ... all her stump speeches follows the same pattern ...

NewJPage · June 2011

polaris_x wrote:

inlet13 wrote:

I actually fully disagree with you. here I think the problem with Sarah Palin was what you mentioned. No offense, but I don't think you've really watched Bachmann. She's not Sarah Palin. It's simplistic for those left-of-center to group Republican/Tea-Party females into one basket. They are not all alike.

Bachmann, unlike a lot of Republicans, doesn't regurgitate talking points. She has a mind of her own, which is one reason she occasionally makes slight mistakes, but it's also the reason she's seen as "real". This is the reason the press is picking on her for mis-statements. They don't like the fact that she's not using a teleprompter or talking points. She's actually fielding questions with her own mind... wow.

I actually think she has a lot of ideas from following her more closely over the past month or so. You can try to generalize with a liberal slant, and say each party is a one trick pony. I'd say you don't know what you're talking about. I could name about 50 issues that she would disagree with the current administration on that are not related to tax cuts.

For your last point, yes they are trivial. The media doesn't like it when a person really can story-tell and use facts that are not talking points. It goes over their collective heads and surprises them. They sit and scratch their heads then wait until next time they see the person to scrutinize on small semantical/trivial arguments, that had very little to do with her underlying point. They play gotcha, and the citizens are on to it. It won't work.

I said it a few weeks back and I meant it.... Bachmann is benefiting from this. She is a serious candidate and I think she could win in a debate with Obama.

firstly, i didn't say she was sarah palin nor christine o'donnell ... secondly, feel free to point to any new idea she has for any key issue ... that hasn't been heard before and generalized ... sure, she's running on limited gov't and as a constitutional conservative but what ideas does she have ... all her stump speeches follows the same pattern ...

I watched her last night on hannity. She said literally the same stump speech answer to 3 different questions. "5 kids, blah blah, 23 adopted, blah blah, tax lawyer, blah blah, small business owner, blah blah." same thing on repeat. There was absolutely zero in terms of critical thinking demonstrated by her.

unsung · June 2011

***jingles the shiny keys***

She isn't going anywhere, she will not win the nomination. Attack the leader. Oh wait, can't attack Romney because he is actually a Democrat.

Carry on with topic blasting the perceived leader...

inlet13 · June 2011

polaris_x wrote:

firstly, i didn't say she was sarah palin nor christine o'donnell ... secondly, feel free to point to any new idea she has for any key issue ... that hasn't been heard before and generalized ... sure, she's running on limited gov't and as a constitutional conservative but what ideas does she have ... all her stump speeches follows the same pattern ...

Seriously? Let's be real here. Do you think Obama had more ideas on the stump?

Basic point, so far, I think she's been articulate in communicating the Republican message.

Prince Of Dorkness · June 2011

inlet13 wrote:

Seriously? Let's be real here. Do you think Obama had more ideas on the stump?

Basic point, so far, I think she's been articulate in communicating the Republican message.

And that message is that... um... what again?

gimmesometruth27 · June 2011

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

inlet13 wrote:

Seriously? Let's be real here. Do you think Obama had more ideas on the stump?

Basic point, so far, I think she's been articulate in communicating the Republican message.

And that message is that... um... what again?

same as the last 30 years.

1. government = bad.
2.cut taxes, specifically on the top earners since they have so many jobs to create,
3. cut spending for necessary government programs to take care of those in need, but at all costs don't cut defense spending.....

that's the gist of it...

polaris_x · June 2011

inlet13 wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

firstly, i didn't say she was sarah palin nor christine o'donnell ... secondly, feel free to point to any new idea she has for any key issue ... that hasn't been heard before and generalized ... sure, she's running on limited gov't and as a constitutional conservative but what ideas does she have ... all her stump speeches follows the same pattern ...

Seriously? Let's be real here. Do you think Obama had more ideas on the stump?

Basic point, so far, I think she's been articulate in communicating the Republican message.

i think that the white house and congress are essentially controlled by corporations ... that is the problem ... not the partisan politics that the media would like people to believe ... yes, i'm a socialist but i identify very little with the democratic party or barack obama for that matter ... i do think tho that his failures in the white house have as much to do with him and the constraints he has to work within ...

my dislike of michelle bachmann isn't so much the semantics or trivial issues as you like to put it ... it is simply the tea party and their value system as it pertains to issues that are important to me ... the environment, human rights, peace ...

inlet13 · June 2011

polaris_x wrote:

i think that the white house and congress are essentially controlled by corporations ... that is the problem ... not the partisan politics that the media would like people to believe ... yes, i'm a socialist but i identify very little with the democratic party or barack obama for that matter ... i do think tho that his failures in the white house have as much to do with him and the constraints he has to work within ...

my dislike of michelle bachmann isn't so much the semantics or trivial issues as you like to put it ... it is simply the tea party and their value system as it pertains to issues that are important to me ... the environment, human rights, peace ...

I respect socialists who call themselves socialists. And I understand that you disagree with her viewpoint.

brianlux · June 2011

Sometimes I seriously wonder if Bachmann and the like are actors hired to divert attention from the real problems facing the world- climate change, crashing economies, peak oil and what will be the resultant energy and food shortages, resource wars, racism, sexism, inadequate public transportation in many part of the U.S. etc, etc.

We would all do well to spend as much time looking for solutions, planting trees and vegetable gardens (rural and urban) and doing something nice for someone as we do ranting away on our computer key boards.

Speaking of... off I go...

Hugh Freaking Dillon · June 2011

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

inlet13 wrote:

Seriously? Let's be real here. Do you think Obama had more ideas on the stump?

Basic point, so far, I think she's been articulate in communicating the Republican message.

And that message is that... um... what again?

same as the last 30 years.

1. government = bad.
2.cut taxes, specifically on the top earners since they have so many jobs to create,
3. cut spending for necessary government programs to take care of those in need, but at all costs don't cut defense spending.....

that's the gist of it...

and don't forget the all important:

4. "family first", AKA "NO GAYS".

gimmesometruth27 · June 2011

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

and don't forget the all important:

4. "family first", AKA "NO GAYS".

ooops, how could i have forgotten about "family values"?? :oops:

kenny olav · June 2011

John Quincy Adams... he was one of the founding sons! And therefore he's just as important as the founding fathers, as well as the founding holy spirits.

usamamasan1 · June 2011

History is always written by the winners

Look it up

Www.google.com

Try not to post long copies when you read something.

Prince Of Dorkness · June 2011

I love how the Tea Baggers are all rallying around here like with the Sarah Palin Paul Revere thing... saying that it's just the "Gotchya Media" that did this to her. Then they whine about "the messiah" and how they don't call him out on "stuff like this" but when you ask them which "stuff like this" they're talking about they can only recall one thing from the famous "58 states and two more to go" statement that he made on a campaign 3 years ago.

It was pretty clear from the rest of the sentence he meant "48 states and two more to go," but whatever... I'll give you that... so there's one. Michelle BAchmann has had 3 this week and they were all MUCH worse than that.

And if we really want to even the playing field, have we seen Michelle Bachmann's birth certificate?

gimmesometruth27 · June 2011

usamamasan1 wrote:

History is always written by the winners

Look it up

http://Www.google.com

Try not to post long copies when you read something.

who are you referring to with this post?

satansbed · June 2011

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

inlet13 wrote:

Seriously? Let's be real here. Do you think Obama had more ideas on the stump?

Basic point, so far, I think she's been articulate in communicating the Republican message.

And that message is that... um... what again?

same as the last 30 years.

1. government = bad.
2.cut taxes, specifically on the top earners since they have so many jobs to create,
3. cut spending for necessary government programs to take care of those in need, but at all costs don't cut defense spending.....

that's the gist of it...

if thats what she was saying she wouldn't be scary

whats scary are her crazy beliefs on homosexuality, evolution, science, she would be a terrible president, but i hope she gets the nomination, because obama will destroy her.... if she ever becomes president the world is fucked

socially liberal republicans are okay, you may not agree with their economics but at least there not trying to shove god down your throat...

its the christian right that scares me

Michelle Bachmann gets it wrong AGAIN..

Comments