Michele Bachmann Gone!

[DC Tom]

You keep implying there's some equal symmetry between right loonies and left. At this time that's certainly not the case. Guns, bibles, foreign wars, environmental conspiracy theory, old canard about media bias, etc etc ..... is way the hell out there and very prevalent within today's GOP

 

You are one seriously !@#$ed up little person.

[dayman]

Bachman was basically the worst of the worst. I will miss her (serious). The people need whackos in power. Otherwise .... we would have no whackos in power!

[DC Tom]

The party of Cynthia McKinney has absolutely no room to criticize Michelle Bachmann.

[truth on hold]

The party of Cynthia McKinney has absolutely no room to criticize Michelle Bachmann.

Even though she's been out of office for 6 years, never was a credible presidential candidate, and no where near as central to the party as bachman to the GOP. There you go with the silly symmetry argument, dragging up ghosts. Next we'll hear about "if karl Marx were alive today" lol

Edited May 30, 2013 by Joe_the_6_pack

[B-Man]

You keep implying there's some equal symmetry between right loonies and left. At this time that's certainly not the case. Guns, bibles, foreign wars, environmental conspiracy theory, etc etc ..... is way the hell out there and very prevalent within today's GOP. That old canard about media bias simply won't cut it this time.

 

That "prevalence " of the Right is all in your head Joe.

 

I will not argue it with you................... as your posts, constantly filled with fear of religion, guns, and individualism, show that you are not open to the reality of today's American society. No ghosts, no strawmen, no what ifs, but the actuality of the hard Left forcing their views on Americans from their actual positions of power.

 

 

 

If one female congressperson, not in any real position of authority can rattle liberals so badly, can bring out so much fear and hate, how deep can your actual convictions be ?.............................................................not very.

 

 

 

 

 

.

[3rdnlng]

Maxine Waters

Al Franken

Hank Johnson

Frederica Wilson

Barbara Boxer

Sen. Whitehouse

[B-Man]

Here is the type of politician that the democrat party puts in leadership roles. If Jtsp, SOB, PJ, and the like, can use Ms. Bachmann as an example , I guess I can follow their example.

 

 

 

Video: Louisiana Democratic Party chair blows the lid off the secret reason people oppose ObamaCare

 

 

Racism.

 

To take this argument seriously, which none but the cheapest lefty demagogues pretend to do, you have to believe that the Republican response to health-care reform in 2010 would have been different under President Hillary. If you remember 1993, you know the truth about that. But then, instead of posting this video, in that alternate universe I’d be posting a video of some Democratic apparatchik complaining that the opposition to HillaryCare is driven by sexism.

 

The only upside to losing to Andrew Cuomo or (giggle) Martin O’Malley in 2016 is that this sort of lame identity-based pandering will be momentarily disabled for national policy, unless the left figures out a way in the meantime to build a “Republicans hate Italians/Irish” narrative. They’re smart. Don’t put it past them.

 

Anyway, a lot more people are set to become racist next year.

 

Exit question: If Peterson’s right, why do I loathe RomneyCare so much? Oh, right — biased against his religion, I take it. Never mind.

 

 

 

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/05/30/video-louisiana-democratic-party-chair-blows-the-lid-off-the-secret-reason-people-oppose-obamacare/

[DC Tom]

Even though she's been out of office for 6 years, never was a credible presidential candidate, and no where near as central to the party as bachman to the GOP. There you go with the silly symmetry argument, dragging up ghosts. Next we'll hear about "if karl Marx were alive today" lol

 

I'm pretty sure you're the only one that considers Bachmann "central." Everything I've read today, and everything I've ever heard from Bachmann, indicates she's a fringe nutjob the likes of...McKinney. Or you could compare committee seats - McKinney sat on the Armed Services Committee and the International Relations Committee. Bachmann, the Financial Services Committee and Select Committee on Intelligence (ironically). By the simple, objective measure of their relative positions and leadership in Congress, if you want to call Bachmann central, McKinney would have to be considered even more central to the Democratic Party.

 

Either way, comparing McKinney to Bachmann is some sort of false equivalence only in your own pointy little head.

[4merper4mer]

I'm pretty sure you're the only one that considers Bachmann "central." Everything I've read today, and everything I've ever heard from Bachmann, indicates she's a fringe nutjob the likes of...McKinney. Or you could compare committee seats - McKinney sat on the Armed Services Committee and the International Relations Committee. Bachmann, the Financial Services Committee and Select Committee on Intelligence (ironically). By the simple, objective measure of their relative positions and leadership in Congress, if you want to call Bachmann central, McKinney would have to be considered even more central to the Democratic Party.

 

Either way, comparing McKinney to Bachmann is some sort of false equivalence only in your own pointy little head.

 

Remember that this is the same guy who essentially made Jerry Sandusky out to be Tom Robinson.....for months.

[IDBillzFan]

If one female congressperson, not in any real position of authority can rattle liberals so badly, can bring out so much fear and hate, how deep can your actual convictions be ?.............................................................not very.

 

Not to mention, the party that proclaims there is a Republican war on women will ultimately say the most vile and disgusting things about a conservative woman and see no problem at all, much like they have no problem calling a black conservative a porch monkey Uncle Tom or a Latino conservative a LINO.

[GG]

Even though she's been out of office for 6 years, never was a credible presidential candidate, and no where near as central to the party as bachman to the GOP. There you go with the silly symmetry argument, dragging up ghosts. Next we'll hear about "if karl Marx were alive today" lol

 

OK sparky, I'm sure you have heard of Dennis Kucinich, then?

[truth on hold]

 

 

OK sparky, I'm sure you have heard of Dennis Kucinich, then?

Yeah, no longer in office and had no chance of earning his party's nomination for president. Opposed foreign wars and had a strong conviction of preserving separation between church and state. Back in the good old says that used to be called a conservative.

[3rdnlng]

Yeah, no longer in office and had no chance of earning his party's nomination for president. Opposed foreign wars and had a strong conviction of preserving separation between church and state. Back in the good old says that used to be called a conservative.

 

You'e mentioned this a few times. Did you actually think that Michelle Bachmann had a chance? Do you think that she thought she had a chance?

 

How do you survive every day?

[truth on hold]

 

 

You'e mentioned this a few times. Did you actually think that Michelle Bachmann had a chance? Do you think that she thought she had a chance?

 

How do you survive every day?

Yeah moron she was the front runner at one point. http://www.euronews.com/2011/08/14/bachmann-emerges-as-republican-front-runner/

[3rdnlng]

Yeah moron she was the front runner at one point. http://www.euronews....n-front-runner/

 

You're a special kind of dumb, Mr. self proclaimed "libertarian" that sucks up to and endorses every liberal cause/opinion.

[OCinBuffalo]

I don't understand the media's obsession with bashing Bachmann.

In a sentence: the 1st class Female Republican Candidate is the single biggest threat to the media and the D party that there is. It destroys their story. Plain and simple.

 

Michelle Bachman is no 1st Class Candidate, but, she is also an invention of the left. No, it's true.

 

I will explain, if you care.

Simple.............. The media and the Left (but, I repeat myself) needed her as a scary bogeyman.

 

Its an important part of their false narrative.

Or, I could have just said this, but added identity politics.

 

See, it's simple: a woman, with the identity of woman, who is also an R, destroys the media's/left's story. That's all there is to it.

No doubt, but make no mistake, she's a grade A bafoon.

As it turns out, so was Mitt Romney, especially in terms of running a winning campaign. At least Bachman is capable of connecting with people(see the photo in this thread ) What we all must learn from this: Ronald Reagan was in many cases what you would call a nutbag social conservative.

 

How did he stack up against Mitt Romney, in terms of political skill, and winning? I don't remember any Scarlet Letters being sown on anybody during Reagan's 8 years. I do remember a guy who was everything Bachman was...but ALSO something more.

 

Put simply: I don't see social conservatism as a reason to disqualify anybody automatically, and I never will.

 

You might as well tell me we don't want a left handed QB, because he is left handed, and that means the RT is going to be a liability, and that our investment in the LT is wasted, without telling me a thing about how the QB reads the field or throws the ball.

The conservative movement can do without social conservatives who seek to legislate their morality.

 

Get rid of them, and become a hard line economic policy machine.

 

Good riddance to Bachmann.

Yeah, because the lack of morally conscious people have done such a fine job managing our government, or winning elections for the Rs recently.

 

Like anything else, this argument lacks balance. You make it too many times, and push the pendulum to far to one side, and you get the inevitable swingback that makes you wrong, and look foolish.

 

Why elect candidates that seek to placate the morally and intellectually vacuous left? Why not elect those who educate them, and also to help them to grow up a little more, and understand that rainbows and unicorns do not = governing in a real and dangerous world?

You keep implying there's some equal symmetry between right loonies and left. At this time that's certainly not the case. Guns, bibles, foreign wars, environmental conspiracy theory, etc etc ..... is way the hell out there and very prevalent within today's GOP. That old canard about media bias simply won't cut it this time.

The hilarity of this statement, given the reality which is right under you nose, today?

 

What an unmitigated moron. Symmetry? Did you say symmetry? :lol: Theories?

 

Which "theory" is more likely to be true as of 6:53am today? Global Warming, or an IRS conspiracy to target Big Government's enemies?

Edited May 31, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[GG]

 

Yeah, no longer in office and had no chance of earning his party's nomination for president. Opposed foreign wars and had a strong conviction of preserving separation between church and state. Back in the good old says that used to be called a conservative.

And here I thought I was on ignore list.

 

You're still an idiot. You asked an example of far left who ran for president and you got one.

[PearlHowardman]

...meanwhile, the rich 1% are getting richer. The poor are getting poorer. African-Americans and women are going backwards economically. Obamacare is a major boon to for-profit health care insurance companies. US military drones are killing civilian children in Afghanistan.

 

"Change Idiots Fell For"

[OCinBuffalo]

...meanwhile, the rich 1% are getting richer. The poor are getting poorer. African-Americans and women are going backwards economically. Obamacare is a major boon to for-profit health care insurance companies. US military drones are killing civilian children in Afghanistan.

 

"Change Idiots Fell For"

Do you really think any of this represents the priority problems and/or accurate descriptions of these problems, in this country, today?

 

What happens when Obamacare fails, and fails primarily because the unions withdraw their support(which I and many others accurately predicted in 2007), and the average poor, uninsured guy refuses to sign up, with 0 chance of consequence? He already isn't paying taxes. What are you going to do him? Stop giving him the free money you have been saying he deserves? Try and collect a fine from millions of poor people, in their neighborhoods, that you propagate and from where you derive political power?

 

I wonder: Will you perchance be bringing any guns along for that activity? Why? I thought they were evil. Will you be encountering people with legal guns, or illegal guns during your romp through poor neighborhoods collecting your Obamacare fines? How do you think this will turn out for you? Are you and the rest of the OWS people going to sign up to be fine collectors? Great. This is great news for the gene pool.

 

And call me crazy, but Isn't this the same argument for not deporting millions of illegals? You can't catch them all? So which is it? We can collect fines from the millions who don't sign up, but, we can't ask them for their ID at the same time? You laugh at "self deport" yet you think "self fine" is going to work?

 

Will you blame the 1%, or, the idiocy that is LBJ's legacy and depends on "we can control everything from DC" as the premise for solutions?

 

Or, will you try to blame liberal FAIL on insurance companies, who have had nothing to do with constructing your doltish policies, are your self-proclaimed enemies, and whom you set out to punish, but, due to your idiocy, will end up making too big to fail monopolies as well?

 

When do you realize that your ideology creates schitty non-solutions that die as soon as they are exposed to oxygen?

Edited May 31, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[Magox]

I don't have a problem with social conservatives, there is obviously a large constituency who wants to have their voices heard, where I have a problem with some social conservatives is when they begin to say bat schitt crazy loony tune comments that hurt the conservative movement. Let's put it this way, and this is a fact that some of you fail to grasp, which is BRAND MATTERS! There is a huge branding issue with the GOP, young people and non whites generally don't like Republicans. Right or wrong, they think they are the party of non-science, the party that protects the rich and the party that generally speaking doesn't care about the poor and non-whites. That's their view, not mine. So it's important to re brand the party so that they can win state wide and national elections, so that they can implement their economic conservative agenda. Doesn't mean you have to give up your conservative economic principles, at all, just means you have to be politically smarter. For instance, get more in tune with people outside of your main constituency, which primarily consists of mid to older aged whites. Communicate more effectively your economic message, the conservative economic message is a stronger one to make than the liberal one. Don't just talk about debt reduction, talk about growth, a la Jack Kemp. Reforming the tax code, communicating how more economic opportunities can arise so that you can climb up the social economic latter under conservative leadership. Stay away from the social issues. It's a political loser on the national level... The times are changing, and the party that doesn't change with the times, will get left behind. Like it or not, politics matter.