12:00 PM | Posted in
Here is the first in another series of posts I did examining the contributors of Michele Bachmann.

Originally Posted June 28, 2008:

This will be the first of a several part series examining some of the organizations and individuals who have decided to contribute to the Michele Bachmann for Congress Campaign. Bachmann is a darling of the ultra-conservative/religious right movement and nothing typifies that support more than the contributions she has received from the ultra right Eagle Forum PAC.

In the past nine months, Bachmann has received a total of $3,500 from the organization led by conservative icon, Phyllis Schlafly. Eagle Forum touts itself as "leading the Pro-Family Movement since 1972". Unfortunately, the actions and rhetoric of the organization and its founder are more anti-immigrant, anti-equality, and anti-education than pro anything.

Take, for example, their continued opposition to a mythical "North American Union".

We oppose opening U.S. northern and southern borders to a North American Community, or Security and Prosperity Partnership, or any kind of economic integration.

Even the Bush Administration, hardly your left wing group, has called the idea "comical".

Can you say today that this is not a prelude to a North American union, similar to a European Union? Are there plans to build some kind of superhighway connecting all three countries? And do you believe all of these theories about a possible erosion of national identity stem from a lack of transparency from this partnership?

PRESIDENT BUSH: We represent three great nations. We each respect each other's sovereignty. You know, there are some who would like to frighten our fellow citizens into believing that relations between us are harmful for our respective peoples. I just believe they're wrong. I believe it's in our interest to trade; I believe it's in our interest to dialogue; I believe it's in our interest to work out common problems for the good of our people.

And I'm amused by some of the speculation, some of the old -- you can call them political scare tactics. If you've been in politics as long as I have, you get used to that kind of technique where you lay out a conspiracy and then force people to try to prove it doesn't exist. That's just the way some people operate. I'm here representing my nation. I feel strongly that the United States is a force for good, and I feel strongly that by working with our neighbors we can a stronger force for good.

So I appreciate that question. I'm amused by the difference between what actually takes place in the meetings and what some are trying to say takes place. It's quite comical, actually, when you realize the difference between reality and what some people are talking on TV about.

Apart from buying into conspiracy theories such as the "North American Union", the leader of Eagle Forum, Phyllis Schlafly has made numerous statements of questionable value:

She has hypothesized that the Virginia Tech shooting was actually a result of the English Department, that married women cannot be raped, and that women are simply too emotional for scientific debate.

The outburst by feminist professors simply confirms the stereotype not only that they are too emotional to handle intellectual or scientific debate, but that they seek to forbid any research that might produce facts they don't want the public to know.

"Women in combat are a hazard to other people around them," she said. "They aren't tall enough to see out of the trucks, they're not strong enough to carry their buddy off the battlefield if he's wounded, and they can't bark out orders loudly enough for everyone to hear."

"By getting married, the woman has consented to sex, and I don't think you can call it rape," she said.

The relationship between Schlafly and Bachmann is hardly one of simple monetary support. Bachmann will be spending considerable time during the month of July attending conferences either sponsored by Schlafly or where Schlafly is also in attendance. One has to wonder if Bachmann buys into all of the conspiracy theory rhetoric or the idea that women are unfit for military service?