To hear Michele Bachmann speak last November in this clip, one might be lead to believe that we have finished the job in Iraq and that it has become a land of milk and honey:
Now, let's forget for a moment that Bachmann doesn't remember that Al Qaeda DID NOT exist in Iraq until after this war began and let us forget for a moment that she represents a brand of religious intolerance that she laments. Let us take for a moment the description of Iraq as a "great situation" and the connection Bachmann makes to General David Patraeus. Actually, let's let Mr. Patraeus speak for himself:
We haven't turned any corners. We haven't seen any lights at the end of the tunnel.
GEN. DAVID H. PETRAEUS the American commander in Iraq, testifying about the war's progress
It has been some time since we last examined Michele Bachmann at Clare Boothe Luce. In this episode, Bachmann touts the Bush economy as one of endless prosperity and success. Unfortunately, as is the case with so many things that come out of her mouth, the facts tell a wholly different story.
Michele tries to use statistics such as that the economy grew at an average rate of 1% before the 2003 tax cuts while after the tax cuts the economy grew at a rate of 3.1%.
However, what she doesn't tell the crowd is that economic growth has fallen every single year since the 2003 tax cuts. From a high of 3.6% in 2004 it fell to 2.2% in 2007. It would be equally valid to say that average economic growth has continually fallen ever since those tax cuts were put into place.
"The big hue and cry that all these talking heads..."
Michele, trying to dismiss opposing arguments by using hyperbole simply shows the hyper-partisanship that has become the norm for your tenure in office. It would be interesting to note that TEN Nobel Laureates came out in opposition to the Bush tax plan. While I understand that those of Bachmann's ilk scoff at academia, it seems to me that the authority of ten economic nobel laureates far outweighs that off a religious zealot from Stillwater, Minnesota.
"All the cliches that you think about liberals and conservatives, THEY'RE TRUE! THEY ARE ABSOLUTELY TRUE!"
So, if we are to understand Mrs. Bachmann correctly, every overused expression used to describe conservatives is true. Has she just admitted that conservatives are war mongering, bigoted racists, and bent on creating a theocratic rule out of the United States government? Add in your own conservative cliches as they have been officially given the Bachmann stamp of approval.
More Bachmann Money Quote:
"putting their John Henry on..."
Excuse me, ma'am? Could you please stop claiming to be patriotic if you cannot even get the name of John Hancock correct.
WHAT! Another Money Quote:
"When Nancy Pelosi took office, oil was being sold at $52 barrel. You know what it was this week? $98 per barrel. That's what happened with these phenomenal spike ups in spending."
Apparently, the implication here is that Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats are to blame for the rise in oil prices. Never mind the fact that when President Bush took office, oil prices hovered below $30 per barrel. Also, never mind the fact that Republicans increased spending by 50% in the years since President Bush took office with nary a veto pen in sight.
With so many inconsistencies, I will leave it to others to fill in the blanks in the comments section.
In the second installment of fisking Michele Bachmann at the racist Clare Boother Luce Institute, Bachmann spends the segment haranguing Democrats with tired platitudes of "1970's style policies", "investing in defeat", and "killing jobs".
On Earmarks:
While Michele Bachmann is able to bring up two examples of Democratic earmarks, she seems to have left out a few items that point to the hypocrisy of the Republican Party on this issue.
First, is that Democrats reduced the number of earmarks in 2007 by nearly 25%. Second, cherry picking John Murtha would work a whole lot better if the other two people in the top three earmark recipients weren't REPUBLICANS. Bill Young (R) of Florida took in over 103 million in earmarks while Jerry Lewis (R) of California took in over 110 million in earmarks. That is on the House of Representatives side. In the Senate, Ted Stevens (R) of Alaska out does all of the top three House members COMBINED by bringing in over 389 million in earmarks. Not to be outdone, the third highest earmarker in the United States Senate is Thad Cochran (R) of Mississippi bringing in over 289 million in earmarks (over 100 million more than John Murtha). Perhaps this faux outrage from Bachmann would work more effectively if it was spread evenly amongst this bipartisan list of earmark recipients.
On Polls:
Bachmann goes quickly into the tired old line about the Congress having the lowest approval ratings in history and attributes that solely to the Democrats. This line of reasoning would work if Congress were made up solely of Democrats, but given that there are also Republicans in Congress one cannot honestly make such a claim. So, Michele, that disdain the public has for Congress is for YOU as well. If Bachmann looked at the issues honestly, she might come to a much different conclusion.
While this poll is a couple months old, it speaks to the complete lack of context found in the message of Michele Bachmann and Republicans thinking that low congressional polls equals a repudiation of Democrats and not of Republicans.
"Now, turning to next year's congressional elections -- If the elections for Congress were being held today, which party's candidate would you vote for in your congressional district: the Democratic Party's candidate or the Republican Party's candidate?" If unsure: "As of today, do you lean more toward the Democratic Party's candidate or the Republican Party's candidate?" Options rotated
Last November, Michele Bachmann was the featured speaker at the Conservative Women's Network (how we missed this one I will never know). Now, let us forget for a moment that this is roughly the same time period that Bachmann was complaining about not having enough time to spend at home in her district due to the arduous five day schedule and examine the hour long conversation. For the record, that would be one hour MORE than she has spent speaking to constituents in open public meetings.
This event is hosted by the Heritage Foundation and the Clare Boothe Luce Institute. While most have heard of the Heritage Foundation, the CBLI flies under the radar of most people. This is an organization that has embraced the likes of Michele Malkin and Ann Coulter. Digging a little deeper, you can even find that the namesake of this institute was decidedly racist and nativist in her views.
In an interview given to Geo Magazine in the early 1980's, Luce claimed:
"In the 19th century, the U.S. absorbed something like 40 million immigrants. But the vast majority were of a fundamental culture, and they were all white. They were not black or brown or yellow."
She also made this claim:
"to prefer the ways of one’s own culture is not racist."
One has to wonder how closely the members and supporters of this institute abide by the beliefs of Clare Boothe Luce. Given the recent appearance of Bachmann on the O'Reilly Factor to demagogue illegal immigration, she may be studying up on how to more closely emulate Mrs. Luce.
Let the fisking begin...
Bachmann begins by parroting Republican talking points that ENDA (Employee Non-Discrimination Act) is nothing more than a bill to keep trial lawyers busy. While it is clear that Bachmann doesn't like the bill because it protects the homosexuals she has been fighting her entire life to discriminate against.
However, she doesn't go that far in this speech. She presents a weak argument that employers are "essentially guilty until they prove themselves innocent". Now I haven't read the entire bill, but it doesn't seem possible that the writers of the bill would go as far as to circumvent the Bill of Rights and thereby jeopardize the Constitutionality of the legislation. Additionally, the enforcement of this bill is tied to Title VII and the Americans with Disabilities Act. So, unless Bachmann would like to make the claim that these too are discrimination against employers then this point is entirely moot.
One further interesting comparison is to point out to Mrs. Bachmann that Minnesota has one of the most liberal anti-discrimination policies. How many illegitimate cases have come before judges in the state of Minnesota or any of the other states with similar laws? Certainly, if this truly were a problem, she would be hammering away some actual statistics rather than empty rhetoric.
Welcome to Liberal in the Land of Conservative!
I, Political Muse, will be your host and my hope is to provide a dash of political commentary, a sprinkle of policy wonkishness, and a double dose of snarkiness to the blogosphere in Minnesota.
If you have any tips on local conservative foolishness or if you want to challenge me to a duel, there are a variety of ways to keep in touch:
We haven't turned any corners. We haven't seen any lights at the end of the tunnel.
