• Hadrian999

    if nominated, this woman could single handedly turn the tide and win the presidency for Obama

  • Hadrian999

    if nominated, this woman could single handedly turn the tide and win the presidency for Obama

    • Tuna Ghost

      I think Obama is already sitting pretty comfortably…Bachmann has no chance, Palin has no chance, Romney is better off than those two but I sincerely doubt he can raise the money that Obama can.  Ron Paul is in the same boat financially, and he’s got a bunch of unorthodox ideas he’s got to make seem either mainstream and/or viable, which I’m doubting he can do when other republicans are tearing him apart in the primaries only to have him face Obama’s PR people after all that.  

      • Simiantongue

        That’s unfortunate in my opinion. Wish there were another option.

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LPdTXRjIKQ

      • Liam_McGonagle

        Obama’s screwed up everything think he’s ever touched.  Have you seen his latest poll #’s?  Have you seen how many people signed the “No way am I ever working GOTV for HIM ever again!” pledge?

        On 2nd May everyone was talking about how being the sheriff that shot Osama Bin Laden was his free ticket to term #2.  Now on 10th August Obama’s seriously worried about being primaried, let alone working the voter turnout.

        Don’t underestimate Obama’s ability to fcuk up everything he touches.

        • Tuna Ghost

          Hmm, I think he’s more shrewd than you’re giving him credit for.  Not to mention he’s got an award-winning PR firm that can turn shit into gold and apparently hypnotize people into not noticing his first campaign was based on pretty much nothing solid at all, just “HOPE” and “CHANGE”.  If he can raise the the sort of funds he was capable of last election, and since he’s as much in the pocket of big business as anyone else if not more so (his “economic recovery team” had a half dozen dudes who should have been indicted for their involvement in the banking schemes that ruined the global economy), there’s no reason to think that he can’t, he’ll be sitting pretty.  You can almost always predict who is going to win based off of how much they spend on their campaign, so I bet he’s not wringing his hands about the election.  

          Then again I’ve been out of the country for the last two years.  Friends are telling me its changed quite a bit in my absence.  Its conceivable that I don’t quite have my finger on the pulse as much as I think I do.

      • Hadrian999

        it’s why i think the elections are rigged, it always seem to be one candidate against a total joke who looks like they are just being set up to be knocked down

        • Tuna Ghost

          You’re not far off.  When I read Hunter S. Thompson’s Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail ’72 I was pleasantly surprised at the depth and insight Thompson was capable of–at one point he was theorizing that the Democrats were basically handing Nixon the re-election so that they could run Ted Kennedy in ’76 and have eight years since they were banking on Nixon encouraging Spirow Agnew to run, who wouldn’t have had a prayer.  They didn’t want to run Kennedy against Nixon because it would be too tight a race and a loss would possibly weaken his theoretical campaign four years later, so they were willing to trade four more years of a Republican for the next eight with a Democrat.  Nixon would have agreed to this, since after winning the ’72 election he wouldn’t be able to run anymore anyway, and exactly nobody gave two shits about Agnew, not even Nixon.  

          That didn’t turn out to be the case, but more than one political analyst told Thompson that that’s the sort of deals that get made at high levels.  Elections aren’t rigged per se but most folks generally have a pretty good idea of their worth on the political market and where there is a market there are trades takng place.  

  • DeepCough

    THE TEA PARTY IS THE FOURTH REICH!

  • DeepCough

    THE TEA PARTY IS THE FOURTH REICH!

  • Tuna Ghost

    I’m really curious, but its difficult to find the drive to learn anymore about Bachmann given what I’ve already learned.  The third book on her “must read” list is Wilkins’s biography of Robert E. Lee, in which he writes:

    Slavery, as it operated in the pervasively Christian society which was the old South, was not an adversarial relationship founded upon racial animosity. In fact, it bred on the whole, not contempt, but, over time, mutual respect. This produced a mutual esteem of the sort that always results when men give themselves to a common cause. The credit for this startling reality must go to the Christian faith. . . . The unity and companionship that existed between the races in the South prior to the war was the fruit of a common faith. 
    African slaves brought to America, he argues, were essentially lucky: “Africa, like any other pagan country, was permeated by the cruelty and barbarism typical of unbelieving cultures.” Echoing Eidsmoe, Wilkins also approvingly cites Lee’s insistence that abolition could not come until “the sanctifying effects of Christianity” had time “to work in the black race and fit its people for freedom.”So as you can see, Bachmann apparently agrees with the notion that black people were unfit for freedom until white christians enslaved them.  Makes perfect sense!  Also, slavery was in no way about race, and the slaves really didn’t mind being slaves.  They were actually happy!  You could tell by the rhythmic way in which they sometimes jangled their chains.  

    So, Bachmann.  Blatant racist, fundamentalist christian who has, time and again, tried to bring down the separation of church and state, and all around crazy person.  Just when we thought she couldn’t be worse than Sarah Palin…its like every layer we uncover reveals more batshit crazy, like some sort of lunatic onion.  

  • Tuna Ghost

    I’m really curious, but its difficult to find the drive to learn anymore about Bachmann given what I’ve already learned.  The third book on her “must read” list is Wilkins’s biography of Robert E. Lee, in which he writes:

    Slavery, as it operated in the pervasively Christian society which was the old South, was not an adversarial relationship founded upon racial animosity. In fact, it bred on the whole, not contempt, but, over time, mutual respect. This produced a mutual esteem of the sort that always results when men give themselves to a common cause. The credit for this startling reality must go to the Christian faith. . . . The unity and companionship that existed between the races in the South prior to the war was the fruit of a common faith. 
    African slaves brought to America, he argues, were essentially lucky: “Africa, like any other pagan country, was permeated by the cruelty and barbarism typical of unbelieving cultures.” Echoing Eidsmoe, Wilkins also approvingly cites Lee’s insistence that abolition could not come until “the sanctifying effects of Christianity” had time “to work in the black race and fit its people for freedom.”So as you can see, Bachmann apparently agrees with the notion that black people were unfit for freedom until white christians enslaved them.  Makes perfect sense!  Also, slavery was in no way about race, and the slaves really didn’t mind being slaves.  They were actually happy!  You could tell by the rhythmic way in which they sometimes jangled their chains.  

    So, Bachmann.  Blatant racist, fundamentalist christian who has, time and again, tried to bring down the separation of church and state, and all around crazy person.  Just when we thought she couldn’t be worse than Sarah Palin…its like every layer we uncover reveals more batshit crazy, like some sort of lunatic onion.  

    • Liam_McGonagle

      Great quote.

      Can’t say that it changes my mind in any way about Bachman.  ‘Cause I had her pegged as a Down Syndrome baby from Day #1.  But it is a perfect case-in-point about a thesis I’m working on to explain the outcome of yesterday’s recall elections in Wisconsin.On the whole, results exceeded my expectations.  All eight races were challenges to Republican incumbents, so anything picked up is a boon to the Dems in my mind.  Two large convincing Democratic victories, two marginal races that stayed Republican and two Republican blow-outs.  It’d have been nice if the Dems were able to pick up a third victory, and take control of the state senate, but I never expected to take the whole shebang in one go.

      Why not?  Because voters are typically very reluctant to admit they’ve made a mistake.  And this is where I tie in to your observations regarding the lengths to which halfwit losers like Bachman will go to rationalize their mental and moral deficiencies.  Standing on a platform that basically calls for the destruction of the United States and hand over to a corporate elite that has been publically proven once again to be our society’s least competent institution in light of recent market down turns, she’s looking for a scapegoat.

      Learning is not a uni-valent phenomenom.  You can “learn” a more correct apprehension of some event or process, or you can “learn” an incorrect one.  Ideally that criteria applied should be how closely the “learned” theory predicts reality.  But in practice it’s often how effective the new theory strokes our egos.  The phenomena in question are usually complicated enough that any prediction failures can comfortably be chalked up to an intransegent opposition’s ignorant obduracy.  In fact, failure often reinforces our sense of superiority–because it’s “The OTHER’s FAILURE”.  Not ours.

      So what we have going on here is kind of a 2 way intellectual arms race.  One side, represented by amoral imbeciles like Bachman, doubles down on the “feel good” tactic of blaming vulnerable minorities.  Why not?  Worked for Hitler.

      The other side, working somewhat against the general headwinds, I must say, is finally beginnng to identify the outgroup as traitorous multinational corporate tools and faux-libertarians.  They are having some success–witness the two flips to Dems in Wisconsin yesterday.

      Which one will win?  Good question.  I think it’ll be the progressives.  The USA definitely has strong traditions of racism, but with every passing generation it’s taking more and more effort to sustain it.  And serious cracks are appearing in the traditional GOP/business alliance.  That S&P report did all but call Tea Baggers featherheads for refusing to tax the rich.

      I hope the progressives win before I die.  But they really have to be more aggressive in identifying that “out” group.

      • Tuna Ghost

        But it is a perfect case-in-point about a thesis I’m working on to explain the outcome of yesterday’s recall elections in Wisconsin. On the whole, results exceeded my expectations.
        I suscribed to some e-mail newsletter about the goings-on in Wisconsin, and I’ve been shocked to see that the e-mail headings seem more and more upbeat–I knew the folks up there weren’t giving up (for some of them the stakes were just too high to ignore), but I really didn’t expect them to succeed on the level that they have.  Certainly a pleasant surprise.

        So what we have going on here is kind of a 2 way intellectual arms race.  One side, represented by amoral imbeciles like Bachman, doubles down on the “feel good” tactic of blaming vulnerable minorities.  Why not?  Worked for Hitler.

        Chomsky’s been drawing comparisons between modern America and Wiermar Germany for a few years now.  I mean, that’s the sort of thing he would do, but I think the comparison is valid in a lot of ways.  A shit economy and an angry populace with very valid questions (“why is the country broke but corporations are still reporting ever-increasing profits, why did they get bailed out for failing, what is anybody doing to fix the shit-show that we’re involved in every goddam day”) that aren’t getting answered.  Thanks to the propaganda machine corporations have been using since the fifties everyone’s natural reaction is to blame the government, or rather the people in charge, when its the system that allows these things to happen that is to blame.  And when you take in account things like the Super Pac legislation, you know its only going to get worse.  

    • Anarchy Pony

      Am I the only one who really hates these ancestor traitor christ lovers? I mean seriously. Crap like this should garner nothing but hatred for these pieces of human garbage. Talks about pagans being cruel and barbaric in one breath and endorses slavery of another race in the next. You can guess who the real savages in the world are.

  • Tuna Ghost

    I think Obama is already sitting pretty comfortably…Bachmann has no chance, Palin has no chance, Romney is better off than those two but I sincerely doubt he can raise the money that Obama can.  Ron Paul is in the same boat financially, and he’s got a bunch of unorthodox ideas he’s got to make seem either mainstream and/or viable, which I’m doubting he can do when other republicans are tearing him apart in the primaries only to have him face Obama’s PR people after all that.  

  • http://buzzcoastin.posterous.com BuzzCoastin

    This cartoon character is not really electable, but she sure creates great media feeding frenzies. Butt eye would like to see a Palin-Bachman ticket just or the lulz.

  • BuzzCoastin

    This cartoon character is not really electable, but she sure creates great media feeding frenzies. Butt eye would like to see a Palin-Bachman ticket just 4 da lulz.

    • Liam_McGonagle

      Yeah–I’d like to see a rival campaign do a black ops number on a Bachman/Palin ticket.  Maybe something like setting them up in identicle outfits for a big rally or conference?  I’d love to see their fat, ravenous egos maul each other to bits over something as equally banal as their platforms.  It’d be exactly the type of metaphorical theatre Americans love.

      • Tuna Ghost

        Ugh I just pictured slavering, bloody maws peeking out of matching pantsuits, dyed-brunette hair flying about, bits of flesh scattered on the podiums.  Ugly.

  • Simiantongue

    That’s unfortunate in my opinion. Wish there were another option.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LPdTXRjIKQ

  • Anonymous

    Great quote.

    Can’t say that it changes my mind in any way about Bachman.  ‘Cause I had her pegged as a Down Syndrome baby from Day #1.  But it is a perfect case-in-point about a thesis I’m working on to explain the outcome of yesterday’s recall elections in Wisconsin.On the whole, results exceeded my expectations.  All eight races were challenges to Republican incumbents, so anything picked up is a boon to the Dems in my mind.  Two large convincing Democratic victories, two marginal races that stayed Republican and two Republican blow-outs.  It’d have been nice if the Dems were able to pick up a third victory, and take control of the state senate, but I never expected to take the whole shebang in one go.

    Why not?  Because voters are typically very reluctant to admit they’ve made a mistake.  And this is where I tie in to your observations regarding the lengths to which halfwit losers like Bachman will go to rationalize their mental and moral deficiencies.  Standing on a platform that basically calls for the destruction of the United States and hand over to a corporate elite that has been publically proven once again to be our society’s least competent institution in light of recent market down turns, she’s looking for a scapegoat.

    Learning is not a uni-valent phenomenom.  You can “learn” a more correct apprehension of some event or process, or you can “learn” an incorrect one.  Ideally that criteria applied should be how closely the “learned” theory predicts reality.  But in practice it’s often how effective the new theory strokes our egos.  The phenomena in question are usually complicated enough that any prediction failures can comfortably be chalked up to an intransegent opposition’s ignorant obduracy.  In fact, failure often reinforces our sense of superiority–because it’s “The OTHER’s FAILURE”.  Not ours.

    So what we have going on here is kind of a 2 way intellectual arms race.  One side, represented by amoral imbeciles like Bachman, doubles down on the “feel good” tactic of blaming vulnerable minorities.  Why not?  Worked for Hitler.

    The other side, working somewhat against the general headwinds, I must say, is finally beginnng to identify the outgroup as traitorous multinational corporate tools and faux-libertarians.  They are having some success–witness the two flips to Dems in Wisconsin yesterday.

    Which one will win?  Good question.  I think it’ll be the progressives.  The USA definitely has strong traditions of racism, but with every passing generation it’s taking more and more effort to sustain it.  And serious cracks are appearing in the traditional GOP/business alliance.  That S&P report did all but call Tea Baggers featherheads for refusing to tax the rich.

    I hope the progressives win before I die.  But they really have to be more aggressive in identifying that “out” group.

  • Anonymous

    Yeah–I’d like to see a rival campaign do a black ops number on a Bachman/Palin ticket.  Maybe something like setting them up in identicle outfits for a big rally or conference?  I’d love to see their fat, ravenous egos maul each other to bits over something as equally banal as their platforms.  It’d be exactly the type of metaphorical theatre Americans love.

  • Anonymous

    Obama’s screwed up everything think he’s ever touched.  Have you seen his latest poll #’s?  Have you seen how many people signed the “No way am I ever working GOTV for HIM ever again!” pledge?

    On 2nd May everyone was talking about how being the sheriff that shot Osama Bin Laden was his free ticket to term #2.  Now on 10th August Obama’s seriously worried about being primaried, let alone working the voter turnout.

    Don’t underestimate Obama’s ability to fcuk up everything he touches.

  • Wanooski

    Am I the only one who really hates these ancestor traitor christ lovers? I mean seriously. Crap like this should garner nothing but hatred for these pieces of human garbage. Talks about pagans being cruel and barbaric in one breath and endorses slavery of another race in the next. You can guess who the real savages in the world are.

  • Ahmacrom

    Christ ! What a cunt….

  • Ahmacrom

    Christ ! What a cunt….

  • Hadrian999

    it’s why i think the elections are rigged, it always seem to be one candidate against a total joke who looks like they are just being set up to be knocked down

  • StillAtMyMomS

    Well, this bitch sounds no different than Palin–perhaps even worse. 

  • StillAtMyMomS

    Well, this bitch sounds no different than Palin–perhaps even worse. 

  • Butter Knife

    Ah yes, she would only nominate judges who are non-activists and don’t legislate from the bench… But prohibiting gay marriage or abortion from the bench is just following the letter of the Constitution. Cute.

    • Hermione Volino

      If Michelle had her way women would have to go back to back alleys to have abortions. She’s anti-abortion, which I can’t stand, and she’s a freaking loony. The only part of the health care law that I don’t like is that mandate because I live in Romneycare land. The rest like the free birth control and insurance companies not being able to deny health care coverage to people is a wonderful idea. How many people have died because health insurance companies have denied them health insurance based on preexisting medical conditions? Too many!

      My personal opinion is that if the rich don’t want to pay more then they should into the federal government like they did during the early part of the 20th century then they need to found their own country and leave us alone. I’m voting for no one on the GOP ticket which leaves me with Obama.

  • Butter Knife

    Ah yes, she would only nominate judges who are non-activists and don’t legislate from the bench… But prohibiting gay marriage or abortion from the bench is just following the letter of the Constitution. Cute.

  • Tuna Ghost

    But it is a perfect case-in-point about a thesis I’m working on to explain the outcome of yesterday’s recall elections in Wisconsin. On the whole, results exceeded my expectations.
    I suscribed to some e-mail newsletter about the goings-on in Wisconsin, and I’ve been shocked to see that the e-mail headings seem more and more upbeat–I knew the folks up there weren’t giving up (for some of them the stakes were just too high to ignore), but I really didn’t expect them to succeed on the level that they have.  Certainly a pleasant surprise.

    So what we have going on here is kind of a 2 way intellectual arms race.  One side, represented by amoral imbeciles like Bachman, doubles down on the “feel good” tactic of blaming vulnerable minorities.  Why not?  Worked for Hitler.

    Chomsky’s been drawing comparisons between modern America and Wiermar Germany for a few years now.  I mean, that’s the sort of thing he would do, but I think the comparison is valid in a lot of ways.  A shit economy and an angry populace with very valid questions (“why is the country broke but corporations are still reporting ever-increasing profits, why did they get bailed out for failing, what is anybody doing to fix the shit-show that we’re involved in every goddam day”) that aren’t getting answered.  Thanks to the propaganda machine corporations have been using since the fifties everyone’s natural reaction is to blame the government, or rather the people in charge, when its the system that allows these things to happen that is to blame.  And when you take in account things like the Super Pac legislation, you know its only going to get worse.  

  • Tuna Ghost

    Ugh I just pictured slavering, bloody maws peeking out of matching pantsuits, dyed-brunette hair flying about, bits of flesh scattered on the podiums.  Ugly.

  • Tuna Ghost

    You’re not far off.  When I read Hunter S. Thompson’s Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail ’72 I was pleasantly surprised at the depth and insight Thompson was capable of–at one point he was theorizing that the Democrats were basically handing Nixon the re-election so that they could run Ted Kennedy in ’76 and have eight years since they were banking on Nixon encouraging Spirow Agnew to run, who wouldn’t have had a prayer.  They didn’t want to run Kennedy against Nixon because it would be too tight a race and a loss would possibly weaken his theoretical campaign four years later, so they were willing to trade four more years of a Republican for the next eight with a Democrat.  Nixon would have agreed to this, since after winning the ’72 election he wouldn’t be able to run anymore anyway, and exactly nobody gave two shits about Agnew, not even Nixon.  

    That didn’t turn out to be the case, but more than one political analyst told Thompson that that’s the sort of deals that get made at high levels.  Elections aren’t rigged per se but most folks generally have a pretty good idea of their worth on the political market and where there is a market there are trades takng place.  

  • Tuna Ghost

    Hmm, I think he’s more shrewd than you’re giving him credit for.  Not to mention he’s got an award-winning PR firm that can turn shit into gold and apparently hypnotize people into not noticing his first campaign was based on pretty much nothing solid at all, just “HOPE” and “CHANGE”.  If he can raise the the sort of funds he was capable of last election, and since he’s as much in the pocket of big business as anyone else if not more so (his “economic recovery team” had a half dozen dudes who should have been indicted for their involvement in the banking schemes that ruined the global economy), there’s no reason to think that he can’t, he’ll be sitting pretty.  You can almost always predict who is going to win based off of how much they spend on their campaign, so I bet he’s not wringing his hands about the election.  

    Then again I’ve been out of the country for the last two years.  Friends are telling me its changed quite a bit in my absence.  Its conceivable that I don’t quite have my finger on the pulse as much as I think I do.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Hermione-Volino/100000592766038 Hermione Volino

    If Michelle had her way women would have to go back to back alleys to have abortions. She’s anti-abortion, which I can’t stand, and she’s a freaking loony. The only part of the health care law that I don’t like is that mandate because I live in Romneycare land. The rest like the free birth control and insurance companies not being able to deny health care coverage to people is a wonderful idea. How many people have died because health insurance companies have denied them health insurance based on preexisting medical conditions? Too many!

    My personal opinion is that if the rich don’t want to pay more then they should into the federal government like they did during the early part of the 20th century then they need to found their own country and leave us alone. I’m voting for no one on the GOP ticket which leaves me with Obama.

21
More in Atheism, Christianity, Democracy, Elections, History, Michele Bachmann, Politics, Religion
Does The U.S. Military Actually Protect American Freedom?

An opinion from Jess Richard on TvNewsLies: Let's make one thing crystal clear, no member of the US military contributes in any way whatsoever to protecting the freedoms of the...

Close