Have you heard the one about Michele Bachmann’s Bridge to Nowhere?
Michele Bachmann is a devotee of Ayn Rand. She claims to be a very devout Christian. How can she be both? Marvin Olasky wrote:
“…For nearly a decade Democrats have sought a religious wedge issue that could separate big chunks of white evangelical voters from their Republican home. …Ayn Rand (1905-1982) was a pro-free-enterprise but anti-Christian popular philosopher and novelist. Millions of Americans have read her most popular work, Atlas Shrugged (1957), even though it clocks in at 1,000-plus pages. Others have seen the movie, belatedly made from the first part of that novel, which hit the theaters this April. Former Fed chairman Alan Greenspan is one of her devotees. Rush Limbaugh is among the many who call her “brilliant.”…I also was amazed at the viciousness of Rand’s view of Christianity, leading up to its conclusion, where the book’s hero traces in the air the Sign of the Dollar, a replacement for the Sign of the Cross. I didn’t mark every purple passage because I was reading the novel on a treadmill, but Rand’s sneering words got my heart beating faster, and it wasn’t true love….But Ryan and others, if they want support from Christians, cannot merely react to the left’s criticism with a shrug: They should show what in Rand they agree with and what they spurn. The GOP’s big tent should include both libertarians and Christians, but not anti-Christians….”
Can she possibly be so stupid? In Spartanburg, SC, Sparkles paused, on August 16, to wish Elvis a Happy Birthday.
Why is she NOT taking part in the Florida straw poll? This one is just too much funner not to notice. I suspect she is afraid of …. losing!
Would someone please tell her the Soviet Union is extinct, like Jacob Marley, it is dead as a doornail.
She worked for the IRS to know her enemy. I kid you not.
Two buck a gallon gas?
What is it with Bachmann’s security?
“…When Chuck McClurg, a cameraman and journalist for the station, sought to record Bachmann outside her bus, he said, a female staffer put her hand over his camera’s lens and shoved it down.
“You don’t have to talk to any camera but if you’re going for the presidency of the United States, you do not place your hands on the cameras and push them — that’s just wrong,” said McClurg, who’s been covering politicians in Iowa since 1988 and had hoped to ask Bachmann how she liked Davenport. “I have never had any candidate or staff ever touch me — only shake my hands and smile and answer my few simple questions.”
Three American reporters who found the Bachmann entourage’s behavior remarkable declined to comment on the record, citing their news outlets’ strictures, fears of access and a fear of being perceived as whining. But the perception is widespread among those following her triumphant month of campaigning in Iowa.
“They’re far more aggressive than other candidates’ security,” said a veteran U.S. political reporter, noting that Bachmann’s aides made a striking contrast with the Rangers who guard Perry.
Some foreign reporters on the campaign were less concerned about perceptions of their comments, and the Norwegian Flaten wasn’t the only one to cite an unusual experience.
Jodie Newell, an Australian photographer who shoots for her own company, Newell Media, said the female advance staffer had demanded she put her camera away outside a recent Bachmann event in Indianola, Iowa, despite the fact that she was standing in an open parking lot, after she didn’t immediately produce her credentials.
Newell, a conservative who earlier had Bachmann sign a placard and wished her well, said the staffer told her, “We’ve been told on the radio to look out for you.”
“I had no idea what she was talking about,” she said, adding that the staffer refused to identify herself.
“They are being extremely heavy-handed with media,” Newell said. “I’m supportive of conservatives but I’m astounded. What they’re doing is just ridiculous and it gives them a bad name.”…”
Michele Bachmann doesn’t seem to understand that we live in a representative republic and not a direct democracy. It’s a problem the tea party shares.
Michele Bachmann is confident she can appeal to independents. Steve Benen at Washington Monthly wrote that she is stark raving mad.
“…Bachmann is, by any reasonable measure, one of the most deranged presidential contenders in generations, but she’s at least aware of the perceptions about her. If Bachmann is going to remain a top-tier candidate for the presidency — a sentence I’m barely even comfortable typing — she’s going to have to convince a lot of Republicans that she can win a national election and appeal to voters outside the GOP’s radical base.
But there’s just one problem with this: the very idea is preposterous. Bachmann is stark raving mad, delivering red meat to extremists who savor every morsel, but the notion that her appeal is broad enough to include significant numbers outside Republican activists is simply comical on its face….”
“… Appearing on “Face the Nation” Sunday, Rep. Michele Bachmann stood by her comment in Thursday’s Republican debate that when she said that wives should be submissive to their husbands, she meant that married couples should have mutual respect.
In 2006, Bachmann said her husband had told her to get a post-doctorate degree in tax law. “Tax law? I hate taxes,” she continued. “Why should I go into something like that? But the lord says, be submissive. Wives, you are to be submissive to your husbands.'”
Asked about the comment by CBS News’ Norah O’Donnell Sunday, Bachmann reaffirmed that to her, “submission means respect, mutual respect.”
“I respect my husband, he respects me,” she said. “We have been married 33 years, we have a great marriage…and respecting each other, listening to each other is what that means.”
O’Donnell asked Bachmann if she would use a different word in retrospect.
“You know, I guess it depends on what word people are used to, but respect is really what it means,” Bachmann replied.
“Do you think submissive means subservient?” O’Donnell asked.
“Not to us,” Bachmann said. “To us it means respect. We respect each other, we listen to each other, we love each other and that is what it means.”…”
“…There are quite a few women leaders in the submission and patriarchy and Quiverfull movements. They are under the headship of male leaders themselves, so you can question how much authority they actually have. But one of the most popular authors in bringing women about to this conviction has been a woman writing in a personal way. I think that’s in keeping with tradition, as with Phyllis Schafly’s example during the Eighties.
Karlin: How much of this do you think is a backlash to the feminist movement?
Joyce: I think generally it is, and that they have taken motivation and even structure from looking at the feminist movement. They organize in small groups and small mentoring models that seem to me very reminiscent of the rap groups, or the consciousness-raising groups of the early feminist movement, that appealed to women where they are, that talked to them about personal issues, and then exposed them to a political thought.
In this case, they are leading women or getting them organized into small groups and teaching them about submission and patriarchy rather than telling them about feminism and opportunities for women’s liberation. But I think there’s a lot of inspiration there. I think what they’re attacking most vocally is feminism, and the idea that women are independent. They take feminism as a threat more seriously than probably anybody has since the 1970s. They talk about it obsessively. It’s their main concern.
Karlin: Getting back to the race issue, it’s been sort of unstated, but how did we get to the point where Jesus and Christianity are seen as white?
Joyce: That is a good question, but I’m not sure I am necessarily qualified to answer that, but I think I should clarify. I think there is subtext of race in a lot of the demographic concerns, but it’s often not overt and I don’t think everybody in this movement shares those beliefs. I think there’s a very strong racial undercurrent, when they talk about demography as a crisis, or underpopulation, or declining fertility rates as a crisis, because they’re talking about declining white fertility rates, not declining worldwide fertility rates. I think there are a lot of ties and connections between the extremist members of this movement and traditionally conservative and racist groups in the South. I don’t think that’s necessarily part of the theological basis for it, though….”
Then there are the lies. Let’s face it, they are lies. How do you know Michele Bachmann is lying – her lips are moving. You know that family reunion she said she was attending? She did not.