Michele Bachman says Obama is turning the United States into a “nation of slaves.”

[bobbyw24]

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) believes that President Barack Obama is turning the United States into a “nation of slaves.”


Bachmann made the comments over the weekend while appearing at the Western Conservative Summit in Denver.


According to the Colorado Independent, Bachmann first read a letter from John Jay that he wrote during the Revolutionary War.


“We are determined to live free or not at all. And we are resolved that posterity shall never reproach us with having brought slaves into the world,” Jay wrote.


Bachmann then riffed off of Jay in her own worlds, telling the audience, “We will talk a little bit about what has transpired in the last 18 months and would we count what has transpired into turning our country into a nation of slaves.”


Bachmann later asserted that the 18 months in which Democrats have held the White House along with the House and Senate have amounted to “tyranny,” pointing directly to the health care reforms Obama was able to shepherd through earlier this year.



Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/39608.html#ixzz0tUjfi9yh

[South Park Fan]

It's a half-truth. It's being going on longer than 18 months, try 97 years.

[Matt Collins]

It's a half-truth. It's being going on longer than 18 months, try 97 years.
Yeah, my thoughts exactly. Where has she been the last few decades :rolleyes:

[acptulsa]

She's just trying to get people's attention without risking being accused of overstating the case. Which is something our other candidates could stand to work on. They accuse us of being extreme, but nothing will make that accusation fall flat faster than the accuser speaking in more extreme language than the accused.

[emazur]

Ayn Rand described big government ~ socialism as a system where everyone is enslaved to everyone else. Obama is furthering such a system, so Bachman is not really off the mark here, unless she narrowly places the blame on Obama and the Dems. Also, the overwhelming debt and entitlements over time will turn every American into a slave if the state doesn't collapse first.

[paulitics]

Ayn Rand described big government ~ socialism as a system where everyone is enslaved to everyone else. Obama is furthering such a system, so Bachman is not really off the mark here, unless she narrowly places the blame on Obama and the Dems. Also, the overwhelming debt and entitlements over time will turn every American into a slave if the state doesn't collapse first.

She seems to place most of the blame on the left, while giving the neocons a free pass, or actually endorsing neocon policies. She is a regular on shows like Hannity for a reason.

She is a dime a dozen, unless she comes out against the wars and civil libitery abuses now, which I doubt. She is part of the problem, although certainly better when her party is not in power.

[Stary Hickory]

She seems to place most of the blame on the left, while giving the neocons a free pass, or actually endorsing neocon policies. She is a regular on shows like Hannity for a reason.

She is a dime a dozen, unless she comes out against the wars and civil libitery abuses now, which I doubt. She is part of the problem, although certainly better when her party is not in power.

Most of the blame is on the left. This is what gets on my nerves sometimes....the progressive left has ruined this country. The neocons have not been perfect by any means. But there is no comparison, especially now with Obama and liberals in the white house.

They have looted, stolen, created more corruption than I have ever witnessed in my life in such a short period. This god awful bloated pile of krap that we call the US government is a progressive invention. Neocons have been progressive lites in some regards, there biggest faults are love of big military and there spineless inability to even put up a decent defense against progressives, Bush was as bad as any a progressive president when he was in office

There is no way I will ever say they are both equally at fault. It's not possible it's a cop out. The Neocon rising is a relatively new thing and it really only manifested itself in a real ugly manner under the Bushies. But before that it was progressive interventionism(which they still love) that spawned the Neocon movement anyways.

Dems have always been for big government, always. Gop for small government, they lack spines and the balls to do anything which is the problem and in recent years they have turned into total useless sacks of krap. But still the problem with the entire world right now is the early 20th century socialist movement that spread far and wide. Like it or not as pussified and lam as the GOP is it is the only resistance that there is to this totaly tyrannical socialist take over. Every bill the Dems push through is more socialism and more destruction.

It's demogaugurey and deceit or just plain stupidity....but what is certain is it's 100% immoral and destructive. I refuse to be a slave to the ignorance of the masses. I suspect I am not alone. But still there IS a difference between the GOP and the liberal left. Saying they are both the same is a copout and just someone trying to position himself on a middle ground that does not exist. I agree that when it comes to a true free society both the Dems and the GOP suck balls. There are some decent liberty minded individuals in the GOP(NOT ONE IN THE LIBERAL DEMS BTW) but they are not even enough to do any major good. The support for the wars is ending with the GOP, because they are and the people that vote for them responsive to the liberty message.....Dems are not responsive....I have no hope that progressives will see the light and stop using force to loot and enslave their fellow Americans...I just can't see it any anywhere.

[acptulsa]

Dems have always been for big government, always. Gop for small government, they lack spines and the balls to do anything which is the problem and in recent years they have turned into total useless sacks of krap. But still the problem with the entire world right now is the early 20th century socialist movement that spread far and wide.

So, you put more blame on the crooks who take over a town than the cops who do nothing to stop it?

Seems to me the only way to seperate them is with a crowbar. I consider the whole 'left vs. neocon' argument meaningless. You might as well say the heads side of that quarter in your pocket is suffering inflation and the tails side isn't.

[YumYum]

Palin and her are joined at the hips.

[Seraphim]

Most of the blame is on the left. This is what gets on my nerves sometimes....the progressive left has ruined this country. The neocons have not been perfect by any means. But there is no comparison, especially now with Obama and liberals in the white house.

They have looted, stolen, created more corruption than I have ever witnessed in my life in such a short period. This god awful bloated pile of krap that we call the US government is a progressive invention. Neocons have been progressive lites in some regards, there biggest faults are love of big military and there spineless inability to even put up a decent defense against progressives, Bush was as bad as any a progressive president when he was in office

There is no way I will ever say they are both equally at fault. It's not possible it's a cop out. The Neocon rising is a relatively new thing and it really only manifested itself in a real ugly manner under the Bushies. But before that it was progressive interventionism(which they still love) that spawned the Neocon movement anyways.

Dems have always been for big government, always. Gop for small government, they lack spines and the balls to do anything which is the problem and in recent years they have turned into total useless sacks of krap. But still the problem with the entire world right now is the early 20th century socialist movement that spread far and wide. Like it or not as pussified and lam as the GOP is it is the only resistance that there is to this totaly tyrannical socialist take over. Every bill the Dems push through is more socialism and more destruction.

It's demogaugurey and deceit or just lain stupidity....but what is certain is it's 100% immoral and destructive. I refuse to be a slave to the ignorance of the masses. I suspect I am not alone. But still there IS a difference between the GOP and the liberal left. Saying they are both the same is a copout and just someone trying to position himself on a middle ground that does not exist.

They are equally to blame because it is all a dog and pony show. People need to stop saying the NEOCONS. They are NAZIS.

With Bush you had National Socialism. Now you have Marxist Socialism. They are equally as bad.

[Stary Hickory]

They are equally to blame because it is all a dog and pony show. People need to stop saying the NEOCONS. They are NAZIS.

With Bush you had National Socialism. Now you have Marxist Socialism. They are equally as bad.

They are not equally the blame at all. For one it's impossible for them to be equally to blame. So let me see you quantify how they are "equally" bad. The progressive left has molded this current government into what it is. Without these loons the government might have grown but NOTHING like what we have here.

Progressives gave us the FEDERAL RESERVE....WW1, WW2, VIETNAM, BOSNIA, SOMALIA, SOCIAL SECURITY, MEDICARE, WELFARE, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, PUBLIC SCHOOLS, GUN CONTROL, DOE.......EPA craziness, GLOBAL WARMING SCARE, GLOBAL GOVERNMENT intentions......BAILOUTS.....the list goes on( I refuse to put Obamacare on this list it will be repealed...or ignored).

The only opposition to any of this was the GOP. The Neocons certainly suck, but their rise was really tied to patriotism over WW2 and this fed the big Neocon rise, especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union, they took full credit for that and did went crazy......and they paid for it big time...the voters threw them out. But when you talk about small government and liberty you can only find this in the GOP, and the problem with the GOP is the Neocons and the phony Republicans who are half progressives. When you look at which party can be reformed and fixed the Democratic party is a lost cause. They are so embroiled with big government and the use of force to take whatever rights or property they want from people that they can never be brought back to a sane moral party. The GOP might actually give way to a libertarian rise, you can find support for sates rights and real reform.....and the support for the wars is waning in the GOP which is a blessing and shows that the voter base in the GOP is a thinking entity ...it responds to a true message.

The Democratic party and it' voters will never respond to a freedom message. Maybe some will come out of the fold I certainly hop so....however the Dem party as a whole is so tied to big government and dependent on promising other people's money away for votes that is incapable of delivering any kind of freedom or prosperity in this country. I am just as sick as anyone else of both parties, but I am not going to sit here and pretend they are both the same.....because they are not.

[Matt Collins]

Palin and her are joined at the hips.
I didn't know that video existed! :p;)

[jmdrake]

They are not equally the blame at all. For one it's impossible for them to be equally to blame. So let me see you quantify how they are "equally" bad. The progressive left has molded this current government into what it is. Without these loons the government might have grown but NOTHING like what we have here.

Progressives gave us the FEDERAL RESERVE....WW1, WW2, VIETNAM, BOSNIA, SOMALIA, SOCIAL SECURITY, MEDICARE, WELFARE, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, PUBLIC SCHOOLS, GUN CONTROL, DOE.......EPA craziness, GLOBAL WARMING SCARE, GLOBAL GOVERNMENT intentions......BAILOUTS.....the list goes on( I refuse to put Obamacare on this list it will be repealed...or ignored).

The only opposition to any of this was the GOP. The Neocons certainly suck, but their rise was really tied to patriotism over WW2 and this fed the big Neocon rise, especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union, they took full credit for that and did went crazy......and they paid for it big time...the voters threw them out. But when you talk about small government and liberty you can only find this in the GOP, and the problem with the GOP is the Neocons and the phony Republicans who are half progressives. When you look at which party can be reformed and fixed the Democratic party is a lost cause. They are so embroiled with big government and the use of force to take whatever rights or property they want from people that they can never be brought back to a sane moral party. The GOP might actually give way to a libertarian rise, you can find support for sates rights and real reform.....and the support for the wars is waning in the GOP which is a blessing and shows that the voter base in the GOP is a thinking entity ...it responds to a true message.

The Democratic party and it' voters will never respond to a freedom message. Maybe some will come out of the fold I certainly hop so....however the Dem party as a whole is so tied to big government and dependent on promising other people's money away for votes that is incapable of delivering any kind of freedom or prosperity in this country. I am just as sick as anyone else of both parties, but I am not going to sit here and pretend they are both the same.....because they are not.

Bush I gave us Somalia. Dubya gave us the bailouts. Bush 1 was also pushing global government. And his dad tried to turn the government over to the Nazis. The rest of your list is pretty accurate. But Dubya gave us Homeland inSecurity, the unPatriot Act, warrentless wiretapping, Iraq, Afghanistan, the current showdown with Iran etc. Like you said, the both suck.

[Seraphim]

GOP is crap. So are the Dems. they are on the same team.

I agree small govt is good. Fiscal Conservatism is good. the GOP is neither of these things. has not been for a while. The entirety (save a VERY FEW) of Congress and the Senate is bought and paid for. Dem. and Rep.

Don't for a second think the Republicans are any different. Crips and Bloods my friend. They will both shoot you and steal your money.

[RM918]

We are going to see a major case of whiplash (again) after the Reps win the hill again and start acting suspiciously like the Dems are now. Will the country have wide enough attention spans to remember all that when the Dems start making sense? I doubt it.

[A Son of Liberty]

We are going to see a major case of whiplash (again) after the Reps win the hill again and start acting suspiciously like the Dems are now. Will the country have wide enough attention spans to remember all that when the Dems start making sense? I doubt it.

Why should they (the country) all of a sudden start getting it? We've been riding this see-saw for a freakin' century without getting it. DRDRDRDRDRDRD... Why isn't anything getting better!? :confused:

[Stary Hickory]

Bush I gave us Somalia. Dubya gave us the bailouts. Bush 1 was also pushing global government. And his dad tried to turn the government over to the Nazis. The rest of your list is pretty accurate. But Dubya gave us Homeland inSecurity, the unPatriot Act, warrentless wiretapping, Iraq, Afghanistan, the current showdown with Iran etc. Like you said, the both suck.

Bush was bad, but where did opposition from the bailouts come from? Dems?.....nope Republicans where the ones who voted against it( and this was the first one). Bush was as bad as many progressive presidents. That was a given. He also increased Medicare with prescription drugs. And yet still all opposition came from the GOP(congress).

The biggest problem with th GOP is nationalism and this progressive interventionism they have latched onto and morphed into Neoconism. Their support the recent wars has been their biggest problem...but we see where they are waning and giving way to some common sense.

I suspect that come 2012 continuing the wars will be something most GOP presidential hopefuls will not want to be connected with. It reflects a voter base who is responsive to a liberty message. Like I said I see this only in the GOP voter base. The Dem base either does not take the time to think or his depenednt and enslaved on the use of force and fraud to take other people's money.

Also the GOP has progressive leaning GOP members who make it nigh impossible to pass any kind of real small government legislation. While this is awful, it does not compare to the liberal left where there is no chance that such ideas wll ever be entertained.

Also remember ruby ridge and waco.....progressives seem to go after Americans with the police state in a rather nasty way. Anyone trying to live free from government influence is a target. Just recently the Ron Paul movement was targeted. I am all against the patriot act, but lets be honest Obama and the Dems have no intention of giving back control to Americans.

Now that they are in power...the power to spy and bring the police state to bear on the citizens is very attractive.

[Stary Hickory]

We are going to see a major case of whiplash (again) after the Reps win the hill again and start acting suspiciously like the Dems are now. Will the country have wide enough attention spans to remember all that when the Dems start making sense? I doubt it.

The GOP has one more chance. If they botch it....wel we are going to see more demands for states rights and people just give up on Washington altogether. The GOP can keep the US limping along a little more unified if it does actually get something done in the next 8 years.

If it pulls another Bushie or if they start ANOTHER war or refuse to end the ones we have now they are done, and really so is the country as we know it. DC will lose the support of the country and the very Democratic system(no adhering to the Constitution) will also fall out of favor.

The country is headed towards a break up if you ask me. Especially when you toss in the economic tightening/meltdown that must occur. If this time period is not accompanied by serious common sense reforms towards smaller government I think people will take matters into their own hands and just defacto dissolve this mess. States rights and a severely weakened central government will be the likely result.

[anaconda]

They are equally to blame because it is all a dog and pony show. People need to stop saying the NEOCONS. They are NAZIS.

With Bush you had National Socialism. Now you have Marxist Socialism. They are equally as bad.


Thank you. The notions that the neocons are in any way better than the neolibs is very disturbing to me. Both take regular and frequent giant craps on the Constitution, steal our hard earned money, disrupt our relationships and our economy, and seek to enslave us. They are both nightmarish.

[Stary Hickory]

Thank you. The notions that the neocons are in any way better than the progressives is very disturbing to me. Both take regular and frequent giant craps on the Constitution, steal our hard earned money, disrupt our relationships and our economy, and seek to enslave us. They are both nightmarish.

Well be disturbed then.... because only in la la land can they both be identical and the same. They are not equally to the blame, they may both suck as compared to what a free country should be like.....but they are not the same. One is totally useless and hopeless.

You know I WANT to be wrong about this, I would love to see a huge freedom movement unleashed in the "progressive party" but this will NEVER happen. The only freedom they like is the State's total freedom to take whatever if wants from people at will so they we can redistribute the in a "fair"(<--- subjective word -Read here Tyrannical) way.

Of course all the while they ignore the fact they are destroying the very reason that people engage in economic activity in the first place. I mean why work if people will just steal what you produce? And why produce if you can just steal other people's hard work? See the progressive utopia that gets created here?

I don't know what it will take to wake the left up....famine? Massive poverty?...I dunno it is scary. But don't tell me they are both equally as bad or equally to blame. They both suck that is for sure, but they are not the same.

[silentshout]

Michele Bachmann is a scary dominionist and a neocon. I can't listen to her.

[catdd]

They can't do it unless you beg them for scraps and hand outs and depend on them from cradle to grave. Break the dependency and free yourself.

[A Son of Liberty]

The Republican party doesn't "want" liberty either. They talk a big game, especially when they're out of power; but what happens to that big game when they take the reins, huh? We get the freaking P*****T Act, endless wars, bailouts, etc.

BS. The Republicans are WORSE than democrats - at least the freaking democrats TELL you they're coming for your liberties. The Republicans smile in your face, shake your hand, pull you in real close and shove a knife in your gut.

Screw them.

[heavenlyboy34]

So, you put more blame on the crooks who take over a town than the cops who do nothing to stop it?

Seems to me the only way to seperate them is with a crowbar. I consider the whole 'left vs. neocon' argument meaningless. You might as well say the heads side of that quarter in your pocket is suffering inflation and the tails side isn't.

qft! A trotskyite republican is no better for humanity than a socialist dem. :p

[heavenlyboy34]

The Republican party doesn't "want" liberty either. They talk a big game, especially when they're out of power; but what happens to that big game when they take the reins, huh? We get the freaking P*****T Act, endless wars, bailouts, etc.

BS. The Republicans are WORSE than democrats - at least the freaking democrats TELL you they're coming for your liberties. The Republicans smile in your face, shake your hand, pull you in real close and shove a knife in your gut.

Screw them.

Good point. :cool:

[Stary Hickory]

The Republican party doesn't "want" liberty either. They talk a big game, especially when they're out of power; but what happens to that big game when they take the reins, huh? We get the freaking P*****T Act, endless wars, bailouts, etc.

BS. The Republicans are WORSE than democrats - at least the freaking democrats TELL you they're coming for your liberties. The Republicans smile in your face, shake your hand, pull you in real close and shove a knife in your gut.

Screw them.

Oh granted Bushie was a real disaster...and they got trounced as a result. But what is different about the GOP is it changes. GOP voters and GOPers themselves are now turning against the patriot act and the wars.

Will we ever see the crazed left turn away from socialism and stealing other peoples money? Will they ever turn away from big government? There is no freaking chance. I know a lot of people who are Republican, they disike Bush now, they disike the war, they hate the patrio act, they hate prescription drugs.

Voters do not like to think, they like to trust a politician to obey the Constitution and do what they preach. The GOP is changing now because it's voter base is paying attention. It got caught with it's pants down. The Bush years were just the manifestation of GOP voter apathy. They simply trusted Bush would do the "right" thing.


Maybe this exists on the left? I doubt it...because what they want is the government to give them freebies, to make people happy, and make things "fair". Oh and BTW the word fair has like 300 million subjective definitions in the US. So when a politician uses the word fair I want to puke, it means nothing because it means something different to each and every person on this planet.

I cannot see the left seeing that it is immoral and economically destructive to steal from their fellow Americans. Heck most of them refuse to acknowledge that they are using force to rob their fellow man, and those that do justify it with idiotic and unfounded accusations of "greed". So they can feel better about the people they rape every day I guess....but when it comes down to real greed like the Federal Reserve they do NOTHING about it they won't touch it because it's interests and big government interests are aligned....insomuch as they both use the same tecnique to defraud America with the printing press.


So show me the hope on the progressive left. I want to believe they will not tell me how I can and cannot take care of my own body, or how I can defend myself or my family, or what I can eat, smoke, what my kids can learn in school, or how much "stuff" I should have. When I look at the progressive left I see nothing but hopelessness and despair. Not one politician that they have seems decent. That is a shame.

The Dem party used to get some decent people in there....sometimes. I guess their might be a few, but it really looks bad. The thing is war and military can be reduced...it can be, entitlements and big government payouts and dependency get institutionalized.

[someperson]

http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/9395/partyt.gif

don't let it happen.

[John Taylor]

Yeah, my thoughts exactly. Where has she been the last few decades :rolleyes:

Not in Congress...:rolleyes:

[LibertyEagle]

Last I knew, Bachmann regularly attended Dr. Paul's meetings. Also, last I knew, Thomas Woods had some pretty nice things to say about her.

She ain't perfect. That's for sure. But, there are a lot worse ones to go after, than her.

[speciallyblend]

this was long before obama. we have the gop/dnc to thank for making us slaves!!!!!

[LibertyEagle]

this was long before obama. we have the gop/dnc to thank for making us slaves!!!!!

No, we have the American peoples' apathy and ignorance.

[Depressed Liberator]

I think we all just need to understand that Stary Hickory is a neocon. No need to argue with him and waste your time.

[Working Poor]

They are not equally the blame at all. For one it's impossible for them to be equally to blame. So let me see you quantify how they are "equally" bad. The progressive left has molded this current government into what it is. Without these loons the government might have grown but NOTHING like what we have here.

Progressives gave us the FEDERAL RESERVE....WW1, WW2, VIETNAM, BOSNIA, SOMALIA, SOCIAL SECURITY, MEDICARE, WELFARE, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, PUBLIC SCHOOLS, GUN CONTROL, DOE.......EPA craziness, GLOBAL WARMING SCARE, GLOBAL GOVERNMENT intentions......BAILOUTS.....the list goes on( I refuse to put Obamacare on this list it will be repealed...or ignored).

The only opposition to any of this was the GOP. The Neocons certainly suck, but their rise was really tied to patriotism over WW2 and this fed the big Neocon rise, especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union, they took full credit for that and did went crazy......and they paid for it big time...the voters threw them out. But when you talk about small government and liberty you can only find this in the GOP, and the problem with the GOP is the Neocons and the phony Republicans who are half progressives. When you look at which party can be reformed and fixed the Democratic party is a lost cause. They are so embroiled with big government and the use of force to take whatever rights or property they want from people that they can never be brought back to a sane moral party. The GOP might actually give way to a libertarian rise, you can find support for sates rights and real reform.....and the support for the wars is waning in the GOP which is a blessing and shows that the voter base in the GOP is a thinking entity ...it responds to a true message.

The Democratic party and it' voters will never respond to a freedom message. Maybe some will come out of the fold I certainly hop so....however the Dem party as a whole is so tied to big government and dependent on promising other people's money away for votes that is incapable of delivering any kind of freedom or prosperity in this country. I am just as sick as anyone else of both parties, but I am not going to sit here and pretend they are both the same.....because they are not.

Plus dems made pot illegal.

[LibertyEagle]

I think we all just need to understand that Stary Hickory is a neocon. No need to argue with him and waste your time.

Real nice of you.

[speciallyblend]

No, we have the American peoples' apathy and ignorance.

well the gop/dnc represent the people,so in the end bottom line the gop/dnc are to thank by the people!! the gop/dnc are slaving americans!!

[Imaginos]

With Bush you had National Socialism. Now you have Marxist Socialism. They are equally as bad.
+1
There is no such thing as the two party system.
It's just one party (big government party) with two branches.
As Jesse Ventura has nicesly put it, American politics = WWF Smackdown.

[AuH20]

They are not equally the blame at all. For one it's impossible for them to be equally to blame. So let me see you quantify how they are "equally" bad. The progressive left has molded this current government into what it is. Without these loons the government might have grown but NOTHING like what we have here.

Progressives gave us the FEDERAL RESERVE....WW1, WW2, VIETNAM, BOSNIA, SOMALIA, SOCIAL SECURITY, MEDICARE, WELFARE, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, PUBLIC SCHOOLS, GUN CONTROL, DOE.......EPA craziness, GLOBAL WARMING SCARE, GLOBAL GOVERNMENT intentions......BAILOUTS.....the list goes on( I refuse to put Obamacare on this list it will be repealed...or ignored).

The only opposition to any of this was the GOP. The Neocons certainly suck, but their rise was really tied to patriotism over WW2 and this fed the big Neocon rise, especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union, they took full credit for that and did went crazy......and they paid for it big time...the voters threw them out. But when you talk about small government and liberty you can only find this in the GOP, and the problem with the GOP is the Neocons and the phony Republicans who are half progressives. When you look at which party can be reformed and fixed the Democratic party is a lost cause. They are so embroiled with big government and the use of force to take whatever rights or property they want from people that they can never be brought back to a sane moral party. The GOP might actually give way to a libertarian rise, you can find support for sates rights and real reform.....and the support for the wars is waning in the GOP which is a blessing and shows that the voter base in the GOP is a thinking entity ...it responds to a true message.

The Democratic party and it' voters will never respond to a freedom message. Maybe some will come out of the fold I certainly hop so....however the Dem party as a whole is so tied to big government and dependent on promising other people's money away for votes that is incapable of delivering any kind of freedom or prosperity in this country. I am just as sick as anyone else of both parties, but I am not going to sit here and pretend they are both the same.....because they are not.

And many of the so-called republican presidents followed their lead, expanding upon their work. Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Reagan and the Bushes. We've never had a conservative president in the modern era or a conservative controlling majority. There would out and out bloodshed if it ever came to fruition. It's funny that Pat Buchanan amusingly stated the same thing. The left has no idea what conservative is when they point to Bush II.

[A Son of Liberty]

The GOP is a conservative party... in the minority. Just like the Democrats are the peace party... in the minority.

I'm tired of their games.

[fj45lvr]

The People of the US are doing it....not Obama.


Close but no cigar for Bachman

[wehrwd]

Michele Bachmann is a scary dominionist and a neocon. I can't listen to her.

Some people have been pretty critical of Michele Bachmann, including the above poster.

Now, Michele Bachmann is not perfect, but she's still one of the best representatives we have in Congress. I come from the same state she does, Minnesota, and I've been following her since she was just a representative in the state legislature. To call her "scary" is absurd. She holds some incorrect views on foreign policy, but she's almost as good as Ron Paul on most fiscal issues.

Someone else on this thread noted that Ron Paul and Tom Woods have both said some very favorable things about Bachmann. They have. Here's a snippet from an article David Weigel wrote about their growing friendship in May 2009:



Since his congressional comeback in 1996 — after a long stint as a Libertarian Party politician, and after only narrowly defeating a Democrat-turned-Republican that Newt Gingrich’s Republican leadership supported — Paul has maintained a small circle of allies in Congress. Some of them, like Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.), are regular guests at the expert luncheons. But the most prominent new face is Bachmann, the rising conservative star who left C-Span and YouTube watchers scratching their heads with a grilling on the Constitution that seemed to puzzle Geithner. “What provision in the Constitution could you point to to give authority for the actions that have been taken by the Treasury since March of ‘08?” asked Bachmann during a hearing on March 24. “What in the Constitution could you point to to give authority to the Treasury’s extraordinary actions that have been taken?”

Bachmann “goes to these luncheons on a weekly basis,” said Debbee Keller, Bachmann’s press secretary. Keller noted that Bachmann was reading “Meltdown,” which argues that the New Deal failed and that the Federal Reserve is responsible for the current economic crisis. “Just as Austrian theory suggests,” wrote Woods, “the Fed’s mischief was responsible for the Great Depression.”

“I had a feeling she’d have some interest in the book,” said Woods, “because she asked some good questions. She was taking notes. She was asking if this or that point could be found in the book. I thought I recognized a sincere person who wanted knowledge, not the usual politician who couldn’t care less about what the truth is and just wanted to propagandize.”

Paul didn’t take credit for turning Bachmann on to Austrian theory (“He’ll give credit to everyone on the planet except himself,” laughed Woods) but said he was pleased to see more members of Congress delving into economics. “She’s very open to studying,” said Paul. “In fact, she’s been working really hard to get me back to Minneapolis. She says, ‘You’ll get such a great reception there!’”


Source: http://minnesotaindependent.com/34032/ron-paul-michele-bachmann

[Imaginos]

Here's a snippet from an article David Weigel wrote about their growing friendship in May 2009:
Source: http://minnesotaindependent.com/34032/ron-paul-michele-bachmann
I am afraid Michele Bachmann's friendship has as much value as the friendship of Bernie Sanders.

[someperson]

Please stop endorsing or condemning these personalities and start endorsing your own ideas. Support those ideas. Promote those ideas. If a candidate promotes your ideas and demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of the underlying philosophy behind why those ideas are correct, support their promotion of those specific ideas. Stay emotionally detached from the messengers. Be passionate about your ideas, alone.

As for Ms. Bachmann, I, for one, don't believe she has a thorough understanding of why foreign and domestic non-interventionism is good policy. If she begins to promote that and proves to me that she correctly understands why she should promote that, I might consider supporting her promotion of that position (note that this is different from supporting her). I think that's unlikely to happen, though.

[wehrwd]

I am afraid Michele Bachmann's friendship has as much value as the friendship of Bernie Sanders.

Surely you can't have read the excerpt I posted and seriously mean this. Does Bernie Sanders attend those liberty luncheons? Does Bernie Sanders urge Ron Paul to come speak at his home state? Does Bernie Sanders introduce Ron Paul at prominent student town hall events, as Michele Bachmann did at a University of Minnesota event a few months ago?

YouTube - Rep Bachmann's Intro To Ron Paul (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJyYiH7g38s&feature=channel)

Most importantly, does Bernie Sanders have a lifetime rating of 100 from the ACU, as Michele Bachmann does? No.

http://www.votesmart.org/issue_rating_detail.php?r_id=4785

[someperson]

Most importantly, does Bernie Sanders have a lifetime rating of 100 from the ACU, as Michele Bachmann does? No.

http://www.votesmart.org/issue_rating_detail.php?r_id=4785
Appeals to authority aren't very convincing... especially when the authority is an epic failure.

According to the """""ACU"""""
TX U.S. House 14 Ronald Paul Republican 83

lol I don't know what they're rating, but they're doing it wrong.

[wehrwd]

Appeals to authority aren't very convincing... especially when the authority is an epic failure.

And just for fun, according to the """""ACU"""""
TX U.S. House 14 Ronald Paul Republican 83

lol I don't know what they're rating, but they're doing it wrong.

I'm not claiming the ACU is perfect in the way it rates representatives. Their numbers do give a ballpark idea of how liberal or conservative members of congress are, though. Hence, Bernie Sanders' lifetime rating of 7.

[someperson]

I suppose I just don't understand why you are using a number provided by a third party instead of evaluating these individuals based on what they purport to believe in and verifying their understanding of those positions and ideas. I implore you to look beyond these superficial means of evaluation. Obviously, Mr. Sanders would be well served by spending a day or 3000 reading at mises, but the same could be said for Ms. Bachmann.

If you could list the ideas that she promotes and that you believe in, along with any of her work demonstrating her understanding of why she believes in each of those ideas, I'd welcome it, as it would help me to understand why you seem to support her. "She's a <insert label such as conservative/republican>" doesn't count as a position. "At least Obama is better than Bush on <insert position>"-style doesn't count, either. I'm also not a fan of guilt-by-assocation arguments, nor am I a fan of honor-by-association.

[speciallyblend]

this country is fucked thanks to the gop/dnc! bottom line this country is screwed!!

[someperson]

this country is fucked thanks to the gop/dnc!
+1 http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=252747

[HOLLYWOOD]

Yeah, my thoughts exactly. Where has she been the last few decades :rolleyes:


Yeah, especially since she was a tax court attorney fighting the IRS/US Treasury prior to becoming a Congress Critter.

[lx43]

Wasn't the first big govt progressive a repubican Teddy Roosovelt?

[wehrwd]

I suppose I just don't understand why you are using a number provided by a third party instead of evaluating these individuals based on what they purport to believe in and verifying their understanding of those positions and ideas. I implore you to look beyond these superficial means of evaluation. Obviously, Mr. Sanders would be well served by spending a day or 3000 reading at mises, but the same could be said for Ms. Bachmann.

If you could list the ideas that she promotes and that you believe in, along with any of her work demonstrating her understanding of why she believes in each of those ideas, I'd welcome it, as it would help me to understand why you seem to support her. "She's a <insert label such as conservative/republican>" doesn't count as a position. "At least Obama is better than Bush on <insert position>"-style doesn't count, either. I'm also not a fan of guilt-by-assocation arguments, nor am I a fan of honor-by-association.

The ACU number was not the only reference I provided. See the article by David Weigel, where he quotes both Thomas Woods and Ron Paul praising Bachmann.

I can't provide a source for this at the moment -- mainly because I don't have time and it would be extremely difficult to find -- but I'm on Ron Paul's e-mail list, and in 2008, he actually sent out an email urging his supporters to donate to Bachmann's campaign. At the time it looked like she might be in danger of losing her congressional seat, and Paul basically said Bachmann was one of his strongest allies in Congress on fiscal issues.

I assure you I'm looking beyond "superficial means" of evaluation, but what I post here must be condensed in the interest of time. Incidentally, I haven't seen anyone here criticizing Bachmann take the time to delve into her record, either.

Have you taken the time to watch Bachmann's 15-minute introduction of Ron Paul? It's the video I posted earlier. If you haven't watched that than I'm not sure you're in a position to be criticizing me for supposedly not "evaluating these individuals based on what they purport to believe in and verifying their understanding of those positions and ideas."

Bachmann was one of the first people to support Paul's Audit the Fed bill. She believes in small government and as a state rep in Minnesota led the charge against our state's abysmal Profile of Learning graduation standards. She's been a strong critic of the global warming crowd, she voted against the Wall Street bailouts, the auto bailout, was a leading opponent of the health care bill, has the correct view of minimum wage laws, hate crimes legislation, etc.

You can see her voting record here: http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=54675 . Again, not perfect, but she's still quite good on the vast majority of issues. Please note that she has actually COME AROUND on certain things. When she first arrived in Washington D.C. in 2007 she was fairly conservative but still, in many ways, a typical neocon. She has clearly been influenced by Paul in the past two years. You can see some of that that here:

YouTube - AIG Hearing with Geithner & Bernanke (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C69h5PEsDrE&feature=player_embedded)
[/QUOTE]

[someperson]

Thanks for the reply, wehrwd! As I mentioned earlier, I'm as fond of honor-by-association fallacies as I am of guilt-by-association. Dr. Paul has endorsed questionable individuals at times, in order to retain his committee positions. Endorsements are near meaningless to me, and I hope most individuals here think this, as well. Each individual must be judged on their own merits, if they are to be judged at all.

You listed some of her ideas. Some of her ideas are good... on paper. However, the party cliches are meaningless, as platitudes for smaller government, fiscal responsibility, and (considering all individuals who label themselves with an R "supported" the audit bill in congress) fed oversight are a dime a dozen. The words must be matched by a comprehensive understanding of why these positions are correct. Else, they're as worthless as Scott Brown.

In other words, "Democrats like spending," isn't a good reason to be fiscally responsible. As such, I asked for her accompanying work (preferably written) demonstrating an understanding of why she supports those specific ideas that you find have merit. Her speeches, including the 15 minute intro, fail to provide this important information. I watched it a long time ago, including her uncomfortable lack of applause at specific points in his speech, which I noted. She still promotes the philosophy of foreign and domestic interventionism, which means she is as fiscally responsible as the aforementioned Scott Brown.

What I think the phases of evaluating a candidate should be:
PHASE 1: Discover an individual's specific ideas and determine if the ideas, themselves, have merit.
PHASE 2: Evaluate the grasp that the individual has on the philosophy that underlies their belief in those ideas. This is infinitely more important than PHASE 1.

Here's an old post, demonstrating what I mean about properly evaluating the ideas of a candidate, contrasting superficial support from informed support. Look at #3, in particular, for what I mean by understanding the philosophical underpinnings behind a position, and #2 for the lack thereof. #1 is, of course, epic fail.



Scenario #1: GO LABELS!
Candidate: Hi, I'm John Smith! Send me back to Washington for a second term as your Republican Senator!
Person thinks... ok, Republican, label = must be fiscal conservative | probably likes war | more useless stereotypes
Person: Those bailouts were terrible, huh? I can't believe those Democrats are destroying the country!
Candidate: Actually, I voted for the bailout, but...
Person reevaluating..... please wai------- Fatal exception: Republican + Bailout != Fiscal Conservative, rolling back mental state, catching...
Person: Oh, yeah, that's good. I'm Republican and, since you voted for it, it must have been for the good of the country! (typical group identity-based defensive irrationality)
Candidate: Can I count on your vote?
Person thinks... other side, Democrat. label = not fiscal conservative | probably didn't like war (lol, I so despise this primitive garbage)
Person: Yes, I'll vote for you! You're Republican! LOLZ.

Scenario #2: NO LABELS. NO ASSUMPTIONS.
Candidate: Hi, I'm Jane Doe! Send me back to Washington for a second term as your Republican Senator!
Person: Yeah, republican, whatever. So, what position did you take on the bailouts?
Candidate: I voted against the bailout! [PHASE 1: PASS]
Person: Why did you decide to vote against the bailout?
Candidate: The Democrats were voting for it, so I voted against it. [PHASE 2: FAIL]
Person: I see.
Candidate: Can I count on your vote?
Person: I'll need to do more research on all of your specific positions... at this point, leaning toward no.

Scenario #3: NO LABELS. THE SEQUEL.
Candidate: Hi, I'm Barack Obama Jones! Send me back to Washington for a second term as your Antarctican Senator!
Person: Yeah, antarctican, whatever. So, what position did you take on the Iraq war?
Candidate: I voted against the Iraq war! [PHASE 1: PASS]
Person: Why did you decide to vote against the Iraq war?
Candidate: As I believe in the non-aggression principle, I find the initiation of force by the state in this case unconscionable. From a constitutional perspective, those individuals in the congress never even proposed a declaration of war, which I still would have voted against as interventionism of this sort has no merit. For these reasons, I voted against the authorization of force that became the Iraq war. [PHASE 2: PASS (good, it seems you know why you voted against it, and your reasoning was rational)]
Person: I see.
Candidate: Can I count on your vote?
Person: I'll need to do more research on all of your other positions... at this point, leaning toward yes, I will support your promotion of the specific position of being against the Iraq war, as it violates the NAP, violates the philosophy of foreign and domestic non-interventionism, and, of somewhat lesser importance, violates the constitution.


I don't know... when it comes to politics and evaluating candidates, I prefer scenarios #2 and #3. Maybe I'm just crazy.

I guess what I'm saying is... don't be easy. Make these individuals work for your support. If you find that a candidate knowledgeably promotes ideas with merit, support their promotion of those specific ideas, but please stay emotionally detached from the candidate, as a person. Be passionate about your ideas, instead.

[someperson]

Ok, I think I'm done editing that post for the 934857th time. Sorry lol

[Arion45]

The United States population has been slaves for a long time.

[Matt Collins]

Tea Party Caucus?

Michele Bachmann…

Voted YES on $192B additional anti-recession stimulus spending. (Jul 2009)
Voted YES on overriding veto on expansion of Medicare. (Jul 2008)
Voted NO on investigating Bush impeachment for lying about Iraq. (Jun 2008)
Voted NO on redeploying US troops out of Iraq starting in 90 days. (May 2007)
Voted YES to EXTEND THE PATRIOT ACT "Spy-On-Citizens" Provisions
Voted YES on HR 5140 Economic Stimulus Plan (Feb 2008)
Voted YES on HR 6331 override a veto on a bill that expands Medicare (July 2007)
Voted YES on HR 3548 Providing Homebuyer Tax Credits (Nov 2009)


You really don’t have a clue if you think she represenst the Tea Party

[constituent]

Is this the tea party caucus lady?

Wonder where she's going to get the bodies to ship off to Iran?

[constituent]

You really don’t have a clue if you think she represenst the Tea Party

You really don't have a clue if you think that she doesn't. :o

[constituent]

this country is fucked thanks to the gop/dnc! bottom line this country is screwed!!

for real. and to think, just two years ago these asshats were dead in the water.

the republican establishment was in shambles.

wut happened?

oh yea, the tea party... :o

welcome back to the fold, suckers.

[MN Patriot]

The Republican party doesn't "want" liberty either. They talk a big game, especially when they're out of power; but what happens to that big game when they take the reins, huh? We get the freaking P*****T Act, endless wars, bailouts, etc.

BS. The Republicans are WORSE than democrats - at least the freaking democrats TELL you they're coming for your liberties. The Republicans smile in your face, shake your hand, pull you in real close and shove a knife in your gut.

Screw them.

When are the people in the Tea Party movement going to wake up and start our own third party? I know, I know, third parties ALWAYS fail. So we better just learn to love the two parties we have. At least that is what the Establishment keeps telling us, since they are deathly afraid of a TRUE independent libertarian party.