Is Bachman 1) an Anti-Catholic or 2) a Godless Heathen?

[Profound Gibberish]

Let's all remember from the last presidential campaign that, as an individual that belongs to a church, you are completely responsible for, and agree with, everything your pastor says, does, has said, has done, will say and will do. Absolutely no exceptions to that rule, correct?

So now we have this:
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/15/michele-bachmann-officially-leaves-her-church/?hpt=hp_t2

If we apply the rule above, Bachman is a radical anti-catholic, but now that she has quit that church, she is a Godless Heathen.

My question, if there is one, is "Which is Worse?"

Welcome to the game, Michele. Hope you enjoy playing it on the other side.

[Captain Amazing]

I think you've set up a no win situation for her here. Little though I like Michelle Bachman, I really don't know what she could do that would satisfy you here. She has, like the Catholic League spokesman said, condemned anti-Catholicism.

[Chronos]

The petard by which she's hoisted isn't that she belonged to that church, but that her fellow Republicans insisted on pinning everything that Rev. Wright had ever said on Obama.

[Simplicio]

Did she actually try and pin Wright's rhetoric on Obama or did just "her fellow Republicans" do that? You might have a point if she came out swinging against Obama's attempts to disassociate himself with his former pastor, but its kinda silly to try and hang hypocracy on her for not acting in concert with what other people in her large and diverse political part said.

There are, after all, many tens of millions of Republicans, its kinda silly to demand they all be 100% consistent with everything the rest of them have said.

[Captain Amazing]

The petard by which she's hoisted isn't that she belonged to that church, but that her fellow Republicans insisted on pinning everything that Rev. Wright had ever said on Obama.

And they were wrong to do so, right? If it was wrong for them to do it to Obama, it's wrong for people to do it to Bachman. Besides, she did leave the church...she actively disassociated herself with the guy.

[Chronos]

I don't know offhand whether she joined in the condemnation herself, but membership in a political party does mean something. When you're running for President under a party's banner, it's perfectly fair and proper for folks to attack you for that party's positions.

[galveston]

This must be the official Democrat forum.

Most of y'all apparently are strong believers in coincidence. The states that have been strong liberal for decades are in worse financial condition than those states that have been more conservative. Eg. California; liberal and bankrupt. Texas; conservative and solvent.

Personally, I don't do coincidence. I believe in cause and effect.

[Profound Gibberish]

Whoa, whoa, whoa there cowboys! This is politics. Every weakness is exploited. Logic and rationality are not welcome. This is business, not personal. OK, it's personal, but this is the fate of the entire nation we are talking about. I didn't make the rules, I just push them to the edge and over. How many other lame excuses do I need to come up with? [End Satire Alert]

[Kolga]

This must be the official Democrat forum.

Most of y'all apparently are strong believers in coincidence. The states that have been strong liberal for decades are in worse financial condition than those states that have been more conservative. Eg. California; liberal and bankrupt. Texas; conservative and solvent.

Personally, I don't do coincidence. I believe in cause and effect.

Texas is only solvent on paper, because Perry moved some state obligations to a different fiscal year in order to be able to say "I balanced Texas' budget" while he campaigns for president.

I also am not sure that it's even solvent on paper (http://www.economist.com/node/18744627)

[Profound Gibberish]

Eg. California; liberal and bankrupt.

Jesus F'n Christ! When did The Schwartz become a Democrat!?!?!?!? Did I miss that in the papers?

And if I am correct, wasn't Arnie's biggest problems with his own Repubs that wanted to keep the pork, graft and corruption flowing in their direction?

Not sayin' Dems could do any better, but lets not drink the Red KoolAid too liberally (pardon the pun), OK?

[kenetic]

This must be the official Democrat forum.

Most of y'all apparently are strong believers in coincidence. The states that have been strong liberal for decades are in worse financial condition than those states that have been more conservative. Eg. California; liberal and bankrupt. Texas; conservative and solvent.

Personally, I don't do coincidence. I believe in cause and effect.

California is bankrupt because of Prop. 13 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prop_13), which lowered taxes. So we're bankrupt due to conservative policies.

And do we really need to do another round of explaining how red states are generally net consumers of federal funds while blue states are net providers?

[Kolga]

California is bankrupt because of Prop. 13 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prop_13), which lowered taxes. So we're bankrupt due to conservative policies.

And do we really need to do another round of explaining how red states are generally net consumers of federal funds while blue states are net providers?

Yes, I think we do, for the benefit of any lurkers, since providing that information is probably not going to change any minds in THIS particular thread.

[kenetic]

Yes, I think we do, for the benefit of any lurkers, since providing that information is probably not going to change any minds in THIS particular thread.

First Google hit (http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2004/09/red_states_feed.html). If you want more do your own googling or search for any of the dozens of old threads on the topic.

[Kolga]

First Google hit (http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2004/09/red_states_feed.html). If you want more do your own googling or search for any of the dozens of old threads on the topic.

Oh, you didn't have to do that for MY benefit. I'm well aware. I was referring to lurkers who might not already be aware. But thanks for starting the ball rolling!

[Profound Gibberish]

Facts? Really? You would stoop that low?

[kenetic]

Oh, you didn't have to do that for MY benefit. I'm well aware. I was referring to lurkers who might not already be aware. But thanks for starting the ball rolling!

Oh sorry, didn't look at who I was replying to. Carry on!

[Kolga]

Facts? Really? You would stoop that low?

We're manipulative and sneaky that way around these parts.

[crowmanyclouds]

At the very least, we can be reasonably certain she's not Jewish! (http://wonkette.com/449459/here-is-your-video-of-michele-bachmann-mispronouncing-chutzpah)

CMC fnord!
Thank you psychobunny for the link . . . fucking search redirect virus robbing me of my Google-Fu skilz.

[twickster]

The topic is Bachman. The stuff about red states, blue states, and the respective solvency of each is utterly and completely off topic.

Start a new thread for that. Stop the hijack now. If not, I'll lock the thread.

twickster, Elections moderator

[Profound Gibberish]

Yow, twickster, where did you come from? You work weekends?

[Recovering Republican]

Let's all remember from the last presidential campaign that, as an individual that belongs to a church, you are completely responsible for, and agree with, everything your pastor says, does, has said, has done, will say and will do. Absolutely no exceptions to that rule, correct?

So now we have this:
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/15/michele-bachmann-officially-leaves-her-church/?hpt=hp_t2

If we apply the rule above, Bachman is a radical anti-catholic, but now that she has quit that church, she is a Godless Heathen.

My question, if there is one, is "Which is Worse?"

Welcome to the game, Michele. Hope you enjoy playing it on the other side.

Drilling further down into the article, you get...

"The Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights issued a statement Thursday about Bachmann's denomination, saying it's "regrettable that there are still strains of anti-Catholicism in some Protestant circles."

"But we find no evidence of any bigotry on the part of Rep. Michele Bachmann," the statement continued. "Indeed, she has condemned anti-Catholicism. Just as President Barack Obama is not responsible for the views of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Rep. Bachmann must be judged on the basis of her own record."

Do you guys really want to go down this road of attacking religion? Because it's really playing with fire.

[BobLibDem]

Drilling further down into the article, you get...

"The Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights issued a statement Thursday about Bachmann's denomination, saying it's "regrettable that there are still strains of anti-Catholicism in some Protestant circles."

"But we find no evidence of any bigotry on the part of Rep. Michele Bachmann," the statement continued. "Indeed, she has condemned anti-Catholicism. Just as President Barack Obama is not responsible for the views of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Rep. Bachmann must be judged on the basis of her own record."

Do you guys really want to go down this road of attacking religion? Because it's really playing with fire.

So a reasonable viewpoint is that Bachmann is no more responsible for her church than Obama was for his. The trouble is, you can score plenty of political points with unreasonable viewpoints, as was done in 2008 against Obama using Reverend Wright as a Scary Dark Bogeyman. Turnabout is fair play in 2012. So what are you threatening with "do you really want to go down this road"? Don't tell me you're going to tell us Obama is a secret Muslim!

[BigT]

My point would be whether or not the Republican voters (particularly the social conservatives) think it's an issue with Bachman like they did with Obama. Or is it okay when their party does it?

[Recovering Republican]

So a reasonable viewpoint is that Bachmann is no more responsible for her church than Obama was for his. The trouble is, you can score plenty of political points with unreasonable viewpoints, as was done in 2008 against Obama using Reverend Wright as a Scary Dark Bogeyman. Turnabout is fair play in 2012. So what are you threatening with "do you really want to go down this road"? Don't tell me you're going to tell us Obama is a secret Muslim!

Oh, no, I firmly believe he's an atheist who only showed up at Wright's circus because the dumb idiots who go there were a good organizing base. But of course, he can't HONESTLY say that he thinks it's all a bunch of bronze age superstition.

But I don't think most Catholics are going to fall for it when you try it.

You're the ones who block school choice.

You're the ones who support McAbortions.

You're the ones trying to shove gay marriage down their throats.

If you are devout enough to really take your Catholicism seriously (something I stopped doing in 1983), then you are going to see this for what it is, "Let's you and him fight."

[Recovering Republican]

My point would be whether or not the Republican voters (particularly the social conservatives) think it's an issue with Bachman like they did with Obama. Or is it okay when their party does it?

WHich voters, particularly?

Keep in mind, ALL protestant sects reject the authority of Ratzinger and company. And a lot of Catholics, do, too. So yeah, saying that your sect of Lutheranism thinks the papacy is the anti-Christ is a bit silly, absolutely.

I think going to a church where the minister calls America a genocidal racist nation, that doesn't play as well.

[Typo Knig]

My point would be whether or not the Republican voters (particularly the social conservatives) think it's an issue with Bachman like they did with Obama. Or is it okay when their party does it?

Yes,It's OK If You're A Republican - whatever it is. Sad, but empirically true.

[Chronos]

But I don't think most Catholics are going to fall for it when you try it. Catholics are a pretty good bellweather for the nation as a whole, actually: They have about the same Democrat/Republican split as everyone else. Yes, there are significant issues on which the Catholic church disagrees with the Democrats, but there are also significant issues on which they disagree with the Republicans, so even for someone who agrees with all of the Church's teachings, it comes down to a question of priorities. And of course most Catholics disagree with the Church on some topic or another.

[Typo Knig]

... I think going to a church where the minister calls America a genocidal racist nation, that doesn't play as well.

America has a genocidal past - ask a Native American. America has a racist past, and too racist a present. Ask any minority member. I'm white, but also Jewish and I've seen bigotry in my lifetime. Heck, my neighbors across the street could not have been leagally married in Virginia until 1967. You may be able to forget our history, but people who suffered to make our present better cannot afford to do so. Even ministers. Even ministers who are former Marines.

[Recovering Republican]

Catholics are a pretty good bellweather for the nation as a whole, actually: They have about the same Democrat/Republican split as everyone else. Yes, there are significant issues on which the Catholic church disagrees with the Democrats, but there are also significant issues on which they disagree with the Republicans, so even for someone who agrees with all of the Church's teachings, it comes down to a question of priorities. And of course most Catholics disagree with the Church on some topic or another.

They are probably a bellweather becasue they are the largest, and therefore the most diverse.

Of course, what I am seeing within my own family (who are nearly all still practicing Catholics) is that a lot of them who thought Obama was okay in 2008 are really souring on him in 2011.

[Recovering Republican]

America has a genocidal past - ask a Native American. America has a racist past, and too racist a present. Ask any minority member. I'm white, but also Jewish and I've seen bigotry in my lifetime. Heck, my neighbors across the street could not have been leagally married in Virginia until 1967. You may be able to forget our history, but people who suffered to make our present better cannot afford to do so. Even ministers. Even ministers who are former Marines.


Okay, this liberal white guilt thing might play well in your circles, but most white folks in this country are getting a little sick of it.

Let's not forget, after he found out that throwing Grandma under the bus didn't work, he distanced himself from Wright PDQ. But if he wants to go after Bachmann's religion or Romney's religion, heck, we can replay that hit.

[tnetennba]

Okay, this liberal white guilt thing might play well in your circles, but most white folks in this country are getting a little sick of it.

By "liberal white guilt," you mean "American history."

[DSeid]

America has a genocidal past - ask a Native American. America has a racist past, and too racist a present. Ask any minority member. I'm white, but also Jewish and I've seen bigotry in my lifetime. Heck, my neighbors across the street could not have been leagally married in Virginia until 1967. You may be able to forget our history, but people who suffered to make our present better cannot afford to do so. Even ministers. Even ministers who are former Marines.
All true, but politicians running for national office cannot afford to be associated with them as they publicly remember. That is as much a reality as is the history of the Trail of Tears.

[Typo Knig]

All true, but politicians running for national office cannot afford to be associated with them as they publicly remember. That is as much a reality as is the history of the Trail of Tears.

True, and Obama did distance himself from Rev. Wright. The point of this thread, if I may speak for the OP, is what's sauce for the gander in 2008 is sauce for the goose in '11/'12. IMO a lot of what keeps "regular folks" out of politics as a career is that you are held responsible/given crap for not only everything you ever said and done (in or out of context), but also for what anyone in any way associated with you ever said or did (in or out of context).

[tnetennba]

Unless you're a Republican. You can do anything you want, because whatever your supporters learn about, they dismiss as "the liberal media." Even if it's just a video clip of you saying something stupid.

[gonzomax]

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/07/16/270896/bachmann-preemptively-ditches-her-church-to-avoid-association-with-its-radical-views/
She didn't quit the church until she announced for the presidency. that would suggest she still has those beliefs, but is disavowing her beliefs for political expediency. From Bachmann, that is all you can expect.

[Folacin]

that would suggest she still has those beliefs, but is disavowing her beliefs for political expediency. From Bachmann, that is all you can expect.

Actually, I'm a little surprised. She's crazy as the MN state bird, but she seemed to generally embrace her positions when called on them.

So I'd be inclined to think that she probably isn't much into the anti-Christ part of that Lutheran sects teachings.

As an aside - grew up Catholic in a small MN town. Only people with our surname in town, Dad was the only attorney in town. Younger brother Tom was dating a Wisconsin synod Lutheran girl - Carol. Standard HS dating - both had dinner at each home, so parents all aware.

One day Carol's dad comes into our dad's office for something - Tom was there, either visting or maybe doing some copying or filing. He said you could see the lightbulb turn on in GF dad's head - Tom's father is Catholic, hence Tom is Catholic. He forbid Carol to date the heathen.

They snuck around (with our parent's blessing (and I think her mom's also (at least a blind eye there)) - but the stress wasn't worth it in the end.

That was my first exposure to religous intolerance - knew that historically people hadn't liked Catholics, but thought that was all in the past.

[Knorf]

"But we find no evidence of any bigotry on the part of Rep. Michele Bachmann," the statement continued. "Indeed, she has condemned anti-Catholicism. Just as President Barack Obama is not responsible for the views of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Rep. Bachmann must be judged on the basis of her own record."

Do you guys really want to go down this road of attacking religion? Because it's really playing with fire.

I really, really hate agreeing with RR. But he's right. Bachmann deserves the benefit of the doubt on this one, just as Obama did.

If we're going to criticize, let's do it using points that are valid, non-hypocritical, and more likely to persuade undecided voters. It's not like there's a shortage of these...

[dropzone]

Is Bachman 1) an Anti-Catholic or 2) a Godless Heathen?I know that for some groups there is no difference between the two.

...

Okay, I know that for some groups there is no difference between the two.

[Recovering Republican]

By "liberal white guilt," you mean "American history."


The only stuff I feel guilty about is stuff I personally did. And that's the only thing ANY of us should feel guilty about.

never owned a slave.
Never oppressed an immigrant.
never stole a Native american's land.

in fact, in two of those arrangements, my ancestors were on the shitty ends of those sticks.

And now you liberals come back and tell me because these things are in our collective history of having happened while we built the greatest country ever, we should all feel guilty about it.

[Typo Knig]

... And now you liberals come back and tell me because these things are in our collective history of having happened while we built the greatest country ever, we should all feel guilty about it.

I'm not asking you to feel guilty. After all you say you're no longer Catholic, and I assume you're not Jewish ;)

I am asking you to recognize some of the negatives in our shared history, and the consequential reactions in the communities who were victimized by that history. Why might the African-American have residual anger at our society? Perhaps because they had only the legal rights of dirt until recently, and that in too many ways they are still being treated that way. I am not African-American, and nobody in my family owned slaves (as it was not possible for Russian peasants who came over in the 1880s to do so). I see society's ills through a lens of economics rather than race. But I recognize that given their history members of the African-American community might feel diferently. Heck if any random person could diminish me and my accomplishments by calling me a kike (equivalent if I were African-American and were called the N word), I'd see the world though a racial lens as well.

[Recovering Republican]

I'm not asking you to feel guilty. After all you say you're no longer Catholic, and I assume you're not Jewish ;)

I am asking you to recognize some of the negatives in our shared history, and the consequential reactions in the communities who were victimized by that history. Why might the African-American have residual anger at our society? Perhaps because they had only the legal rights of dirt until recently, and that in too many ways they are still being treated that way. I am not African-American, and nobody in my family owned slaves (as it was not possible for Russian peasants who came over in the 1880s to do so). I see society's ills through a lens of economics rather than race. But I recognize that given their history members of the African-American community might feel diferently. Heck if any random person could diminish me and my accomplishments by calling me a kike (equivalent if I were African-American and were called the N word), I'd see the world though a racial lens as well.


But you see, I don't buy that. If they have residual anger, it's because we have race pimps like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and yes, Jeremiah Wright stoking it all the time. If you want to say you can diminish someone by calling them a name, then who hasn't been called a name some time in their lives? If you have to work twice as hard to get the same recognition, (whether it be due to skin color or gender or even if you have a receding hairline), then you work just as hard. That's life, man. Life ain't fair.

[Typo Knig]

But you see, I don't buy that. If they have residual anger, it's because we have race pimps like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and yes, Jeremiah Wright stoking it all the time. If you want to say you can diminish someone by calling them a name, then who hasn't been called a name some time in their lives? If you have to work twice as hard to get the same recognition, (whether it be due to skin color or gender or even if you have a receding hairline), then you work just as hard. That's life, man. Life ain't fair.

You are very lucky if you think life is always that simple. Keeping things within the thread, re-read Folacin's story about his brother and his brother's HS girlfriend. Their relationship may or may not have made it, but it could not stand against the gal's family's anti-Catholic prejudices.

I'd suggest trying to have honest conversations with your real-world colleagues of color, or your Army buddies of color, about their experiences with racism. I think you'll learn that sometimes working twice or three times as hard isn't enough if you're a minority. You may also get some insight into why race-baiting jerks like Sharpton, Jackson, Wright, etc., get any traction at all within the African-American community.

I no fan of Sharpton, but the best thing I ever saw him in was a segment of the Daily Show where he and Stewart talked about the revelation that Strom Thurmond's great-grandfather owned Sharpton's great-grandfather. Stewart said he knew his great-grandfather, so Sharpton had been in direct contact with a man who had been a slave, or at most one person removed. Speaking as someone who also knew one of his great-grandfathers, and quoting Faulkner, "The past is not dead. In fact, it's not even past."

[galveston]

Texas is only solvent on paper, because Perry moved some state obligations to a different fiscal year in order to be able to say "I balanced Texas' budget" while he campaigns for president.

I also am not sure that it's even solvent on paper (http://www.economist.com/node/18744627)

Really!!!

More jobs created in the private sector recently than anywhere in the US.

No state income tax.

Lower unemployment.

All on paper, of course. OF course!!!:D

[galveston]

Jesus F'n Christ! When did The Schwartz become a Democrat!?!?!?!? Did I miss that in the papers?

And if I am correct, wasn't Arnie's biggest problems with his own Repubs that wanted to keep the pork, graft and corruption flowing in their direction?

Not sayin' Dems could do any better, but lets not drink the Red KoolAid too liberally (pardon the pun), OK?

Every conservative knows Arnie is a RINO. He is a liberal.

[galveston]

California is bankrupt because of Prop. 13 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prop_13), which lowered taxes. So we're bankrupt due to conservative policies.

And do we really need to do another round of explaining how red states are generally net consumers of federal funds while blue states are net providers?

You are kiddin, right?

Prop 13 is the only thing that bankrupted California? Get real.

And FYI Texas turned down some federal funds for education because of all the strings attached.

[Kolga]

Really!!!

More jobs created in the private sector recently than anywhere in the US.

No state income tax.

Lower unemployment.

All on paper, of course. OF course!!!:D

You said "solvent." I was pointing out the budget issues that make the determination that Texas is solvent problematic. You didn't mention any of the other things you listed.

[galveston]

This may not matter to anyone else, but I like Bachmann because she stands for fiscal responsibility, as not raising the debt ceiling (me adding unless we get more $ up front spending cuts than the $ raised), repealing Obamacare, strengthening the traditional family, and secure borders, don't raise taxes during a recession, to name a few things.

These may not appeal to you, but they do to me. (No, I'm not rich!)

[Recovering Republican]

You are very lucky if you think life is always that simple. Keeping things within the thread, re-read Folacin's story about his brother and his brother's HS girlfriend. Their relationship may or may not have made it, but it could not stand against the gal's family's anti-Catholic prejudices. ."

Not in the same category, since if you really believe in that silly nonsense, then you really believe people's souls are at risk. I personally rejected the notion that God can be such a prick that he'll condemn otherwise good people to hell, but hey, people really believe that crap. On both sides.



I'd suggest trying to have honest conversations with your real-world colleagues of color, or your Army buddies of color, about their experiences with racism. I think you'll learn that sometimes working twice or three times as hard isn't enough if you're a minority. You may also get some insight into why race-baiting jerks like Sharpton, Jackson, Wright, etc., get any traction at all within the African-American community. ."

Oh, I have. my attitudes aren't moved. Frankly, instead of whining about "racists", they need to clean up their own acts.



I no fan of Sharpton, but the best thing I ever saw him in was a segment of the Daily Show where he and Stewart talked about the revelation that Strom Thurmond's great-grandfather owned Sharpton's great-grandfather. Stewart said he knew his great-grandfather, so Sharpton had been in direct contact with a man who had been a slave, or at most one person removed. Speaking as someone who also knew one of his great-grandfathers, and quoting Faulkner, "The past is not dead. In fact, it's not even past."

What I remember about Sharpton is that he perpetrated the Tawana Brawley rape hoax and tried to destroy a lot of people in the process. The man should never be allowed in polite society after that.

[SeldomSeen]

That's life, man. Life ain't fair.

A republican lacky paraphrasing Jimmy Carter!??:eek:
Guy, you ain't nearly recovered enough yet!
Well, as you know, there are many things in life that are not fair, that wealthy people can afford and poor people cant.*
*Pres. Jimmy Carter, news conference, Washington, D.C., July 12, 1977.

[Knorf]

Prop 13 is the only thing that bankrupted California?
Not the only thing, by a long shot. But a primary contribution, definitely.

[Folacin]

Oh, I have. my attitudes aren't moved. Frankly, instead of whining about "racists", they need to clean up their own acts.

Wow - are you talking about individuals cleaning up their act? One of my eye-opening moments happened during what we'd now call diversity training (it was in the 80's, so I think it had another name back then). Basically, an all hands meeting of our programming staff. The facilitator asked all of the African-American's who had been stopped for 'driving while black'/'shopping while black'/etc to stand.

I think all but one (maybe two) stood up. Some may have been playing a victim card, but most were solid, middle-class professionals who were in turn the children of solid, middle-class professionals.

Unless you're suggesting that harassing one citizen for the actions of (stereotype alert) inner-city gang-bangers is acceptable. Although I guess it's in line with the 'assume all Muslims are terrorists' meme popular on the right (I don't recall reading anything like that from you - so no personal slam intended).

[kenetic]

You are kiddin, right?

Prop 13 is the only thing that bankrupted California? Get real.


Not what I said, Knorf pointed out.

[Typo Knig]

This may not matter to anyone else, but I like Bachmann because she stands for fiscal responsibility, as not raising the debt ceiling (me adding unless we get more $ up front spending cuts than the $ raised), repealing Obamacare, strengthening the traditional family, and secure borders, don't raise taxes during a recession, to name a few things.

These may not appeal to you, but they do to me. (No, I'm not rich!)

Oh yeah, the original topic. Thanks for bringing us back, [b]galveston[/]!

Some quick counter points:
Did Bachmann vote for Bush's budgets in '07 or '08? If so she has no credibility on the fiscal responsibility thing. Every POTUS at least as far back as Nixon has promised to balance the budget. Only Clinton delivered on that promise. Who, by the way, raised taxes during a recession and thereby stabilized the federal budget and the economy as a whole. Rather than the economic disaster predicted by the Congressional Republicans we had a string of prosperous years undet Bubba.

Obamacare will save the government money in the short and long run. You may not like that particular fact, but there it is. Also the health insurance system the PPACA replaced was not sustainable. Within a score of years you would only have millionaires insured. Another unhappy fact but there it is. Repeal will also be extremely difficult. Few health care bills have been successfilly repealed - I believe just 1 in US history. The PPACA has helped my family simply by ensuring my kids are covered under my plan until age 26. My kids have diagnosed special needs - this is huge and I am not letting it go.

As for "protecting the traditional family" - I have followed the debate about legalizing gay marriage for years now and I have yet to encounter a reason for preventing gays from marrying in our very pluralistic society other than "gay sex is icky and I don't like it". Straight marriages are not limited to only christians, or people who have or will produce children, or even limited to one couple for life. If you are voting for any candidate on this issue you are being had. Conservatives have promised much to social conservatives in the last 30+ years, but delivered zero. I contend that the way to help families is not by using the legal system to cudgel them into outdated pidgeon holes.

[crowmanyclouds]

Every conservative knows Arnie is a RINO. He is a liberal.I believe you've dropped your sporran.

Every true conservative!

CMC fnord!

[Recovering Republican]

Wow - are you talking about individuals cleaning up their act? One of my eye-opening moments happened during what we'd now call diversity training (it was in the 80's, so I think it had another name back then). Basically, an all hands meeting of our programming staff. The facilitator asked all of the African-American's who had been stopped for 'driving while black'/'shopping while black'/etc to stand.

I think all but one (maybe two) stood up. Some may have been playing a victim card, but most were solid, middle-class professionals who were in turn the children of solid, middle-class professionals.

Unless you're suggesting that harassing one citizen for the actions of (stereotype alert) inner-city gang-bangers is acceptable. Although I guess it's in line with the 'assume all Muslims are terrorists' meme popular on the right (I don't recall reading anything like that from you - so no personal slam intended).

BUt that's exactly my point, isn't it? They might not be the ones engaging in the unacceptable behavior, but there is too much tolerance of the ones who are.

When you have rap music glorifying bad behavior, when you have a 65% illegitimacy rate in that community, and so on, really, there's a point where you need to stop blaming whitey.

"“We need fathers to realize that responsibility does not end at conception.” ...“Too many fathers are M.I.A, too many fathers are AWOL, missing from too many lives and too many homes,” - Barack Obama.


Since you brought up the issue of muslims, I guess I do have a real problem with the TSA patted down and strip searching middle aged white people when there hasn't been a rash of old people blowing stuff up. But we wouldn't want to OFFEND anyone by going after the people more likely to engage in the bad behavior.

[Chronos]

So what you're saying is, it's OK to be racist, because blacks really are uneducated and poorly-behaved? And that it doesn't matter if an individual black person actually is well-behaved and educated, it's still OK to assume that he's not, just because of his skin color?

[Jas09]

Just to try to get the content-to-nonsense ration up in this thread, here is what Bachmann said about Rev. Wright back in 2008:
BACHMANN: All I did on Chris Matthews is I questioned Chris Matthews and said, “look, if John McCain had friends like Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers and Father Pfleger, you’d be all over him Chris, but you’ve laid off of Barack Obama.” And so, he was using the word “Anti-American” and I told Chris, what I question are Barack Obama’s views. Because Barack Obama’s views are against America. They won’t be good for our country.If Rev. Wright's sayings (according to Michelle Bachmann) imply that Barack Obama is Anti-American, then I can only assume that her preacher's comments imply that she is Anti-Catholic. She happily jumped on that wagon back in 2008, even after Obama disavowed Wright's rhetoric.

The rest of her conversation is here: http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2008/10/22/31130/bachmann-doubles-down/

[Profound Gibberish]

This is so fun! Drop a bait in the pond and see what hits.

My observation: The devout do not joke

Progressives attempt to reason. Conservatives hit with bumper sticker-depth slogans.

Conservatives just cannot take a step back and look at their reasoning. Attack, attack, attack to the point of absurdity. But they miss the absurdity because they cannot self-assess. Progressives think "Why can't we all be reasonable?" Because reason is a fairly recent invention and is quite contradictory to the fundamental nature of human beings.

So at the end of the day, who will be marginalized and who will continue a meaningful debate?

[DSeid]

Just to try to get the content-to-nonsense ration up in this thread, here is what Bachmann said about Rev. Wright back in 2008:
If Rev. Wright's sayings (according to Michelle Bachmann) imply that Barack Obama is Anti-American, then I can only assume that her preacher's comments imply that she is Anti-Catholic. She happily jumped on that wagon back in 2008, even after Obama disavowed Wright's rhetoric.

The rest of her conversation is here: http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2008/10/22/31130/bachmann-doubles-down/
Well done! I had tried in vain for quite a few minutes to find that! (I knew she had made some comment.) And that is what makes this pertinent. As Simplico had saidDid she actually try and pin Wright's rhetoric on Obama or did just "her fellow Republicans" do that? You might have a point if she came out swinging against Obama's attempts to disassociate himself with his former pastor, but its kinda silly to try and hang hypocracy on her for not acting in concert with what other people in her large and diverse political part said.
With that hint I'll add to your link. Here is more on what she said then (http://rawstory.com/news/2008/GOP_Rep._Obama_Congress_may_be_1017.html):Sen. Barack Obama and certain members of Congress should be investigated by the media for "being anti-American," Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) said.

The Democratic presidential candidate's ties to 1960s radical Bill Ayers and Rev. Jeremiah Wright cast suspicion on his claims to American values, Bachmann said in an interview with MSNBC's Chris Matthews. She also connected "leftists" and "liberals" to her allegations about Obama's character.

"The news media should do a penetrating expose and take a look... at the views of the people in Congress and find out, 'Are they pro-America or anti-America?'" Bachmann said. "I think people would love to see an expose like that." ... When asked by Matthews why Obama's connection to Ayers is important, Bachmann said it "calls into question what Barack Obama's true beliefs" are ... "Anti-American is the point. The liberals that are Jeremiah Wright and that are Bill Ayers are over-the-top anti-American and that's the question that Americans have."

Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin said Obama "pals around with terrorists" in a clip shown by Matthews. Bachmann agreed with Palin's statement.
In fact, here is the whole transcript! (http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/10/rep_michele_bachmann_tells_chr.html) Coming out swinging is an understatement. Obama's renounced associations were enough to call for an investigation into his Anti-American activities.

So Simplico? Ping your hypocrisy meter yet?

[dropzone]

The facilitator asked all of the African-American's who had been stopped for 'driving while black'/'shopping while black'/etc to stand. Back when people from the Asian subcontinent were pretty new to Chicago's suburbs an Indian doctor asked my wife why shopkeepers would follow her as she shopped.

"They probably think you are a Gypsy."

[Recovering Republican]

So what you're saying is, it's OK to be racist, because blacks really are uneducated and poorly-behaved? And that it doesn't matter if an individual black person actually is well-behaved and educated, it's still OK to assume that he's not, just because of his skin color?

No, that's not what I'm saying at all, but honestly, I'm getting tired of repeating myself...

[pseudotriton ruber ruber]

tired of repeating myself...

One can only hope....

[gonzomax]

The only stuff I feel guilty about is stuff I personally did. And that's the only thing ANY of us should feel guilty about.

never owned a slave.
Never oppressed an immigrant.
never stole a Native american's land.

in fact, in two of those arrangements, my ancestors were on the shitty ends of those sticks.

And now you liberals come back and tell me because these things are in our collective history of having happened while we built the greatest country ever, we should all feel guilty about it.
So we should ignore Bachmann's bigotry and American history because you do not feel guilt for America's past. Makes perfect sense in Repub land.
The thread is about Bachmann bigotry for "other religions " and her hatred of gays. She is a box of bigotry .

[Recovering Republican]

So we should ignore Bachmann's bigotry and American history because you do not feel guilt for America's past. Makes perfect sense in Repub land.
The thread is about Bachmann bigotry for "other religions " and her hatred of gays. She is a box of bigotry .


Guy, you work on the assumption that being homophobic is a deal killer. At best, most americans tolerate gays, but arent' comfortable with them. (Personally, I don't care, one way or the other.) Seriously, even Obama has to pretend he's for traditional marriage (but if the courts strike it down, wink, wink, that's good with him.) So Bachmann isn't going to lose much sleep because the Log Cabin Republicans don't like her.

(Incidently, is there name some kind of inuendo that Lincoln was gay or something?)

As for her bigotry against other religions, a Church she doesn't belong to anymore has a traditional belief about the Church of Rome. Yes, I know we aren't supposed to air these things in polite society, and churches are just supposed to be about pancake breakfasts now.

[Chronos]

All churches have traditional beliefs about the Church of Rome. For most of them, though, those traditional beliefs aren't that the Church of Rome is Satanic. That's just a little bit out of the mainstream.

[Recovering Republican]

All churches have traditional beliefs about the Church of Rome. For most of them, though, those traditional beliefs aren't that the Church of Rome is Satanic. That's just a little bit out of the mainstream.


Read what Martin Luther had to say about the Church of Rome....

That's actually a pretty consistant view with his writings.

But again, you bring the Bachmann's Church up, we can bring back Reverend Wright and his "America is Racist" rants. That'll work out really well.

[Chronos]

But again, you bring the Bachmann's Church up, we can bring back Reverend Wright and his "America is Racist" rants. That'll work out really well. Yes, we're quite aware that you can bring that up. We're aware of that because you keep on doing it no matter what we say or do.

[Der Trihs]

This must be the official Democrat forum.

Most of y'all apparently are strong believers in coincidence. The states that have been strong liberal for decades are in worse financial condition than those states that have been more conservative. Eg. California; liberal and bankrupt. Texas; conservative and solvent.First, it's largely due to the strong Republican presence in California that the state is having problems; they screwed it up with their anti-tax-at-any-cost garbage and refuse to let it fix itself.

And notoriously, the Red States on the whole are net consumers of federal funds while the Blue States carry the Red on their backs. And Texas is a hellhole, it is hardly a recommendation for Republican policies.

[pikey pete]

This must be the official Democrat forum.

Most of y'all apparently are strong believers in coincidence. The states that have been strong liberal for decades are in worse financial condition than those states that have been more conservative. Eg. California; liberal and bankrupt. Texas; conservative and solvent.

Personally, I don't do coincidence. I believe in cause and effect.

Yeah, Texas is solvent because we dont mind cutting education funding, svengali accounting, and outright lying. Oh, wait...we aren't solvent. We have a 27 billion dollar deficit.

[pikey pete]

Let's all remember from the last presidential campaign that, as an individual that belongs to a church, you are completely responsible for, and agree with, everything your pastor says, does, has said, has done, will say and will do. Absolutely no exceptions to that rule, correct?

So now we have this:
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/15/michele-bachmann-officially-leaves-her-church/?hpt=hp_t2

If we apply the rule above, Bachman is a radical anti-catholic, but now that she has quit that church, she is a Godless Heathen.

My question, if there is one, is "Which is Worse?"

Welcome to the game, Michele. Hope you enjoy playing it on the other side.

can't we just call her an anticatholic, godless heathen?

[gonzomax]

This may not matter to anyone else, but I like Bachmann because she stands for fiscal responsibility, as not raising the debt ceiling (me adding unless we get more $ up front spending cuts than the $ raised), repealing Obamacare, strengthening the traditional family, and secure borders, don't raise taxes during a recession, to name a few things.

These may not appeal to you, but they do to me. (No, I'm not rich!)

Well I could use my traditional family strengthened.