C’mon. Michelle Bachmann has a reputation for taking some um, controversial stands.
At least one? Probably the only one, though I don’t know for sure. Sounds more like a hit piece on Barney Frank to me though.
Bullshit. It was a list of loaded, tendentious, rhetorical questions assuming facts not in evidence and in most cases demonstrably false. That last thing such a list is intended to do is to stimulate people to think for themselves.
The call for Senators to “read the bill” is not, and never has been, about getting a Senator to read and understand the location of every period, comma, and semicolon in the legislation. It is a call for Senators to be able to accurately articulate the points within the legislation, when asked about them, which few have been able to do. If the summaries are available to the Senators, and these summaries are accurate, then the Senator should be able to answer questions asked by their constituents.
My own personal question revolves around where the f*ck the bill came from…how is it that a 1,000-page (or whatever mule-choking size it is this week) bill was just lying around on the shelf…that troubles me. Yes, I understand that often legislation is crafted ahead of time, but I’m not sure I am comfortable with that approach. It smacks of, “We have this idea/plan/whatever…but now isn’t the time. We will keep it on the shelf until a crisis/public attitude/power in Congress/Supreme Court situation will make it more palatable and able to be passed.”
Additionally, there is much consternation within the citizenry over 2 a.m., middle-of-the-night-when-nobody-is-watching bill amendments, adjustments and votes. These situations (bills-at-the-ready, and middle-of-the-night passages) feel to many citizens as wrong. Not technically illegal, but unethical…
But if they did that, they wouldn’t be able to tell the Death Panel lie, would they?
BTW, “Assuming facts not in evidence” is a far-too-polite way of saying Beck’s a damned liar. The evidence of that, in this thread alone, is substantial.
Clothahump, so he “makes other people think”, does he? Tell us, in what way has he made you think about any of these topics?
I asked him a similar question when he said that Beck’s presentation of those questions was intended to get people to do research. I asked him how much research Beck has inspired him to do. So far - crickets.
They have a staff that reads the bills when they have time. None read the Bush anti-terrorism bill. It was huge and no time was allowed. The repubs did not want the TARP bill read either. They gave a mighty push to jam that down the congressional and senatorial throats.
There should be time allowed to read a bill. If none is allowed they should vote NO.
There has been plenty of time to read the Health care bills. They have been thoroughly digested.
I agree. I think that’s one thing that is really pissing people off , not just the Beck fans but average honest folks. Know the bill enough to really answer questions and if you don’t know then find out. Can the political speak and try to be real. Sometimes people ask unrealistic questions. Be smart and honest. People can grasp the basics if you’ll spell them out. If our congress critters really don’t know and are voting based on political games rather than policy then you can expect people to be mad as hell.
Congress is made up of hundreds of lawyers. You don’t think hundreds of lawyers could whip up a a box of paperwork in a day or two? 
Have you bothered to read the health care bill? I have.
Are you concerned about our growing debt? I am.
Are you doing anything to stop either one of those? I am.
Yes to all three. Reading is only the first step, though.
The question, one which you raised, was about how Glenn Beck has “made you think” about those things. And? :dubious: