# Bachmann Supports Big Government **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [January 15, 2012, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bachmann-supports-big-government/609622 "2012-01-15T18:26:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2012, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bachmann-supports-big-government/609622/21 "2012-01-16T00:01:23Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > The letter was from Bachman for President. Under that banner, Gingrich is a political opponent. Eh, she’s not running for Prez anymore, irregardless of letterhead. Her purpose in this isn’t to gain an advantage over a political opponent, she doesn’t have any political opponents. > [@](#): > > She’s not asking the FCC to do anything. If you read the letter, she’s saying that the stations do not have an FCC mandate to air this ad, and that they therefore shouldn’t since it’s not in “the public interest” to air and ad with misleading info in it. Does that have any remote chance of working? I’ve never heard of the FCC requiring an ad to be pulled due to being a misleading ad. If there are such cases, then I agree Bachman is simply using the pre-existing rules of the game to preserve her endorsement. But if there isn’t any precedent, then I think she deserves some criticism for trying to conjure up a new regulation to scare radio networks with. > [@](#): > > She, or her lawyers, are trying to keep control of who she endorses. I agree. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2012, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bachmann-supports-big-government/609622/22 "2012-01-16T00:05:47Z")
> [@Simplicio](#): > > Eh, she’s not running for Prez anymore, irregardless of letterhead. Her purpose in this isn’t to gain an advantage over a political opponent, she doesn’t have any political opponents. She’s not presently a candidate for the Republican nomination for president. She will probably run again, and probably wants to remain as a viable VP candidate-- something that is not too likely if she endorses Gingrich. > [@](#): > > Does that have any remote chance of working? I’ve never heard of the FCC requiring an ad to be pulled due to being a misleading ad. If there are such cases, then I agree Bachman is simply using the pre-existing rules of the game to preserve her endorsement. But if there isn’t any precedent, then I think she deserves some criticism for trying to conjure up a new regulation to scare radio networks with. If you read the letter, she isn’t asking the FCC to do that. Her lawyers are sort of threatening that something like that might happen, although that seems to be a huge stretch. ---
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2012, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bachmann-supports-big-government/609622/23 "2012-01-16T01:14:58Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > She’s not presently a candidate for the Republican nomination for president. She will probably run again, and probably wants to remain as a viable VP candidate-- something that is not too likely if she endorses Gingrich. Don’t disagree with any of that. I don’t see where it makes Gingrich her “political opponent”. But in anycase: > [@](#): > > If you read the letter, she isn’t asking the FCC to do that. Her lawyers are sort of threatening that something like that might happen, although that seems to be a huge stretch. I think the threat is pretty clear. But even without a threat, or without asking the FCC, my original complaint remains. She’s positing a regulation that radio-stations need to comply with that to the best of my knowledge (though I’d be interested to be corrected if I’m wrong) doesn’t exist. She’s not “playing by the rules” to protect her own interests, she’s trying to make a new regulation by stretching the"public interest" language further then it has, or will be, used before. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2012, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bachmann-supports-big-government/609622/24 "2012-01-16T03:27:10Z")
Republicans, for at least the last 30 years, have always said they were for smaller government but when they get in power, they become the opposite. Bachmann is just demonstrating a long history of such hypocrisy by the GOP. Nobody should be surprised, but we should continue to call them out on it [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bachmann-supports-big-government/609622.md?page=1)