I am a socially progressive, fiscally conservative Republican. Ever since the early 90’s I have felt like a strager in my own party. I have actually had other Republicans tell me I am not a Republican because of my views on abortion and SSM. IMHO, the problem is the Republican Party is that it is not longer inclusive of people left of Pat Buchanan and Sarah Palin so when Bachmann gets on her stump like she did last week and tells me that Republicans need to ATTRACT the social Nazis and not let them leave once we have them, I now believe that she is living in Bachmannland and any similarity with reality is purely coincidental.
A social conservative whose party has done very well electorally by attracting social conservatives in the past thinks they should continue to try and attract social conservatives? I think your defining down the word “insane” by a considerable margin.
Do you have a cite or transcript?
She claimed she worked at the IRS, after becoming a tax attorney, so she could “know her enemy”. That is one of the rules of was according to her. She worked there 4 years, taking off 2 1/2 for maternity leave. She took bigtime advantage of the benefits.
I currently work for the Army. I guess I might be a spy! It’s the only explanation!
-Joe
I hope it doesn;t take a generation or two for Republicans like you to recognize that their party has been taken over by lunatics, and that the Democrats should be more than right-wing enough for you. Once that occurs, we can open a meaningful dialogue between Conservatives (Democrats) and Progressives (liberal Democrats), and abandon the hard-line ideologues (Socialists on the left, TPers on the right) on the margins. Until that understanding, we’re in a Mexican stand-off, unable to govern or even to discuss policy.
No. It was a clip of one of her speeches that I heard on the radio.
I wish I had the quote handy but according to her, the Republicans don’t have social conservatives in the party and needs to get them on board.
It’s not exactly insane… around primary time, you can set your watch by evangelicals harrumphing about how the Republicans aren’t doing enough to attract them.
Hijack: how Bachmann is NOT insane, or even misinformed. When she misspoke and referred to the Soviet Union being a threat (rather than Russia), Democrats just rolled their eyes for the most part, assuming she made a minor (if amusing) gaffe. Very few concluded that she hasn’t heard about the end of the Cold War–just that she misspoke.
But I haven’t heard the end of Pubbies claiming that Obama genuinely seemed to think that there were 57 states when he made a similar (if less sinister) gaffe on the campaign trail in 2008. On this, Bachmann is NOT insane.
Pubbies who continue to harp on the 57 states thing, however, may well be.
I wanna sing her this song in close range with “Out” changed to “In”.
She’s not insane, she just gets these headaches . . .
Neighborhood pets keep disappearing…
I have similar political views as the OP, then my wife pops this tidbit on me yesterday:
http://technorati.com/videos/article/video-michelle-bachmann-promises-a-return/
Come On! What does that mean to a Pro-market party. That statement is pure insanity.
Thank goodness we have Christine O’Donnell to remind us of just how much more insane someone could be than Rep. Bachman.
I don’t think she’s insane, but she isn’t very thorough in her knowledge of politics and national affairs. She’s just like Sarah Palin: She’s an attractive successful woman that at first blush seems like she can be a winner. She can give a stump speech and stick to her talking points just fine. When she goes any further than that, she is exposed as being out of her element and lacking a consistent, thoughtful approach to things.
The $2 per gallon article is a good example. The only way that happens is if the economy tanks again. The refusal to raise the debt ceiling is another.
What does she propose- conquering the Arabian peninsula, exterminating it’s inhabitants and mandating that the petroleum has to be sold to Americans for cost plus five percent? For even that to work, you’d have to forbid the American companies that would presumably now own the oil fields to not sell on the world market for what price they can. SOCIALISM! 
She proposes that a Bachmann administration would be so economically ruinous that domestic demand for gasoline would collapse. Voila, $2 fuel at the pump.
And a chicken in every pot, no doubt.
I think the difference is that Palin would say something which indicates she doesn’t know what the debt ceiling is. Bachmann does know, but is so insane in her economics that she doesn’t understand the impact. Which is not to imply that Palin isn’t insane also.
An alternative explanation is that Bachmann know full well what would happen, but is they type who would destroy the country in order to save it, thinking that the depress that would ensue would ensure Republican control. Kind of like those terrorists convinced that blowing up government buildings will cause the people to rise up in revolution.
This seems more plausible to me, since Palin never actually had to learn anything in college while Bachmann did.