The problem was, Pawlenty trying to slap Bachmann down was spouting absolute nonsense. It seemed like he had never taken a civics class. He talked about her failure to win in the house against things like Obama-care, as though she controlled how other members of the house, even from the other party, voted on those issues. That is like when Bullard talks about the Rockets free throw defense, but the Bull is joking. Pawlenty was totally serious when saying that Bachmann failed to defeat Obama-care in the house, despite being in the minority party.
because he wears cowboy boots, shoots coyotes, and talks about secession. if those hypocrites actually looked into his record as governor there is no way they would support him - forced vaccines for children, seizure of private property for foreign owned toll roads, california sized budget shortfalls, raising business taxes, ect. i seriously question the credibility of anyone from the tea party. and paul will not steal any votes from perry - there is not much overlap there as far as their base - its two totally different types of voters. ron paul is pretty much the only politician that i could support and i still dont think he has a chance. i was hoping in 2008 that once he did not get the republican nomination he would go independent. that is the only way b/c the republicans will never give him the nomination (even though he has the best chance of beating obama). i would hope than he goes independent this year, but i doubt it will happen.
agree, but the way i see it there are two different versions of the tea party - there is the ron paul faction, which started when bush was still president - these people actually care about big government and out of control spending, regardless of who the president is. than there is the foxnews version of the teaparty, which is basically nothing more than disgruntled bush supporters and hypocritical republicans who only started giving a damn about the economy in january 2009 - this is palin...i mean bachmans base. it is also the much, much, much larger faction of the tea party.
I would disagree. last years gubernatorial elections were proof that a tea party candidate can steal votes from Perry. Many people still do not know who Ron Paul is and just go vote whoever is the mainstream candidate is or vote for whomever the TV endorses. Perry is getting a bunch of air time on TV and the internet and Ron Paul who nearly won didnt get any. So as long as we spread Ron Pauls name. our support will exponentially rise
Can't argue that, but it wasn't just Obama-care he brought up. He listed 3 or 4 things she fought for, and lost. Like he said, they need someone with results, not someone who is always fighting a losing battle. Apparently Iowans like them a consistent loser.
True Pawlenty was wrong to put those things on Bachmann but while she isn't responsible for failing to beat the Democrats' legislative agenda he is right that she has no significant legislative accomplishments both as a US Rep or state senator. Yes she has been in the minority other than heading the Tea Party caucus she hasn't been in her parties leadership or to my knowledge co-authored much legislation.
I didn't think he was out of line for that argument actually. Bachmann's entire campaign is on what she's fought against. Well, with all due respect to the Congresswoman, never confuse efforts with results. Pawlenty was right. She wants to run on her record of "fighting" when that has produced nothing.
I might as well announce I'm fighting against babies being abducted and raped and for our troops and for equality. It seems my just saying I'm for all these pro-American ideals is enough because I've accomplished it seems as much as Bachmann has. Although I don't have Randy Travis giving a free concert to people who vote for me.
Bachman was like a Chatty Cathy doll; you pull her string and she quotes her talking points. There are like 8 of them and no matter what question is asked she quotes one. Good discipline. Her brain is double checking for gaffs and she gets real pleased with herself when she gets the quote right. It's strange to watch.
go back to 2008, count how many times T****R said "hope" and/or "change." TPM called, wants it's blog back.
I have no idea what your comment means. That's more of me not understanding and not that what you're saying doesn't make sense.
Bingo. This is my point. Her only claim to the office of President is that she "fights" against Obama's agenda. What does that even mean? "Leading the fight." Pawlenty is right. If her claim to fame is that she "led the fight" to stop Obamacare, raising the debt ceiling, TARP, etc. well, quite frankly her record sucks. If that's what she wants us to judge her on she is an abject failure. I guess it's to the discredit of all the other candidates they actually have a record. They'd be better off like her with zero record of any accomplishments so they could just spout off about what they oppose.
Pawlenty's heart wasn't in that fight which was why he came off as awkward and forced and she came off as an authentic fighter. Bachmann is a rabid ideologue that stands up for what she believes in. I couldn't disagree more with what she believes in, but she stands up for it. That is what her supporters love her for. She is the Kucinich of the Republican party: she stands up for the party's core beliefs and rarely compromises. As such she rarely gets anything done, but she is seen as fighting the good fight and to a great segment of today's GOP that's more important than accomplishments. It's just a different value system. I can respect that at least as much as I can respect compromising one's core values to get things done. Of course Kucinich could never rise to the rank of serious contender because he is a Democrat and Democrats don't nominate ideologues. Compromise is a core value of the majority of today's Democratic party. It is a core value in the most powerful segment of the Republican party NOT to compromise. Pawlenty said the stuff he said out of desperation. He never wanted to be fighting Bachmann; he wanted to be fighting Romney. But he needed Ames so he had to try to hit her. It was his last chance, he failed at it and that's why he's out of the race.
Where Bachmann and her supporters are concerned, they're actually fighting against babies being murdered. Though I don't share it, it's not an outlandish point of view. Her vitriol toward gays and lesbians is pretty out of step with where America is finally at these days (thank God!), but there are still more than enough anti-gay voters in the GOP for that not to hurt her at all.
I would prefer someone having no legislative accomplishments than negative legislative accomplishments. If she had voted for the debt ceiling compromise deal, she could have that accomplishment, but it would be accomplishing a steaming pile, which is not a good thing if you aren't in the can. She has shown that she is not willing to take a bite of the crap sandwich, and if she is given the veto pen, she can stop things like it in the future. That should be her counter every time such a stupid argument is brought up.
That's fine but has she ever authored any legislation (whether you agreed to or not) or taken on any party leadership positions than the position of Tea Party Caucus that she had a big hand in creating? In short has she done anything to give you a good sense of what sort of leader she would be as the head of the Executive branch. Just judging her on what she hasn't done seems like a very poor basis to determine someone's potential as President of the United States.
