Tea Party groups: Bachmann should stay in the race

posted at 6:45 pm on October 28, 2011 by Tina Korbe

The leaders of several Tea Party groups have risen to Rep. Michele Bachmann’s defense after American Majority president Ned Ryun called for her to drop out of the presidential race.

Two days ago, Ryun authored a post on the American Majority blog that criticized Bachmann for riding her Tea Party credentials from obscurity to a national platform “like no other,” for focusing too intensely on social issues and for purporting to speak for a grassroots movement that “has no spokesperson.” Ryun wrote:

It’s time for Michele Bachmann to go. …

In Bachmann’s case, it is clear that the campaign has become less about reform and more about her personal effort to stay relevant and sell books; a harsh commentary, but true.  It’s not about tea party values or championing real plans to solve real problems.  While other campaigns are diving into the substance, the supposed tea party candidate Bachmann is sticking to thin talking points and hanging on for dear life.

Every day the campaign flounders, it risks hurting the credibility of the movement.  If she really is about the tea party, and making it successful, it’s time for the Congresswoman to move on.  The Tea Party doesn’t have a spokesperson, and it’s certainly not Michele Bachmann.

But leaders of FreedomWorks, the Tea Party Express, Tea Party Patriots and the Tea Party Nation told The Daily Caller they disagree with Ryun:

  • FreedomWorks’ Brendan Steinhauser said: “I think people want them to compete to see who emerges. I don’t think it’s helpful to ask any of these guys to drop out. At least let them compete in Iowa,” after which point, he noted, the field would likely narrow itself.”
  • Tea Party Express’ Sal Russo echoed Steinhauser: “Voters are still moving around — they’re not locked in yet, so I don’t think we’re at a point yet where we have to narrow the field.”
  • Tea Party Patriots’ Mark Meckler focused on American Majority itself: “I find it odd that a group that claims to be a ‘training institute’ would call for such a thing. It doesn’t seem to be within their mission as stated on their website, and it certainly isn’t anything I’m hearing regularly from the ‘grassroots’ whom they claim to serve.”
  • And Tea Party Nation’s Judson Phillips had kind words for Bachmann: “Michele Bachmann is a passionate, articulate and graceful voice in this movement. It is not up to a Washington insider to tell her when she should or should not leave the race. Nor is it their place to pronounce that she is harming this movement.”
Pretty easy to know whose side to take in this. The leaders of the four Tea Party groups above have it right. Bachmann’s voice adds to the race. She’s consistently conservative on both fiscal and social issues, was one of the few who actually said “no” to TARP at the time and knows Obamacare — both the legislation and the fight against it — better than virtually anyone. It’s particularly rich of Ryun, a Perry supporter, to criticize the disorder of the Bachmann campaign. What candidate hasn’t struggled to refine strategy, other than, perhaps, Mitt Romney, whose “outlast everybody else” strategy has exasperated countless GOP voters?
Finally, as easy as it is to think Bachmann has already had her turn as the “flavor of the week” and is unlikely to surge again, the campaign trail repeatedly proves itself to be unpredictable. Best to retain truly conservative options as long as possible.
That said, Ryun’s post does serve as a useful reminder that the Tea Party movement is, in fact, a grassroots movement. Unlike the OWS movement, which seems to have started with any number of issues and tried to whittle them down, the Tea Party has first focused on overspending and gradually expanded to other issues. But a call to restrain out-of-control government spending should continue to be the message the GOP hypes in 2012. It’s at the core of the country’s joblessness and, frankly, contributes to social problems, too, as welfare programs promote crippling dependency. If his post does no more than to remind Bachmann and others to speak first to overspending and then to other issues — at least in campaign settings — then it will certainly have done more good than harm.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Bachmann should never have ran.

ninjapirate on October 28, 2011 at 6:52 PM

I think she should stay..She has paid her dime..:)

Dire Straits on October 28, 2011 at 6:54 PM

She should stay in at least as long as Huntsman.

But she has no chance. All she is doing now is providing a voice to her conservative opinions, nothing more.

neoavatara on October 28, 2011 at 6:58 PM

Running for President creates jobs.

SlaveDog on October 28, 2011 at 6:58 PM

I think she has done enough damage.

ronsfi on October 28, 2011 at 6:59 PM

This started with Ned Ryun, a die-hard Perry backer, and is part of Rick Perry’s blogger outreach.

Frustrated their guy is pulling a whopping 4% to 10% in the polls they want everyone else to drop. Its this type of arrogance that has already alienated a lot of voters.

Bachmann should turn around and demand Perry drop out. After all, he is only a few points ahead of her, she is more conservative, and has proven she can win in Iowa.

swamp_yankee on October 28, 2011 at 7:00 PM

Time for Michelle to go and take Bart Huntsman and Rick Santorum with.

As far as these guys go……

But leaders of FreedomWorks, the Tea Party Express, Tea Party Patriots and the Tea Party Nation :

They need to stop sending me e-mails every day begging for money.

Knucklehead on October 28, 2011 at 7:01 PM

Obama is the one who should drop out.

SlaveDog on October 28, 2011 at 7:01 PM

Bachmann and Santorum attack the flaws in the other candidates as determined by the infallible legalist wing of Christianity they represent.

Jesus said these types kije to load burdens on men’s shoulders but will not lift a finger to help them bear the load. Yup, that’s Bachmann and Santorum to a T.

The Lord went on to call them a brood of vipers, which seems harsh to me

But many folks feel better when they are yoked up as religious slaves and beaten with guilt…it’s familiar to them.

Both Bachmann and Santorum need to learn grace, and then they will quit trying to share their severe headaches caused from carring a load of goodness, but being totally ignored by free men that have accepted grace and human imperfection.

jimw on October 28, 2011 at 7:01 PM

Kind of surprised that the whole blog never mentions that Ned Ryun is a Rick Perry shill.

swamp_yankee on October 28, 2011 at 7:02 PM

And this is why the Tea Party will soon end up being as irrelevant as Perot’s United We Stand party. No one is going to take you seriously if you keep blindly doubling down on twits like Bachmann and COD just because they happen to spout all the pretty cliches that you want to hear.

JFS61 on October 28, 2011 at 7:02 PM

Bachmann should quit because she’s turning the Tea Party into a Saturday Night Live parody. She has done as much as Christine O’Donnell to injure the Tea Party’s reputation as fiscal conservatives with gravitas. She began to come across as a kook during the debt crisis when she insisted it was okay to default on our debt. This poisoned the well for the GOP, and of course the Dems carried that ball and ran with it, and the T.P’s reputation has not recovered. Next came the Gardisil fiasco which made her look like both hysterical and gullible. During the last debate (when she was fittingly dressed like a Nutcracker) she decided to make speeches at inopportune times, sounding like a loony candidate for the H.S. debating team. I used to like and respect her and defend her, but she’s a perfect example of how being a member of the House who serves local constituents does not necessarily transfer to the wide stage of the White House and the leader of the free world.

Buy Danish on October 28, 2011 at 7:02 PM

Obama is the one who should drop out.

SlaveDog on October 28, 2011 at 7:01 PM

Thread Winner!..:)

Dire Straits on October 28, 2011 at 7:03 PM

That said, Ryun’s post does serve as a useful reminder that the Tea Party movement is, in fact, a grassroots movement.

Face meet mirror. Why does he presume to speak for it?

chemman on October 28, 2011 at 7:05 PM

Kind of surprised that the whole blog never mentions that Ned Ryun is a Rick Perry shill.
swamp_yankee on October 28, 2011 at 7:02 PM

Tina:

It’s particularly rich of Ryun, a Perry supporter, to criticize the disorder of the Bachmann campaign.

Buy Danish on October 28, 2011 at 7:05 PM

Buy Danish on October 28, 2011 at 7:05 PM

Oops. I missed that.

swamp_yankee on October 28, 2011 at 7:08 PM

…Bachmann’s voice adds to the race. She’s consistently conservative on both fiscal and social issues…

ON THOSE POINTS, I AGREE…*but* a few qualifiers:

– Bachmann’s being hailed to remain in the race by the various Tea Party groups BECAUSE she’s head of the Tea Party Caucus in Congress; and,

– She is becoming a liability on a national level in the competition, or soon will be however one looks at the percentages of voter support or lack thereof.

She DOES contribute to the campaign overall of others by offering an amplification of issues, and I find Bachmann agreeable and interesting.

However, I no longer see the point of her remaining “in the race” especially after New Hampshire, except to reduce the credibility of the Tea Party as a movement what with her as Tea Party Caucus leader.

She can do a lot of good in Congress and as a national spokesperson for the voters. But I disagree that she should “stay in the race,” particularly after New Hampshire.

Lourdes on October 28, 2011 at 7:08 PM

“But a call to restrain out-of-control government spending should continue to be the message the GOP hypes in 2012…”

Pointing out that Obowma is rapidly turning the once great US of A into a Tijuana whore house couldn’t hurt either…

Seven Percent Solution on October 28, 2011 at 7:08 PM

Any of the candidates should stay in as long as they want, or leave whenever they want.

Totally their call.

listens2glenn on October 28, 2011 at 7:10 PM

Pointing out that Obowma is rapidly turning the once great US of A into a Tijuana whore house couldn’t hurt either…

Seven Percent Solution on October 28, 2011 at 7:08 PM

TJ whorehouses are indignant.

Kataklysmic on October 28, 2011 at 7:11 PM

Kind of surprised that the whole blog never mentions that Ned Ryun is a Rick Perry shill.
swamp_yankee on October 28, 2011 at 7:02 PM

Tina:

It’s particularly rich of Ryun, a Perry supporter, to criticize the disorder of the Bachmann campaign.

Buy Danish on October 28, 2011 at 7:05 PM

Well, I didn’t know this but meanwhile, my opinions (above stated) are my own without reference and favor to any one candidate.

I just think Bachmann has begun that “downward slide” in popularity that will eventually, or likely will, reduce the credibility of the Tea Party on a national stage. Thus, she should not “stay in the race” too much longer, particularly after New Hampshire. No one wants to see her slide on down to 2% support or something.

Lourdes on October 28, 2011 at 7:11 PM

Pretty easy to know whose side to take in this. The leaders of the four Tea Party groups above have it right. Bachmann’s voice adds to the race.

That’s a joke, right? Right???

Bachmanns voice adds to the race alright- her voice adds crazy and illegitimacy to the GOP and Tea Party movement.

She should never have been considered anything but a fringe vanity candidate in the first place. Michele “Tardisil” Bachmann is who you want representing you, Tea Party? If that’s the route you want to take, enjoy your impending decline into obscurity.

Hollowpoint on October 28, 2011 at 7:12 PM

Obama is the one who should drop out.
SlaveDog on October 28, 2011 at 7:01 PM

Thread Winner!..:)
Dire Straits on October 28, 2011 at 7:03 PM

Second the motion!

listens2glenn on October 28, 2011 at 7:12 PM

God Bless America

Key West Reader on October 28, 2011 at 7:13 PM

Isn’t this a twist… they want to co-opt the Tea Party!

Kini on October 28, 2011 at 7:14 PM

When she rescued Romney in that last debate just when the Romneycare pile on was getting good, I realized it was time for her to get lost.

Daemonocracy on October 28, 2011 at 7:15 PM

What about Lavon Huntsman…?

Seven Percent Solution on October 28, 2011 at 7:16 PM

Lourdes on October 28, 2011 at 7:11 PM

After a couple of poor showings in a couple of states. Sure.

But she did reach frontrunner status once, and did win the IA straw poll. Cain rose, flopped, and then rose again. I think its rather arrogant for one campaign to tell another to quit in October.

What’s really going on is that Perry supporters presume a great “consolidation” that hasn’t happened, and wont happen before Iowa. They know Perry could get stuck down in the results with Cain, Romney and also Paul, Bachmann and Santorum all having an impact in IA. So they want to clear they way for Perry.

swamp_yankee on October 28, 2011 at 7:17 PM

Well, I didn’t know this but meanwhile, my opinions (above stated) are my own without reference and favor to any one candidate.
Lourdes on October 28, 2011 at 7:11 PM

As are mine. I have been very circumspect about criticizing Perry, Cain and Gingrich, but it’s been clear for awhile now that Bachmann hurts the T.P. and the GOP.

Buy Danish on October 28, 2011 at 7:17 PM

I think she has done enough damage.
ronsfi on October 28, 2011 at 6:59 PM

In what way or how, or to whom?

To herself?

To the Republican Party?

To the Tea Party?

To the conservative movement in general?

I’m not saying you’re wrong, but you gotta qualify that with a little more detail.

listens2glenn on October 28, 2011 at 7:19 PM

What’s really going on is that Perry supporters presume a great “consolidation” that hasn’t happened, and wont happen before Iowa. They know Perry could get stuck down in the results with Cain, Romney and also Paul, Bachmann and Santorum all having an impact in IA. So they want to clear they way for Perry.

swamp_yankee on October 28, 2011 at 7:17 PM

considering how you can’t read a blog properly before you foam at the mouth over Perry, it is not surprising you miss the mark here as well.

It’s NOT just Perry supporters who are laughing at her here. You think Bachmann support hurts Perry more than Cain? does not compute.

Daemonocracy on October 28, 2011 at 7:21 PM

The face of the Tea Party.

The longer she stays the better.

Pablo Honey on October 28, 2011 at 7:21 PM

considering how you can’t read a blog properly before you foam at the mouth over Perry, it is not surprising you miss the mark here as well.

It’s NOT just Perry supporters who are laughing at her here. You think Bachmann support hurts Perry more than Cain? does not compute.

Daemonocracy on October 28, 2011 at 7:21 PM

Computes easily if you have a brain. The race they want is Perry and Romney. They think Cain will fade. Even if he doesn’t fade, and one assumes Bachmann’s support splits between Cain and Perry. It still helps Perry.

swamp_yankee on October 28, 2011 at 7:27 PM

But a call to restrain out-of-control government spending should continue to be the message the GOP hypes in 2012.

If his post does no more than to remind Bachmann and others to speak first to overspending…..

We had our chance when the Cut, Cap & Balance was voted on in the House. Bachmann voted AGAINST it!! So she should be the last one to talk about out of control government spending. She also, encouraged the Tea Party Caucus that she set up in the U.S. House and named herself the Chair to go along with her and vote AGAINST the Cut, Cap & Balance. She did all of this, knowing the Credit Downgrade was going to be the result.

She likes to talk, but actions speak louder than words.

bluefox on October 28, 2011 at 7:33 PM

Buy Danish on October 28, 2011 at 7:02 PM

I know we’ve had our differences, but you have made valid points in those comments.

The damage to the Tea Party “Movement” is what concerns me. These various Organizations that have their own self appointed “Presidents”, “Leaders” etc don’t really speak for all of the various local TP across the Nation.

Bachmann set up the Tea Party Caucus in the House and invited the Tea Party Patriot Organization in for discussions, which I thot should not have happened.

bluefox on October 28, 2011 at 7:40 PM

Let everyone stay in the race – and add a few more!

I just want everyone to have equal time to state their viewpoints.

Some will make the others look smart and some will make the
others look dumb.

At the end of it all we will have a pretty good idea (hopefully)
of whom would be the best candidate to run the country; reverse
the damage the idiot one with the jug ears has done.

Amjean on October 28, 2011 at 7:45 PM

As everyone on this site keeps saying when their candidate is ahead in the polls, i’d vote for a ham sandwich against Obama. Well, I guess we can count on all your votes if Bachmann wins the nomination.

astonerii on October 28, 2011 at 7:53 PM

With mittens being pushed by the repub establisment……as far as I’m concerned there’s plenty of room!!

Tim_CA on October 28, 2011 at 7:53 PM

swamp_yankee on October 28, 2011 at 7:27 PM

How does Bachmann staying in the race help Perry? Or anyone for that matter. She’s been the attack dog for Romney starting with the very first debate that Perry was in. A week doesn’t go by that she’s not making some statement against Perry. Have you ever heard her say anything against Romney? I’ve seen her give him a hug and a kiss, but that’s the most.

Every Candidate has been against Perry except Newt. Why? Romney doesn’t have a record?

Bachmann is all about Bachmann, don’t kid yourself. She latched on to the Tea Party Movement. But it was Sarah Palin that did the work and produced the results with all of her fundraising and putting her money where her mouth was, not Bachmann. In fact Sarah fundraised for Bachmann in MN when Pelosi was ready to defeat MB re-election bid. Had it not been for Sarah, she would have lost.

Then when Rollins came out with his snarky insult of Palin, where was Bachmann? Silent. That was the thanks Palin got from Bachmann.

If you think I can’t stand Bachmann, you’d be right.

bluefox on October 28, 2011 at 7:54 PM

Computes easily if you have a brain. The race they want is Perry and Romney. They think Cain will fade. Even if he doesn’t fade, and one assumes Bachmann’s support splits between Cain and Perry. It still helps Perry.

swamp_yankee on October 28, 2011 at 7:27 PM

This isn’t about Perry supporters at all, it is about Romney supporters wanting as many Conservatives in the race as possible to split the vote.

That would be you.

Daemonocracy on October 28, 2011 at 7:57 PM

Stay in or get out, that’s her decision. The question should be, why hasn’t she gained more support from so called conservatives? Out of all the GOP candidates she is the only one that said our involvement in Libya is wrong, no one else is as fiercely opposed to Obamacare, no one besides Ron Paul is more passionate about reducing the size and role of government, etc. etc. It’s almost like some people aren’t quite as conservative as they portray. Imagine that.

lowandslow on October 28, 2011 at 7:59 PM

As everyone on this site keeps saying when their candidate is ahead in the polls, i’d vote for a ham sandwich against Obama. Well, I guess we can count on all your votes if Bachmann wins the nomination.

astonerii on October 28, 2011 at 7:53 PM

well, yeah.

Daemonocracy on October 28, 2011 at 7:59 PM

Hey, maybe turn identity politics on its head:

Cain/Rubio 2012.

Rubio/Cain 2012.

Either of these tickets may be better than what we seem to have now.

petefrt on October 28, 2011 at 7:59 PM

bluefox on October 28, 2011 at 7:54 PM

I dont think you read my comments correctly. Bachmann staying in the race does not help Perry. That’s why Ned Ryun, a Perry guy, started this buzz for her to quit. I think its disingenuous for him to do it under the banner of the “Tea Party”. Its not a tea party issue. Its a Rick Perry issue. They think a consolidation around Rick Perry will occur with the others out of the race.

swamp_yankee on October 28, 2011 at 8:01 PM

They think a consolidation around Rick Perry will occur with the others out of the race.

swamp_yankee on October 28, 2011 at 8:01 PM

And supporters of the other candidates don’t think the same thing?

again, your logic fails to compute. But as I said, this isn’t about Perry, it’s about splitting the conservative vote for Romney.

Daemonocracy on October 28, 2011 at 8:04 PM

considering how you can’t read a blog properly before you foam at the mouth over Perry, it is not surprising you miss the mark here as well.
Daemonocracy on October 28, 2011 at 7:21 PM

Says someone who foams at the mouth with Romney Derangement Syndrome on a daily basis. Swamp_Yankee missed one sentence in a long post and acknowledged the error. Meanwhile I’m still waiting for evidence that Mitt imposed carbon caps in Massachusetts. Unless I missed it, in which case if you could just direct me to where you responded…

bluefox on October 28, 2011 at 7:40 PM

Yep, many of these various and sundry T.P. groups are opportunists who have taken hold of a grass roots movement for their own agenda. FreedomWorks is one of the worst – one of its most vocal Romney critics is a guy named Brendan Steinhauser who worked for Ron Paul. I posted a lot of stuff about him and his stunts recently but can’t find it right now and damn if it isn’t dinner time. Anyone is free to express their opinions, but it’s always helpful to have context to who it is who is doing the opinionating.

Buy Danish on October 28, 2011 at 8:04 PM

Buy Danish on October 28, 2011 at 8:04 PM

Yes, the idea of a Massachusetts liberal getting the nomination after the 2010 tea party wave does in fact produce foam around my lips, it’s pretty disturbing.

As for your evidence on Romney and Carbon caps, you must be pumped full of Gardasil and delirious from the side effects. He targeted a plant in his own state, you commented in two threads about it, please slam your liberal face into your keyboard repeatedly to knock some sense into yourself.

You can’t defend Romney’s record so you attack others or willfully ignore it. Romney enforced Carbon caps in the past, has surrounded himself with cap an trade extremists, and has expressed support for cap and trade on a global scale. The list is forever growing with this man.

Name one key conservative issue Romney has not played both sides on and has been an advocate for throughout his career.

Daemonocracy on October 28, 2011 at 8:13 PM

That’s one of the problems with the decentralized nature of the Tea Party – so many people claim to speak for it and many, like Ned Ryan, have their own personal agendas.

bw222 on October 28, 2011 at 8:15 PM

Perry is done, he would be eaten alive by barry, Huntsman is an undercover democrat and never had a chance, Santorum was a big spending repub and is too closely linked with the squishy’s like bill bennett and pete weiner, Paul is entertaining but he is an anti-semite, isolationist and everyone knows he would get us all killed, Newt is articulate and brilliant but is too much of a professional politician and self promoter, who the heck is Johnson? Cain is a good man but has not yet figured out how to balance his honesty and sincerety with the nastiness and gotcha strategy of the media and may not have enough time to figure it out. Romney is slick, may be either an undercover liberal or an undercover conservative, and the media is already picking him to be the nominee (who makes up the media?). Bachmann is consistent, she is a fighter and the media wants her gone.

Don’t dismiss the woman.

peacenprosperity on October 28, 2011 at 8:45 PM

swamp_yankee on October 28, 2011 at 8:01 PM

Frankly I don’t even know who Ned Ryun or the American Majority is.
Haven’t heard of either one; guess I should have read the article.

Ok, I just read the article. I happen to agree with everything he said. He did not mention Gov. Perry’s name nor any other Candidate.
Tina said in part above: It’s particularly rich of Ryun, a Perry supporter, to criticize the disorder of the Bachmann campaign.

I don’t know if he’s a Perry supporter or not but that makes no difference in what he is saying. The message is right and the messenger should not be attacked. This seems to be an attempt to connect Ryun’s opinion about Bachmann to Gov. Perry.

Why even mention Gov. Perry? Let Ryun’s opinion stand on it’s own, which it does in my opinion and I agree with it.

Sorry, I misread your post. However, I still stand on what I said about Bachmann, etc:-)

bluefox on October 28, 2011 at 8:53 PM

The TEA party did not grow out of social con principles. The organizing principle from its inception was/is limited, accountable government, Constitution-based guaranteed liberties, and lower taxes.

Michele Bachmann is free to run and to run her campaign as she sees fit, but she cannot claim that all of principles derive from the TEA party. She does the movement a disservice.

onlineanalyst on October 28, 2011 at 8:58 PM

Daemonocracy on October 28, 2011 at 8:13 PM

Something to bookmark to read at your leisure:-) I was dizzy from reading it:-)

http://www.redstate.com/erick/files/2011/10/FLIPFLOPS.pdf

bluefox on October 28, 2011 at 9:00 PM

The message is right and the messenger should not be attacked. This seems to be an attempt to connect Ryun’s opinion about Bachmann to Gov. Perry.

That’s a liberal symptom; it doesn’t matter what the background or possible intentions of the messenger, if they agree with me their integrity and honesty cannot be questioned.

peacenprosperity on October 28, 2011 at 9:00 PM

bluefox on October 28, 2011 at 7:54 PM

Every point you make is valid in my book.

From PA, I donated to Bachmann’s House campaign when Pelosi dedicated her party’s resources against Bachmann. Ever since, I have been inundated with phone calls, emails, and snail mails. Enough already!

onlineanalyst on October 28, 2011 at 9:05 PM

I think she has done enough damage.
ronsfi on October 28, 2011 at 6:59 PM

In what way or how, or to whom?

To herself?

To the Republican Party?

To the Tea Party?

To the conservative movement in general?

listens2glenn on October 28, 2011 at 7:19 PM

How about all of the above.

JFS61 on October 28, 2011 at 9:06 PM

Even Biff Huntsman has a video mocking Romney’s flips, using a toy monkey to make the point. I guess that Clark Huntsman could not use that against his former employer for its coded racist message.
bluefox on October 28, 2011 at 7:54 PM

onlineanalyst on October 28, 2011 at 9:10 PM

We had our chance when the Cut, Cap & Balance was voted on in the House. Bachmann voted AGAINST it!! So she should be the last one to talk about out of control government spending.
bluefox

She voted against it because it raised the debt limit, which is something she AND the Tea Party were against. Maybe she thought giving the president a few trillion more dollars in borrowed money to waste wasn’t the best way to control spending.

By the way, didn’t cut, cap and balance pass the house anyway? Uhh, yeah, it did. How’d that work out? It didn’t. Immediately after passing, Boehner basically threw it under the bus, it failed in the senate, we got a huge debt increase anyway, AND a reduced credit rating. Go figure.

She likes to talk, but actions speak louder than words.

bluefox

She told her supporters she wouldn’t vote to raise the debt limit, and she actually took action and voted no on raising the debt limit, so I guess you’re right…actions do speak louder than words.

And lest anyone get the wrong idea, no, I’m not a Bachmann supporter. She may as well drop out, because she has no chance at winning.

xblade on October 28, 2011 at 9:13 PM

He targeted a plant in his own state, you commented in two threads about it, please slam your liberal face into your keyboard repeatedly to knock some sense into yourself.Daemonocracy on October 28, 2011 at 8:13 PM

Yes I did! I pointed out that the the carbon caps never happened! Ed Morrisey’s own post contradicted itself on this issue. You disputed what I said and insisted carbon caps happened, yet despite, oh, maybe 20 attempts to get you to provide facts to back up your allegation that he instituted carbon caps you are still coming up with a whole lotta zero, zip, nada, nothing. As for bashing my head into a keyboard, I’ll refrain from commenting on this and just let your words hang out there.

Buy Danish on October 28, 2011 at 9:16 PM

Its not a tea party issue. Its a Rick Perry issue. They think a consolidation around Rick Perry will occur with the others out of the race.

swamp_yankee on October 28, 2011 at 8:01 PM

I just re-read your comment above. I disagree. Ryun’s article was about the Tea Party. He didn’t mention Gov. Perry as I said previously. You inserted Gov. Perry into the issue just as Tina did and there was no reason for that. His article could have been written by any local Tea Party!!

Bachmann’s performances in the debates are not Presidential and are an embarrassment and also to the Tea Party Movement.

bluefox on October 28, 2011 at 9:18 PM

bluefox on October 28, 2011 at 9:18 PM

The fact he didn’t mention that he is in the tank for Perry is the point. Freedomworks, Tea Party Nation, Tea Party Express, and Tea Party Patriots all rebuke him. There is no cry from Tea Partiers to get Bachmann to quit. Ryun is a Perry supporter. Just read his twitter feed. I found this twee ironic:

“nedryun Ned Ryun

I’m with @jimdemint on this; I too am tired of one person saying he speaks for the #teaparty. thedc.com/n0FETh #majority #tcot #rs”

Unless its Ned pretending to speak on behalf of the tea party calling on Bachmann to quit.

swamp_yankee on October 28, 2011 at 9:45 PM

No.

Crazy-eyed lady bordering on insane and being nothing but a distraction stealing thunder/money/effort/air time/etc… go away!

FlatFoot on October 28, 2011 at 9:49 PM

Buy Danish on October 28, 2011 at 9:16 PM

You’re insane. You are batshit insane.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/67881069/Romney-Announces-Strict-New-Clean-Air-Regulations-to-Take-Effect-January-1

Name one key conservative issue Romney has not played both sides on and has been an advocate for throughout his career.

Daemonocracy on October 28, 2011 at 9:52 PM

Of course she should stay in, she’s giving up her House seat to get her message out. She probably understands she can’t get the nomination, but that doesn’t mean she can’t drag some of the candidates into the discussion she wants to put out in front of the public.

Jason Coleman on October 28, 2011 at 10:18 PM

Bachmann’s performances in the debates are not Presidential and are an embarrassment and also to the Tea Party Movement.

bluefox on October 28, 2011 at 9:18 PM

You are a die-hard Perry supporter and have the gall to criticize the debate performance of the other candidates?

I am not a Michele Bachmann supporter, but unlike Rick Perry she is able to string 5-10 words together into s sentence that makes sense.

Perry comes off looking like Jethro Bodine from an old Beverly Hillbillies rerun. Perhaps Perry looks dumb and sounds dumb because he is dumb.

bw222 on October 28, 2011 at 10:20 PM

Jason Coleman on October 28, 2011 at 10:18 PM

Gardasil and vaccine hysteria is really not something we need to be focusing on in this primary.

I don’t see what she brings to the table that the other candidates haven’t. Santorum focuses on social issues as she does with Perry being an unapologetic social conservative, Cain and even Huntsman spearheaded Tax Code reform with Gingrich and Perry soon following and Perry talks of entitlement reform while Cain endorsed the Chilean model for SS.

Of course the final decision is her’s, but these debates need to start thinning out and Bachmann, Santorum and Huntsman are the stragglers. Perry has too much money in the bank and media attention to be counted out yet and Paul has a limited but devoted following which keep him relevant to an extent.

Daemonocracy on October 28, 2011 at 10:36 PM

Daemonocracy on October 28, 2011 at 10:36 PM

With Bachmann, Santorum and Huntsman gone, the remaining 5 candidates will get around an extra half hour to defend and explain their positions. That is valuable time.

Daemonocracy on October 28, 2011 at 10:42 PM

That’s a liberal symptom; it doesn’t matter what the background or possible intentions of the messenger, if they agree with me their integrity and honesty cannot be questioned.

peacenprosperity on October 28, 2011 at 9:00 PM

Since you attached the “liberal” word to your response, I’m taking it that you know the “intentions” of Ryun. However, I took the article as it was stated, not knowing of him nor his website and really it doesn’t matter. I think Objective would be the word.

I’m certainly not a liberal by any stretch of the imagination, yours or anyone elses’.

I know you are a Bachmann supporter, since we’ve exchanged comments before, remember?

bluefox on October 28, 2011 at 11:55 PM

bluefox on October 28, 2011 at 7:54 PM
Every point you make is valid in my book.

From PA, I donated to Bachmann’s House campaign when Pelosi dedicated her party’s resources against Bachmann. Ever since, I have been inundated with phone calls, emails, and snail mails. Enough already!

onlineanalyst on October 28, 2011 at 9:05 PM

I’ve heard that too. I’m very selective who I sign up with.

It appears to me that Bachmann allowed her acceptance from some Tea Party Speeches she made go to her head. I cannot imagine her being President, no experience and not stable.

bluefox on October 29, 2011 at 12:27 AM

swamp_yankee on October 28, 2011 at 9:45 PM

I can’t tell what that exchange means. Don’t use twitter, so…?

bluefox on October 29, 2011 at 12:32 AM

She voted against it because it raised the debt limit, which is something she AND the Tea Party were against. Maybe she thought giving the president a few trillion more dollars in borrowed money to waste wasn’t the best way to control spending.

xblade on October 28, 2011 at 9:13 PM

So she was against Cutting Spending, Capping Spending and Balancing the Budget also since that was in the bill.

She also knew as others did, that the credit downgrade was coming and the ONLY thing that could stop it was the CCB. So knowing this, she chose to vote against it. That is my point.

And then she wants to talk about Gardasil, LOL

She knew and everyone in the House, Senate & the White House knew there was going to be a debt ceiling increase, no matter what. And there was.

bluefox on October 29, 2011 at 1:00 AM

Jason Coleman on October 28, 2011 at 10:18 PM

Bachmann gave up her House seat? I hadn’t heard that. I know she’s missed quite a few votes since July 1 tho.

bluefox on October 29, 2011 at 1:05 AM

I know you are a Bachmann supporter, since we’ve exchanged comments before, remember?
bluefox on October 28, 2011 at 11:55 PM

Sorry, I don’t remember. I guess you didn’t write anything worth remembering.

I was a Romney supporter in 08, I’m not sure who I will vote for in my primary yet. What I do know is faux-conservatives who spout msm talking points to attack conservative candidates are annoying.

peacenprosperity on October 29, 2011 at 7:13 AM

She probably understands she can’t get the nomination, but that doesn’t mean she can’t drag some of the candidates into the discussion she wants to put out in front of the public.

Jason Coleman on October 28, 2011 at 10:18 PM

Well if that was what she was doing I wouldn’t have a problem with her, but instead she’s been an attack dog for Mitt Romney. Why would a real conservative do that? It has to be personal ambition. Look at the way she went after Perry from the get-go, in addition it came across like she was just p*issed off that he took her support. After the Gardasil fiasco my opinion of her motives changed dramatically and not for the better. I would be happy if she dropped out. Her, Arnold Huntsman and Rick Santorum just need to go. In my opinion they will never be the nominee and are splitting the conservative vote- which only helps Romney.

kg598301 on October 29, 2011 at 8:27 AM

You’re insane. You are batshit insane.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/67881069/Romney-Announces-Strict-New-Clean-Air-Regulations-to-Take-Effect-January-1
Daemonocracy on October 28, 2011 at 9:52 PM

Asking for facts to back up allegations is a symptom of insanity? Oh well, thank for for finally responding. You see the story Ed wrote up about Douglas Foy contradicted itself because it said that Mass withdrew from the RGHGI and that the cap and trade program never happened (and I’m still unclear as to whether carbon caps actually occurred). Here are some key points from an analysis by The Heartland Institute, a conservative/free-marketgroup (July 1, 2004):

Unlike the Kyoto Protocol, Romney’s plan focuses on voluntary initiatives, restricting any mandatory requirements to only a few large industries and the state itself. The plan includes no enforcement mechanism for requiring attainment of the goals.

Some of the most economically punitive measures activist groups frequently propose to reach such goals, such as energy taxes and emission caps, are absent from the plan. It is thus unlikely the state will suffer the economic consequences of capping carbon dioxide emissions.

Romney already has rejected more stringent proposals. An earlier version of the plan obtained by the Boston Globe called for a reduction of greenhouse gases by 75 to 85 percent by 2050, but state officials have backed away from that provision…

State officials who drafted the final plan said there was “no scientific basis” for setting goals as far into the future as 2050 and that current technology would be unable to meet the reductions proposed for 2050…

“It was a consensus view that unless we could prove how we were going to achieve it, which was the whole point of the plan, that we should get on with the near- and midterm goals,” said Douglas Foy, head of Romney’s Office of Commonwealth Development.

In addition to rejecting more stringent proposals, Romney made a special effort to convey that he personally had doubts about alarmist global warming theory, going so far as to attach a letter to the plan’s final version suggesting he remains unconvinced that man-made greenhouse gases are an environmental problem.

“Romney said he was unsure whether climate change is occurring and whether human activity is causing it,” reported the May 7 Environment & Energy Daily.

Indeed, the powerful and influential enviro lobby (like the Union for Concerned Scientists) blasted Romney for his plan. Mitt had to try to balance competing interests in a deeply Blue State. One thing is clear – he has always considered the economic harm enviro policies can cause and made the economy a priority when formulating ideas.

P.S. I do hope though that you don’t mind reducing emissions of Sulphur Dioxide and Mercury – which we can all agree are pollutants (unlike CO2).

Buy Danish on October 29, 2011 at 10:37 AM

She should never have been considered anything but a fringe vanity candidate in the first place. Michele “Tardisil” Bachmann is who you want representing you, Tea Party? If that’s the route you want to take, enjoy your impending decline into obscurity.

Hollowpoint on October 28, 2011

Amen, brother bullet !

Haldol on October 29, 2011 at 11:05 AM

Asking for facts to back up allegations is a symptom of insanity? Oh well, thank for for finally responding.

Buy Danish on October 29, 2011 at 10:37 AM

You’re insane because that information was right there in that thread and has been this whole time you have supposedly been following me around and asking for evidence you already had.

Don’t bother coming to this site when you don’t read the threads or ignore the info which is posted. You’re still trying to resist.

Name one key conservative issue Romney has not played both sides on and has been an advocate for throughout his career.

Daemonocracy on October 29, 2011 at 11:27 AM

You’re insane because that information was right there in that thread and has been this whole time you have supposedly been following me around and asking for evidence you already had.

Don’t bother coming to this site when you don’t read the threads or ignore the info which is posted. You’re still trying to resist.
Daemonocracy on October 29, 2011 at 11:27 AM

I have been looking for specific data to support the claim that Romney’s initiatives (most of which were rescinded by him, but reinstated by Deval Patrick) caused prices to go up. That makes me insane?

The fact is, the info was not at that thread originally and the letter you cite only came in later as an update. I read the thread in its entirety and I questioned the contradictory elements of it, and I see today that Morrissey eventually updated the thread but there was still not a single link provided to back up the claim Romney’s “caps” caused a rise in energy prices (and frankly, I am still having trouble accessing this data. If you have anything other than the letter from Romney’s office which provides a direct link to a rise in energy prices I’d be grateful).

Obviously, energy is a commodity, prices go up and down, and there are many factors which contribute to prices. For example, in Mass, after period of decline prices began to skyrocket in 2001, prior to Romney’s term:

Because of fuel cost increases, Massachusetts regulators have approved rate increases for customers participating under the standard offer. Through 2001, standard offer rates have increased 40 percent or more, depending on the utility. These rate increases will drive up the average retail electricity prices across the State.

Further, this report from the Beacon Hill Institute (which argues against green energy mandates and incentives) concludes that Mass has 25 programs which distort energy prices, but I have no idea who was responsible for each of the individual mandates/incentives. Note too that the Red State of Texas comes in second with 20 mandates and incentives (see Table 4 page 11).

And please, do not tell me not to come to this site. I am one of the most thorough commenters here and contrary to your claim, I don’t “ignore info which is posted”, I “read the threads” and unlike many here, I take the time to read the supporting material provided through links.

Buy Danish on October 29, 2011 at 1:55 PM

This is the kind of stuff that bothers me about her. Even if it’s true, it just makes her look paranoid and small. She really has it in for Perry, she said on Hannity last week that she was the one who came up with the postcard idea and she was “glad he likes my ideas” or something. Again, even if that were true it only makes her look petty.

kg598301 on October 29, 2011 at 2:17 PM

What I do know is faux-conservatives who spout msm talking points to attack conservative candidates are annoying.

peacenprosperity on October 29, 2011 at 7:13 AM

If you are accusing me of the above, I’d say you assume a lot. You need either to read HA more or post more to get a better opinion before making statements that are false.

MB should do the same regarding her constant attack on Gov. Perry.

bluefox on October 29, 2011 at 2:38 PM

kg598301 on October 29, 2011 at 8:27 AM

I agree with your comments. Of course she’s an attack dog for Romney as there is no other way to explain it. Hugs & Kisses, literally for Romney, and constant knives in the back for Gov. Perry.

As much as she talks about Obamacare, she doesn’t have any problem with Romneycare which was the basis for Obamacare. When facts are ignored, there is a reason.

bluefox on October 29, 2011 at 2:44 PM

She’s consistently conservative on both fiscal and social issues, was one of the few who actually said “no” to TARP at the time and knows Obamacare — both the legislation and the fight against it — better than virtually anyone.

She’s idiotic on the issues… not conservative. She damages the tea party brand and the conservative brand with her nonsense.

As long as she wants to run she should stay in the race but let’s not validate her crazy crap as being somehow conservative.

lexhamfox on October 30, 2011 at 1:57 AM