Michele Bachmann running for president in 2012

[lakhota]

Michele Bachmann 2012: Congresswoman Running For President (VIDEO)

ST. PAUL, Minn. — Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, an outspoken Republican with close ties to the tea party, announced Monday that she is running for president, a candidacy that could further shake up a volatile fight for the GOP nomination.

The first female contender to enter the 2012 race, Bachmann announced her bid during a Republican presidential debate in New Hampshire. The third-term Minnesota congresswoman has been leaning heavily toward a run over the past few months, visiting early primary states, raising money and railing against President Barack Obama.

"We cannot risk giving President Obama four more years to dismantle our nation. We must act now," Bachmann said in a fundraising letter sent within an hour of her entrance. "That's why I've made the decision to get in this race."

More: www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/13/michele-bachmann-2012-president_n_876392.html

[NoMoreLunacy]

Who do you think will play MB on SNL?

[SweetVirginia]

Jun 13, 2011 22:41:40 GMT -5 @lakhota said:

Michele Bachmann 2012: Congresswoman Running For President (VIDEO)



"We cannot risk giving President Obama four more years to dismantle our nation. We must act now," Bachmann said in a fundraising letter sent within an hour of her entrance. "That's why I've made the decision to get in this race."

The people she is preaching to, are the exact same people who voted for GWB and RISKED the dismantling of our nation under Bush's regime by voting for Bush not once but TWICE!!! Even though Bush had out spent all presidents combined to that point, and had squandered the surplus he inherited. These are the same people she is pandering to. She should do quite well among them.

[lakhota]

Jun 13, 2011 22:43:01 GMT -5 NoMoreLunacy said:

Who do you think will play MB on SNL?

Amy Winehouse...?

[NoMoreLunacy]

Tina Fey and Sarah Palin were a match made in heaven. Amy Winehouse and MB? Not so much.

[hello fromWarsaw]

Christine Weig would be good. No Palin tho- she's a gem ;D

[lakhota]

Well, if Amy Winehouse and Octomom are unavailable, I suppose Kristen Wiig could nail it.

[hello fromWarsaw]

I believe she already has, actually- the whole schtick is she's always looking at the wrong camera or out into space...

[cereb]

Jun 13, 2011 22:51:37 GMT -5 @lakhota said:

Jun 13, 2011 22:43:01 GMT -5 NoMoreLunacy said:

Who do you think will play MB on SNL?

Amy Winehouse...?

That was awesome!

[lakhota]

Yep, I know Kristen Wiig already has it locked up. She's already nailed Bachmann in couple delightful skits. The problem with Bachmann is that she isn't funny like Palin - just crazy.

[lakhota]

Thank you, cereb.

[NoMoreLunacy]

Jun 13, 2011 23:40:47 GMT -5 @lakhota said:

Yep, I know Kristen Wiig already has it locked up. She's already nailed Bachmann in couple delightful skits. The problem with Bachmann is that she isn't funny like Palin - just crazy.

That works!

Thank you lord for giving us the bounty of Republican Presidential candidates who are barrels of fun ...

[privateinvestor]

Michele Bachmann 2012: Congresswoman Running For President


This has to be the biggest farce since Dan Quayle ran for president...but at least Bachmann can spell, I think??

[Mkitty is pro kitty]

This has to be the biggest farce since Dan Quayle ran for president

I think Trump (watch the Apprentice!), Palin (watch my reality show!), and Gingrich (Buy my books so I can pay off Tifanys!) has him beat. If I made a comic about 2012 Republican candidates, I'd call it The Farce Side.

Who do you think will play MB on SNL?

How about she just plays herself? It can be done in 4 easy steps:

1. Invite her to some fake anti- rally (Note how Republicans can only be against things and not for anything, especially problem solving)
2. Turn the microphone on
3. Ask her any question about American history or the Constitution
4. Success! Instant comedic gold!

[marshabar1]

Will any conservatives on the board defend her? Not me.

I felt she was all about herself in the debate. I guess it's good to define one's candidacy but during a debate on issues it was a little disgusting to see her positioning herself and promoting herself with little attention to issues.

I'll go to bat for Pawlenty for now.

Sad to say there are no bright and shining stars.

On either side.

[Deleted]

"We cannot risk giving President Obama four more years to dismantle our nation.

I totally agree.

The people she is preaching to, are the exact same people who voted for GWB and RISKED the dismantling of our nation under Bush's regime by voting for Bush not once but TWICE!!! Even though Bush had out spent all presidents combined to that point, and had squandered the surplus he inherited.

Actually President Bush didn't "dismantle" our nation, or try to. He worked within the framework of our government. President Obama is trying to "change" our form of government. Big difference. Also I don't think President Bush has outspent President Obama & I'm sure that he certainly didn't outspend all presidents combined including President Obama.

[floridayankee]

Jun 14, 2011 10:10:37 GMT -5 @marshabar1 said:

I'll go to bat for Pawlenty for now.

Sad to say there are no bright and shining stars.

On either side.

Once again, it rolls back on Cognitive Dissonance: State of psychological tension arising from incompatibility among a person's attitudes, behavior, beliefs, and/or knowledge, or when a choice has to be made between equally attractive or repulsive alternatives.

IE, it appears once again like this will be a popularity contest between same old entrenched stuffed suit politicians instead of choosing the best "man" for the job. The 2012 election will likely come down to the "lesser of the two evils"....resulting in a heaping spoonful of buyers remorse.

Will it be Dumb or will it be Dumber...you decide.

[privateinvestor]

"We cannot risk giving President Obama four more years to dismantle our nation.


I don't think he deserves one more year to dismantle our nation..let alone another four years of hope and promise that is about as meaningless as his obamacare

[swamp]

Jun 14, 2011 10:10:37 GMT -5 @marshabar1 said:

I felt she was all about herself in the debate. I guess it's good to define one's candidacy but during a debate on issues it was a little disgusting to see her positioning herself and promoting herself with little attention to issues.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who saw that.

[marshabar1]

Jun 14, 2011 10:21:04 GMT -5 floridayankee said:

Jun 14, 2011 10:10:37 GMT -5 @marshabar1 said:

I'll go to bat for Pawlenty for now.

Sad to say there are no bright and shining stars.

On either side.

Once again, it rolls back on Cognitive Dissonance: State of psychological tension arising from incompatibility among a person's attitudes, behavior, beliefs, and/or knowledge, or when a choice has to be made between equally attractive or repulsive alternatives.

IE, it appears once again like this will be a popularity contest between same old entrenched stuffed suit politicians instead of choosing the best "man" for the job. The 2012 election will likely come down to the "lesser of the two evils"....resulting in a heaping spoonful of buyers remorse.

Will it be Dumb or will it be Dumber...you decide.

It'll take a miracle.

[privateinvestor]

Will any conservatives on the board defend her? Not me.

I think Michele Bachmann is a very funny lady but we don't need any more comedians in the White House...as our President or Vice President...

According to highly unreliable sources she wants to be the VP on a ticket with Romney or with Palin....

[handyman2]

Well the left media will have a different female to kick around this time. Bet they are searching for her e-mails as we speak.

[lakhota]

Jun 14, 2011 16:40:51 GMT -5 @toughtimes said:

I think a rock should play Ms. Bachman. She is certainly as dumb as a stone.

Good choice!

[NoMoreLunacy]

Where do Republicans get these crazies from anyway? First Palin, now this?

[NoMoreLunacy]

Are you sure you were just not jealous because Palin is supposedly a 10? [Disclaimer: I would not do her even after downing a bottle of whiskey.]

[Value Buy]

Jun 14, 2011 10:10:37 GMT -5 @marshabar1 said:

Will any conservatives on the board defend her? Not me.

I felt she was all about herself in the debate. I guess it's good to define one's candidacy but during a debate on issues it was a little disgusting to see her positioning herself and promoting herself with little attention to issues.

I'll go to bat for Pawlenty for now.

Sad to say there are no bright and shining stars.

On either side.

I thought she did a pretty good job. She has had some baggage with bad statements in the past, and she showed a new improved version of herself in this test. Puts her a little ahead of Sarah Palin in 2008 when Sarah continued to shoot her toes off everytime she opened her mouth.
She has a major problem in only being a Congressperson. When was the last time we elected a Congress(man) person President?

[cme1201]

From the House of Represenatives I am not sure, from the Senate 2008.

[NoMoreLunacy]

Jun 14, 2011 18:03:39 GMT -5 @toughtimes said:

Being a heterosexual woman, it would be hard for me to understand what might turn on a man in relation to her. I suppose if you like naughty librarians...

She talks like a 5 year old. That's a major turn off. Also I have a hunch she would be pretty uptight in bed.

[SweetVirginia]

Jun 14, 2011 10:15:37 GMT -5 @oldtex said:

"We cannot risk giving President Obama four more years to dismantle our nation.

I totally agree.

The people she is preaching to, are the exact same people who voted for GWB and RISKED the dismantling of our nation under Bush's regime by voting for Bush not once but TWICE!!! Even though Bush had out spent all presidents combined to that point, and had squandered the surplus he inherited.

Actually President Bush didn't "dismantle" our nation, or try to. He worked within the framework of our government. President Obama is trying to "change" our form of government. Big difference. Also I don't think President Bush has outspent President Obama & I'm sure that he certainly didn't outspend all presidents combined including President Obama.

Re-read my post, I said that Bush outspent all presidents combined to that point. Bush was a big spender, as was the republican controlled congress from 2001 to 2006, which rubber stamped all of Bush's spending requests. And let us not forget that Bush did not put the cost of both wars on the budget records. Obama does.

[lakhota]

And let us not forget that Bush did not put the cost of both wars on the budget records. Obama does.

Amen!

GOP budget cuts: Everything old is new again

Funny how the right wing simply won’t acknowledge and admit that one of the primary reasons why Barack Obama’s budget is so much larger is because George W. Bush never included any costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in his budgets. During Bush’s term, all war expenses were “supplemental,” “discretionary” and “emergency” funding allocations … not one dime of it was ever budgeted – and they were in addition to the established Defense budget.

Now Obama has added them to the direct budget and the GOP is acting surprised and giving us DeNiro-esque performances of faux-outrage.

You remember how the wars were going to be paid for according to Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and the rest of the “we’ll never sleep until we get bin Laden” crowd, don’t you? “Iraqi oil will pay for it all.” Then gas in America topped $4 a gallon, we heard constant reports of oil shortages, and Bush wrote checks for $700 Billion in 2003, $813 Billion in 2004, $907 Billion in 2005 and more than $700 Billion in each of 2006, 2007 and 2008. And that didn’t include the roughly $10 Billion per month that went to “supplemental emergency appropriations” to accompany the “emergency funding” and “supplemental appropriations” that the war budgets were defined as by BushCo. And every single dime of it was … *gasp* … BORROWED from the Chinese and Saudis and/or DEFICIT-SPENT.

Then Obama comes along and decides, “Hey, it’s time to stop hiding the cost of these wars from the people who are paying for them. We’re going to put the cost right up front, in plain sight, and include it in the annual budgets.” And Republicans recoiled in faux-horror, with faux-indignation and feigning faux-ignorance that the costs had been there all along.

The Iraq and Afghanistan war costs are not the only reason for increases in Obama’s budget, there is plenty of bloat and extraneous entitlement spending going on that needs to be cut. But adding the costs of the wars is certainly the biggest reason – and by *FAR* dwarfs the expenditures requested for Social Security (which would be self-sufficient if Congress hadn’t treated it like a rainy day fund for the past 40 years), Unemployment, WIC, Community Development and Food Stamps. And as for Republican spending cuts, isn’t it funny how there are significant slashes to every single domestic, social and assistance program, but the GOP is adamant that not one dime of the defense line item budget, defense contracts, energy contracts or Congressional expenses are on the table or even open to discussion as far as Republicans in Washington are concerned.

The GOP response to Obama’s budget:
•Social Security benefits? Cut ‘em.
•Veterans Administration funding? Cut it … for the sixth time.
•Department of Education? Gut it.
•Community programs? Slash ‘em! 50% isn’t enough.
•Arts funding? Get rid of it! That’ll teach those smarmy “Sesame Street” liberals to make fun of Fox News!
•Defense spending? How *dare* you even suggest such a thing!?!? Obama’s wars are going on!
•Corporate subsidies? Sacrilege!
•End the Bush tax cuts? Why do you hate America?
•Strangulative federal oversight? Never!
•Congressional perks and benefits? How are we supposed to get and keep the “best and brightest”?
•Jobs? Not now! We’re too busy focusing on the budget!
•Now … let’s get back to abolishing abortion and the definition of rape …

garystlawrence.wordpress.com/2011/02/14/gop-budget-cuts-everything-old-is-new-again/