|
Title: Missing Michelle Post by: Howey on May 30, 2013, 11:56:28 am As we all should know by now, Michelle Bachmann has decided not to run for reelection next year.
*sniff* Here's someone (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/michele-bachmann-a-fact-checkers-dream/2013/05/29/1481a6b8-c85e-11e2-9245-773c0123c027_blog.html) who will actually miss her! Quote The announcement that Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) is not seeking reelection will leave the Capitol a much less interesting place to fact check. As one of our colleagues put it, “The entire fact checking industry may have to hold a national day of mourning.” Bachmann is not just fast and loose with the facts; she is consistently and unapologetically so. No other lawmaker earned as high a percentage of Four-Pinocchio ratings as Bachmann — and she earned an average of more than Three Pinocchios as a presidential candidate. Thus she provided a window into the no-holds-barred politics that has come to characterize modern-day Washington. Just this year, she has earned four Four-Pinocchio ratings. Below are links to those columns — as well as a round-up of her worst campaign-related comments. Click on the headline to read the full column. Bachmann claimed that President Obama spent $1.4 billion on perks in the White House. But most of this money was for Secret Service protection and helicopters — and Obama’s spending appeared to be lower than that for George W. Bush. (http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/6991/pinocchio4.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/838/pinocchio4.jpg/) ‘70 percent of food stamps go to bureaucrats’ Bachmann claimed that 70 percent of the food stamp budget went to Washington bureaucrats. This turned out to be an extreme misinterpretation of the data. The actual amount of the food stamp budget that goes to the “bureaucrats” who manage the program is less than one-third of 1 percent. Even counting all administrative expenses only adds up to 6 percent. (http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/6991/pinocchio4.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/838/pinocchio4.jpg/) ‘I voted against the sequester bill because of cuts to the poor’ This was an odd bit of revisionist history. She did vote against the law that established the sequester, but because she said it did not cut spending enough. She began to express concerns about the impact on the poor only after the sequester kicked in. (http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/6991/pinocchio4.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/838/pinocchio4.jpg/) ‘The most personal, sensitive, intimate, private health-care information is in the hands of the IRS’ Bachmann leaped onto the bash-the-IRS bandwagon with this false claim that the tax agency would have control of personal health-care information as a result of President Obama’s health-care law. But no data would be stored in any sort of database, as she claimed. (http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/6991/pinocchio4.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/838/pinocchio4.jpg/) ‘I don’t think I said anything inaccurate in the debates’ After Bachmann patted herself on the back for her debate performance, we produced this round-up of her major-league errors. Title: Re: Missing Michelle Post by: ekg on May 30, 2013, 12:49:32 pm I wonder how much heritage foundation offered to pay her to come work for them?
then again, she'll probably pull a Palin and start her own 501.4(c) and bilk her followers out of millions.. good riddance to bad trash. Title: Re: Missing Michelle Post by: uselesslegs on May 30, 2013, 01:06:35 pm She did such a great disservice to the body politics. We're still stuck in extremes, but she was the queen of them. I hope now that she'll be gone, that all of the koo-koo light she was absorbing, will now start shining a bit more brightly on the other fringe koo-koo's so they can be seen as well for who they truly are.
When a crazy asshole can point to Bachmann to get the attention off him...you know that's quite the helping of crazy she kept hoarding. Title: Re: Missing Michelle Post by: reverend_darth on May 30, 2013, 01:23:52 pm then again, she'll probably pull a Palin and start her own 501.4(c) and bilk her followers out of millions.. Of course she will and it will work because she's reasonably attractive, and bat shit right wing "tell them what they want to hear" fucking nuts, Just like Palin. If they looked like Madeleine Albright they'd starve to death which is an interesting commentary of the country in and of itself. It's fuckin "show biz" and we all want to see Brad & Angelina, not some mud fish bastards. But is it really bilking when morons throw money at you? My only bitch, just like with churches, is they don't have to pay tax on it. That's fuckin insane! Really want to reduce the deficit? Tax fucking churches! Title: Re: Missing Michelle Post by: reverend_darth on May 30, 2013, 04:00:04 pm What a surprise. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/29/michele-bachmann-legislative-accomplishments_n_3354476.html
Title: Re: Missing Michelle Post by: Howey on May 30, 2013, 04:47:57 pm What a surprise. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/29/michele-bachmann-legislative-accomplishments_n_3354476.html lol. Title: Re: Missing Michelle Post by: ekg on May 30, 2013, 09:00:29 pm Of course she will and it will work because she's reasonably attractive, and bat shit right wing "tell them what they want to hear" fucking nuts, Just like Palin. If they looked like Madeleine Albright they'd starve to death which is an interesting commentary of the country in and of itself. It's fuckin "show biz" and we all want to see Brad & Angelina, not some mud fish bastards. But is it really bilking when morons throw money at you? My only bitch, just like with churches, is they don't have to pay tax on it. That's fuckin insane! Really want to reduce the deficit? Tax fucking churches! you know I still can't look at Albright without seeing the vagina neck, asshole. HA! |