OK, it actually is a surprise that Michele Bachmann dropped out of the GOP race. I didn't think she had that much brains, or humility. Weirder yet is the Palinistas telling her to drop out, so as to unite social conservatives.
More on how others, from James Dobson on, are looking for the anti-Romney, here.
Semi-surprised she'd endorse Ron Paul instead of Rick Santorum. See, while Paul is a small-government type, AND, he's pro-life, and he's not as pro-legalization on drugs as Paul-tards make him out to be, his social conservativism ends entirely at water's edge. To riff on Pat Buchanan, Ron Paul is NOT in "the Amen corner" of American Protestant millennialists writing blank checks to Israel.
Santorum and Rick Perry both are. After New Hampshire, the GOP heads south, so Perry still has a limping chance. Both have better chances than Paul, long-term. That said, it would be fun to see him bolt the party again, and this time square off against Gary Johnson for the Libertarian nod. Both are libertarian nutbars, but with nuanced differences, including that Johnson's not so anti-Fed nor such a goldbug, nor a fellator of Austrian school economics in general.
Back to the GOP, though. Will Paul struggle in New Hampshire? Will he then fall flat in South Carolina? And, can Santorum "do Southern"? Can Newt win in S.C. himself? Or will he rather, as Mother Jones hinted, try to blow up the GOP as a last act of petulance? Stay tuned.
That includes you, Doug Christie, Mitch Daniels, et al.
But Kevin Drum probably has it right By Super Tuesday, it could well be just Romney and Santorum, with the Mittster coming near to locking up the nomination on that primary date or even going over the top.
A skeptical leftist's, or post-capitalist's, or eco-socialist's blog, including skepticism about leftism (and related things under other labels), but even more about other issues of politics. Free of duopoly and minor party ties. Also, a skeptical look at Gnu Atheism, religion, social sciences, more.
Note: Labels can help describe people but should never be used to pin them to an anthill.
As seen at Washington Babylon and other fine establishments
Showing posts with label Bachmann (Michelle). Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bachmann (Michelle). Show all posts
January 05, 2012
December 10, 2011
#Whatsinyourwallet Mitt? Maybe more than the #DNC
This summary is not available. Please
click here to view the post.
November 09, 2011
The worst GOP debate yet
Let's skip Rick Perry's amnesia, whether from alcohol, pain meds or just being an idiot.
The GOP debate Nov. 9 was the worst so far of the ones I followed.
How bad? I actually agreed with Michele Bachmann on something, namely that Obama's wrong to continue to have a Social Security tax cut. When that, Rick Perry's amnesia and PizzaMan's 9-9-9 chorus are the highlights of the nigh, it's bad.
And, speaking of 9-9-9, ave you heard about the new version of the #9-9-9 plan from #HermanCain? Nine women, nine lawsuits, nine settlement deals. Yeah, not the best joke, either.
But, let's look at Tricky Ricky, since many are arguing (including wingers) that he's now officially toast:
I've said for some time now that his money plus his many other issues had given Perry the potential to be a new Phil Gramm, and he's getting closer and closer to that point.
As for GOP candidates clamoring that we could be just like Europe if we don't fix the deficit, tosh. Romney and Huntsman actually know better, so they're pandering. The rest of the GOP field probably actually believes that, so they're idiots.
The always-readable Gail Collins weighs in, saying every candidate played to type. Yep, and that's part of the problem. (That, and no Gary Johnson on the dais.)
And, there were plenty of whoppers being told (along with Romney's flip-flops, speaking of playing to type.) And, per the comment below, I think of Steve Miller: "Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right."
The GOP debate Nov. 9 was the worst so far of the ones I followed.
How bad? I actually agreed with Michele Bachmann on something, namely that Obama's wrong to continue to have a Social Security tax cut. When that, Rick Perry's amnesia and PizzaMan's 9-9-9 chorus are the highlights of the nigh, it's bad.
And, speaking of 9-9-9, ave you heard about the new version of the #9-9-9 plan from #HermanCain? Nine women, nine lawsuits, nine settlement deals. Yeah, not the best joke, either.
But, let's look at Tricky Ricky, since many are arguing (including wingers) that he's now officially toast:
I've said for some time now that his money plus his many other issues had given Perry the potential to be a new Phil Gramm, and he's getting closer and closer to that point.
As for GOP candidates clamoring that we could be just like Europe if we don't fix the deficit, tosh. Romney and Huntsman actually know better, so they're pandering. The rest of the GOP field probably actually believes that, so they're idiots.
The always-readable Gail Collins weighs in, saying every candidate played to type. Yep, and that's part of the problem. (That, and no Gary Johnson on the dais.)
And, there were plenty of whoppers being told (along with Romney's flip-flops, speaking of playing to type.) And, per the comment below, I think of Steve Miller: "Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right."
September 23, 2011
Wingnuts, real world agree: GOP debate, Perry sucked
First, there's the booing of the gay solider. Anybody with a conscience, including perhaps one GOP Congresswoman, agrees that was just ridiculous.
Then there was the debate itself. Wingnuts agree it sucked, too. Erick Erickson thinks Herman Cain won and Jon Huntsman did well! Whoa, Erick, don't sprain your brain slouching toward non-wingnuttery. The Weekly Standard also slouches toward non-wingnuttery, reprinting a GOPer email that says, "We all sounded like crazy people."
And, it agrees that Rick Perry sucked:
Per many others, I think the moment where Perry tried to nail Romney as a flip-flopper and wound up making George W. Bush sound intelligent was the key:
Even Faux's soft bigotry of low Perry expectations was underwhelmed.
Oh, and Perry told another lie related to the Gardasil vaccine.
I'm disappointed that nobody hammered Perry more on illegal immigration; I guess the new study of how it's been the only true part of the "Texas miracle" didn't get out in time. Or else, non-nutbars actually aren't so different on illegal immigration from him.
Michelle Bachmann, who had the most to gain from a Perry meltdown? Per this story, via Ed Brayton, she appears to be toast. It's still a two-person race, with wingnuts not liking Romney and Perry becoming ever more clear to non-Texans as being a nut, but not a true tea party nut.
Weekly Standard is still pushing for Chris Christie, it's getting that bad. And, the time isn't that urgent yet. Christie would be smart to avoid Iowa, anyway, and get a late-starting campaign focused on New Hampshire and Romney.
Then there was the debate itself. Wingnuts agree it sucked, too. Erick Erickson thinks Herman Cain won and Jon Huntsman did well! Whoa, Erick, don't sprain your brain slouching toward non-wingnuttery. The Weekly Standard also slouches toward non-wingnuttery, reprinting a GOPer email that says, "We all sounded like crazy people."
And, it agrees that Rick Perry sucked:
But no front-runner in a presidential field has ever, we imagine, had as weak a showing as Rick Perry. It was close to a disqualifying two hours for him.http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/278127/my-quick-take-rich-lowryNo surprise to those of us who know that he's coasted with weak opposition in general elections, and that in the last primarily, a light-on-experience, light-on-brains Debra Medina actually skewered him a few times.
Per many others, I think the moment where Perry tried to nail Romney as a flip-flopper and wound up making George W. Bush sound intelligent was the key:
Even Faux's soft bigotry of low Perry expectations was underwhelmed.
Oh, and Perry told another lie related to the Gardasil vaccine.
I'm disappointed that nobody hammered Perry more on illegal immigration; I guess the new study of how it's been the only true part of the "Texas miracle" didn't get out in time. Or else, non-nutbars actually aren't so different on illegal immigration from him.
Michelle Bachmann, who had the most to gain from a Perry meltdown? Per this story, via Ed Brayton, she appears to be toast. It's still a two-person race, with wingnuts not liking Romney and Perry becoming ever more clear to non-Texans as being a nut, but not a true tea party nut.
Weekly Standard is still pushing for Chris Christie, it's getting that bad. And, the time isn't that urgent yet. Christie would be smart to avoid Iowa, anyway, and get a late-starting campaign focused on New Hampshire and Romney.
Labels:
2012 presidential election,
Bachmann (Michelle),
Huntsman (Jon),
Perry (Rick),
Romney (Mitt)
September 17, 2011
#RickPerry: I was for TARP b4 I was against it
Ohhhhh, this ought to be a fun one. A conservative Iowa radio news/talk show host sent a reporter to ask Perry about why he apparently supported TARP in 2008 . And he denied it, and she pressed him.
And now, the fun gets funner. West Virginia's pseudo-Democrat Sen. Joe Manchin, the governor of the Mountaintop Removal State in 2008, claims the letter he and Perry co-sent to Congress then was only urging that Congress do something and wasn't designed to support TARP . Considering Manchin is almost as big a general liar and snake-like politician in particular as Tricky Ricky, this of course carries no water. If Perry somehow gets the GOP nod, I have no doubt Manchin will officially endorse him.
Here is the original AP story on the letter. Given that TARP was coming up for a second vote that night, that GOP partisanship had sunk the original version, and both Bush and biz leaders were specifically urging passage of TARP, it's clear Perry and Manchin are lying like hell.
And, tea partiers hate TARP even mre than illegal immigration, so this could be a problem. Unless Perry recovers fast, this helps Bachmann a LOT. Romney, not much. He's not insane enough to attack TARP. Pizza Man Cain, Ron Paul and "I'm So Sexy for My Name" Santorum may pick up tea partier bits and pieces, depending on how they push this issue AND try to find any leverage with Bachmann.
Palin? She's out, due to Joe McGinness' book; per my review, many tea partiers won't accept her having a fling with a black man (sorry, Pizza Man Cain). That's even worse than snorting coke or cheating on your hubby.
So, we're kind of back at the place where it might be Romney's election to lose. Or, where there's still a hankering for somebody new to enter the race, as late as it is in terms of how today's political world operates.
And now, the fun gets funner. West Virginia's pseudo-Democrat Sen. Joe Manchin, the governor of the Mountaintop Removal State in 2008, claims the letter he and Perry co-sent to Congress then was only urging that Congress do something and wasn't designed to support TARP . Considering Manchin is almost as big a general liar and snake-like politician in particular as Tricky Ricky, this of course carries no water. If Perry somehow gets the GOP nod, I have no doubt Manchin will officially endorse him.
Here is the original AP story on the letter. Given that TARP was coming up for a second vote that night, that GOP partisanship had sunk the original version, and both Bush and biz leaders were specifically urging passage of TARP, it's clear Perry and Manchin are lying like hell.
And, tea partiers hate TARP even mre than illegal immigration, so this could be a problem. Unless Perry recovers fast, this helps Bachmann a LOT. Romney, not much. He's not insane enough to attack TARP. Pizza Man Cain, Ron Paul and "I'm So Sexy for My Name" Santorum may pick up tea partier bits and pieces, depending on how they push this issue AND try to find any leverage with Bachmann.
Palin? She's out, due to Joe McGinness' book; per my review, many tea partiers won't accept her having a fling with a black man (sorry, Pizza Man Cain). That's even worse than snorting coke or cheating on your hubby.
So, we're kind of back at the place where it might be Romney's election to lose. Or, where there's still a hankering for somebody new to enter the race, as late as it is in terms of how today's political world operates.
Labels:
Bachmann (Michelle),
Paul (Ron),
Perry (Rick),
Romney (Mitt),
TARP,
tea partiers
September 13, 2011
Rick Perry (and W) meet Phil Gramm and John Connally
Dear Texans, GOPers and Americans: For a George W. Bush or George H.W. Bush who has coasted to the GOP nomination on a boatload of money (and Texas tough talk, etc. in the case of W., to extend this analogy), there's also been a Phil Gramm and a John Connolly before him. So, Rick Perry? Nothing's guaranteed. Nothing at all.
The second in a troika of GOP presidential debates shows that, too. I don't totally agree with Steve Kornacki's debate on the Social Security issue. While it didn't play well last night for Mittens, that's because that was a Tea Party Express, not just tea partier, debate. Remember the southern GOP old fart who said in 2010, to the "government," that he was warning it to "keep your hands off my Medicare"? While quasi-astroturfed groups like Tea Party Express have plenty of younger faces, actual lower-case tea partiers are older, as well as whiter, than generic Republicans. This issue will play well in Florida, and in conservative but non-nutbar states that are older, like Pennsylvania.
That said, Kornacki nails that the Gardasil vaccine push (and Perry got $30K, not $16K, from Merck) was red meat to TPers wary of big gummint. More importantly, it was red meat for Michele Bachmann, keeping her in the race, or getting her more back in it. If she can finish within 10 points of the winner of Iowa, undercut Perry enough to give Mittens a majority in New Hampshire, or to help Ron Paul finish ahead of Perry ... she might pick up some Southern support. Let's say Nikki Haley, South Carolina's gov, endorses her, not Tricky Ricky? Perry's possibly out of the race.
The debate also shows, within the GOP, that Tricky Ricky is vulnerable on illegal immigration. Mittens came close to the truth here, noting that this might be part of Perry's "Texas miracle." But, he didn't go far enough.
To me, it seems clear that the Perry who really likes illegal immigration is Bob Perry, to build his cheap homes. Bachmann would be the best to make that tie-in, and then call it "socialism."
Anyway, Rick Perry's money and posturing don't guarantee a thing.
The second in a troika of GOP presidential debates shows that, too. I don't totally agree with Steve Kornacki's debate on the Social Security issue. While it didn't play well last night for Mittens, that's because that was a Tea Party Express, not just tea partier, debate. Remember the southern GOP old fart who said in 2010, to the "government," that he was warning it to "keep your hands off my Medicare"? While quasi-astroturfed groups like Tea Party Express have plenty of younger faces, actual lower-case tea partiers are older, as well as whiter, than generic Republicans. This issue will play well in Florida, and in conservative but non-nutbar states that are older, like Pennsylvania.
That said, Kornacki nails that the Gardasil vaccine push (and Perry got $30K, not $16K, from Merck) was red meat to TPers wary of big gummint. More importantly, it was red meat for Michele Bachmann, keeping her in the race, or getting her more back in it. If she can finish within 10 points of the winner of Iowa, undercut Perry enough to give Mittens a majority in New Hampshire, or to help Ron Paul finish ahead of Perry ... she might pick up some Southern support. Let's say Nikki Haley, South Carolina's gov, endorses her, not Tricky Ricky? Perry's possibly out of the race.
The debate also shows, within the GOP, that Tricky Ricky is vulnerable on illegal immigration. Mittens came close to the truth here, noting that this might be part of Perry's "Texas miracle." But, he didn't go far enough.
To me, it seems clear that the Perry who really likes illegal immigration is Bob Perry, to build his cheap homes. Bachmann would be the best to make that tie-in, and then call it "socialism."
Anyway, Rick Perry's money and posturing don't guarantee a thing.
September 04, 2011
What price for #SarahPalin to make GOP endorsement?
No, seriously.
We know she's not running. The New Hampshireman who asks if she's running for president or selling books either should know the answer, should know his rhetorical question is only shouting into the wind, or reflects the low political IQ necessary to being a political activist.
That said, her claim to be the strongest defender of what Politico calls the "tea partier wing of the Republican Party" and most of us call "the majority of the Republican Party" says that she's trying to play king- or queenmaker. If that doesn't, this does:
So, what's her next option?
Selling her endorsement, of course.
No, seriously.
Now, it wouldn't necessarily be a cash payout.
Perry, Bachmann or whomever would want to get the nod from her might be required to pay an "appearance fee" on Palin's Faux News show. Or pay Palin to do an infomercial. Or hire daughter Bristol, the nonprofit abstinence genius, either to work in the campaign or to be nominated as Secretary of Health and Human Services should Perry or Bachmann win. (OK, that one isn't realistic.)
Seriously.
If Palin doesn't run for president, I give you 50-50 odds she tries to sell her endorsement in some way. Now, she may not be successful; that's a different story. But, 50-50 odds says she'll try.
We know she's not running. The New Hampshireman who asks if she's running for president or selling books either should know the answer, should know his rhetorical question is only shouting into the wind, or reflects the low political IQ necessary to being a political activist.
That said, her claim to be the strongest defender of what Politico calls the "tea partier wing of the Republican Party" and most of us call "the majority of the Republican Party" says that she's trying to play king- or queenmaker. If that doesn't, this does:
In what could be seen subtly contrasting herself against the announced candidates in the Republican field — especially Texas Gov. Rick Perry and Rep. Michele Bachmann, who are both mounting their campaigns on appeals to the same kinds of voters with whom Palin resonates most — she slung an attack at the Republican candidates who “raise mammoth amounts of cash.”So, Palin wants to expand her own "mammoth amounts of cash," surely. And, as a quasi-potential political candidate, she's been written off by so many of the "elite" that she can't do that.
“We need to ask them, too: What, if anything, do their donors expect in return for their investments?” She noted gleefully, “I don’t play that game, either, of hiring expert political advisers just so they’ll say something good about me on TV.”
So, what's her next option?
Selling her endorsement, of course.
No, seriously.
Now, it wouldn't necessarily be a cash payout.
Perry, Bachmann or whomever would want to get the nod from her might be required to pay an "appearance fee" on Palin's Faux News show. Or pay Palin to do an infomercial. Or hire daughter Bristol, the nonprofit abstinence genius, either to work in the campaign or to be nominated as Secretary of Health and Human Services should Perry or Bachmann win. (OK, that one isn't realistic.)
Seriously.
If Palin doesn't run for president, I give you 50-50 odds she tries to sell her endorsement in some way. Now, she may not be successful; that's a different story. But, 50-50 odds says she'll try.
September 03, 2011
#RickPerry'sTexasMiracle - #Romney to fight back
In a mix of "chess match" plus actual strategy discussion news analysis, the New York Times reports Mitt Romney is ready to take on Rick Perry on three issues: immigration, jobs creation and time in government.
The former makes sense. With the possible exceptions of Jon Huntsman and the one true libertarian in the race (sit DOWN, you Paultards), Gary Johnson, Perry's an outlier on this issue.
That also said, any Texas progressive with brains knows Rick Perry's OK with illegal immigration because his No. 1 campaign donor, Bob Perry, likes the cheap labor to build those cheap suburban homes.
The second one? Given income inequality, plus the barely-legal kickbacks of sorts of Perry's enterprise fund, the Mittster isn't going to be the only GOPer asking questions. The story said that Bachmann is doing a study course on Perry's record. (Is the briefing paper monosyllabic?)
That said, the third one is interesting, and one I hadn't thought of yet. Especially with tea party types being so down on government in general, attacking Perry for, in essence, being a "government lifer" could gain some traction. Romney's been out of government for a while; Bachmann's not been in, on a full-time basis, for very long. Huntsman's out. Newt's out. And Perry spent pretty much a decade in the Lege before running for ag commissioner, so the "lifer" argument has merit.
Next? Wednesday's debate. Tis true that Perry ducked debates in the 2010 general election (and 2006), but couldn't in the primary. The person there for a Bachmann to study is neither Kay Bailey Cheerleader nor Perry, but Debra Medina. If Bachmann wants to do some appealing to tea party true believers, the script is already in place; it just needs some expansion and polishing up.
Also? One thing not yet on the GOP opposition radar, but that they could easily find if they went back to 2006 is the Trans Texas Corridor. That's a big "big government" issue to hang on Perry.
The former makes sense. With the possible exceptions of Jon Huntsman and the one true libertarian in the race (sit DOWN, you Paultards), Gary Johnson, Perry's an outlier on this issue.
That also said, any Texas progressive with brains knows Rick Perry's OK with illegal immigration because his No. 1 campaign donor, Bob Perry, likes the cheap labor to build those cheap suburban homes.
The second one? Given income inequality, plus the barely-legal kickbacks of sorts of Perry's enterprise fund, the Mittster isn't going to be the only GOPer asking questions. The story said that Bachmann is doing a study course on Perry's record. (Is the briefing paper monosyllabic?)
That said, the third one is interesting, and one I hadn't thought of yet. Especially with tea party types being so down on government in general, attacking Perry for, in essence, being a "government lifer" could gain some traction. Romney's been out of government for a while; Bachmann's not been in, on a full-time basis, for very long. Huntsman's out. Newt's out. And Perry spent pretty much a decade in the Lege before running for ag commissioner, so the "lifer" argument has merit.
Next? Wednesday's debate. Tis true that Perry ducked debates in the 2010 general election (and 2006), but couldn't in the primary. The person there for a Bachmann to study is neither Kay Bailey Cheerleader nor Perry, but Debra Medina. If Bachmann wants to do some appealing to tea party true believers, the script is already in place; it just needs some expansion and polishing up.
Also? One thing not yet on the GOP opposition radar, but that they could easily find if they went back to 2006 is the Trans Texas Corridor. That's a big "big government" issue to hang on Perry.
August 28, 2011
Douthat - at best, half right about the GOP and Xn right
Ross Douthat says that journalists should look at claims of Rick Perry's or Michele Bachmann's religious dominionism, or whatever, with the same eye as claims about Barack Obama allegedly palling around with socialists.
Well, wrong on half, and the half-right portion is itself only half right. Let me explain.
Douthat is right that, to some degree, some GOP wingers pander to the religious right. He cites Rick Perry and the cervical cancer vaccine pandering to Merck even in the face of outcry from Christian rightists and others. But, he ignores, even while citing the diversity of the Christian right, that its "success gospel" subset would be perfectly OK with pandering to big business. He also gives little more than lip service to the "What's the Matter with Kansas" issue of many winger GOP politicians pandering to the Christian right then not following through.
Where he's 100 percent wrong, the half where he's totally wrong, is making the analogy to the 2008 claims against Obama.
Why? Obama wasn't even pandering to "socialist," to Bernardine Dohrn and Bill Ayers or any others. Let alone actually trying to put in socialism in the White House.
The GOP's wingnuts are at least pandering to the Xn Right, on the other hand.
And, in the case of a Bachmann, if not a Perry, actually trying to implement Xn Right beliefs as part of public policy.
I'm inventing a new scale for judging the stupidity of mainstream media punditry. (With some "equivalency" exceptions, MSM news coverage is still generally OK.)
This scale will be 1-10 "doorknobs," based on Alcoholics Anonymous' claim that one's "higher power" can even be a doorknob.
There will be two ratings ... one a general one, the other scaled to the "base point" of a columnist I review regularly.
This column gets 7.5 doorknobs overall (higher is stupider) and 5 Douthat doorknobs (it's about the middle of his stupidity range).
Well, wrong on half, and the half-right portion is itself only half right. Let me explain.
Douthat is right that, to some degree, some GOP wingers pander to the religious right. He cites Rick Perry and the cervical cancer vaccine pandering to Merck even in the face of outcry from Christian rightists and others. But, he ignores, even while citing the diversity of the Christian right, that its "success gospel" subset would be perfectly OK with pandering to big business. He also gives little more than lip service to the "What's the Matter with Kansas" issue of many winger GOP politicians pandering to the Christian right then not following through.
Where he's 100 percent wrong, the half where he's totally wrong, is making the analogy to the 2008 claims against Obama.
Why? Obama wasn't even pandering to "socialist," to Bernardine Dohrn and Bill Ayers or any others. Let alone actually trying to put in socialism in the White House.
The GOP's wingnuts are at least pandering to the Xn Right, on the other hand.
And, in the case of a Bachmann, if not a Perry, actually trying to implement Xn Right beliefs as part of public policy.
I'm inventing a new scale for judging the stupidity of mainstream media punditry. (With some "equivalency" exceptions, MSM news coverage is still generally OK.)
This scale will be 1-10 "doorknobs," based on Alcoholics Anonymous' claim that one's "higher power" can even be a doorknob.
There will be two ratings ... one a general one, the other scaled to the "base point" of a columnist I review regularly.
This column gets 7.5 doorknobs overall (higher is stupider) and 5 Douthat doorknobs (it's about the middle of his stupidity range).
Xn conservative hypocrisy, women's political division
Why is Michele Bachmann in the House of Representatives? Why is she running for president?
Sarah Palin, similarly -- why did she run for governor of Alaska, then vice president? Why would she run for president?
I'm not talking in terms of motivation.
Rather, since multiple places in the Christian New Testament, either Paul or someone pretending to be Paul said, in various ways, he didn't permit women to have authority over men, aren't they being HUGE religious hypocrites?
The three main "proof texts" are 1 Timothy 2:12, written by a pseudo-Paul, Titus 2:5, by the same pseudo-Paul, and 1 Corinthians 14:34, possibly written by the real guy, though authorship is questioned by a fair amount of critical scholars.
Let's look at each one, in case you're not familiar. (All citations are New International Version; even though any good old-time fundamentalist knows the KJV was just as inspired as the original Greek and Hebrew, there's errors in the KJV, there is no "original" Greek and Hebrew left today and we can't always tell from textual criticism what the original was, and inspiration in that sense doesn't exist anyway.)
I Timothy 2:12:
Well, first, many fundamentalists and conservative evangelicals will claim the first two passages (the second one explicitly saying so) apply only inside churches.
Tis true, that is.
BUT!
The Palins and Bachmanns of the world, and many of their backers, are on record as saying:
1. America is a Christian nation;
2. America needs to be more explicitly governed by Christian law.
Ergo, the easy deduction is that for these people, America is akin to a giant church. Therefore, the first two passages still apply.
And, with Titus, it's in spades. The passage presumes that older women have already learned, and practice, the art of being subject to their husbands, else how could they train younger ones? Therefore, women in general (who are presumed to be married if not widows) are supposed to be subject to their husbands.
Period.
No "in the churches" only. Everywhere.
That said, it's fun watching a conservative Xn, and even more, one of these "messianic fulfillment" types who think that knowing five words of Hebrew and writing Old Testament names in full Hebrew transliteration gives them some cachet (it doesn't) try to wriggle out of this.
The main "excuse"? Paul's claim elsewhere that there is no male or female, no Greek or Jew, etc.
Well, that's wrong, and it undercuts their beliefs about Paul, to boot.
First, in Galatians, Paul never says that different types of people have the same rights at this moment in life. Proof? He also says there's no slave or free, but then, in the book of Philemon, sends Onesimus back to his slaveowner master. Oops!
Besides that, if this WERE the correct interpretation of how to understand the Galatians passage, it would be proof that Paul didn't write I Timothy, II Timothy or Titus, and that the I Corinthians passage is an interpolation.
Beyond that, all of these admonitions apply in spades to women pastors of fundamentalist and conservative evangelical churches.
I just love the way Christians allegedly devoted to the true, inerrant word of God ...
Aren't!
Sarah Palin, similarly -- why did she run for governor of Alaska, then vice president? Why would she run for president?
I'm not talking in terms of motivation.
![]() |
| Michele Bachmann gets a smackdown from the hypothetically inerrant Word! |
The three main "proof texts" are 1 Timothy 2:12, written by a pseudo-Paul, Titus 2:5, by the same pseudo-Paul, and 1 Corinthians 14:34, possibly written by the real guy, though authorship is questioned by a fair amount of critical scholars.
Let's look at each one, in case you're not familiar. (All citations are New International Version; even though any good old-time fundamentalist knows the KJV was just as inspired as the original Greek and Hebrew, there's errors in the KJV, there is no "original" Greek and Hebrew left today and we can't always tell from textual criticism what the original was, and inspiration in that sense doesn't exist anyway.)
I Timothy 2:12:
I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.I Corinthians 14:34:
Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says.Titus 2:5, starting from v. 4 in parentheses:
(Older women must train younger women) to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God.So, why do Palin and Bachmann want to violate the Word of God? (Capitalized for those types of folks.)
Well, first, many fundamentalists and conservative evangelicals will claim the first two passages (the second one explicitly saying so) apply only inside churches.
Tis true, that is.
BUT!
The Palins and Bachmanns of the world, and many of their backers, are on record as saying:
1. America is a Christian nation;
2. America needs to be more explicitly governed by Christian law.
Ergo, the easy deduction is that for these people, America is akin to a giant church. Therefore, the first two passages still apply.
And, with Titus, it's in spades. The passage presumes that older women have already learned, and practice, the art of being subject to their husbands, else how could they train younger ones? Therefore, women in general (who are presumed to be married if not widows) are supposed to be subject to their husbands.
Period.
No "in the churches" only. Everywhere.
That said, it's fun watching a conservative Xn, and even more, one of these "messianic fulfillment" types who think that knowing five words of Hebrew and writing Old Testament names in full Hebrew transliteration gives them some cachet (it doesn't) try to wriggle out of this.
The main "excuse"? Paul's claim elsewhere that there is no male or female, no Greek or Jew, etc.
Well, that's wrong, and it undercuts their beliefs about Paul, to boot.
First, in Galatians, Paul never says that different types of people have the same rights at this moment in life. Proof? He also says there's no slave or free, but then, in the book of Philemon, sends Onesimus back to his slaveowner master. Oops!
Besides that, if this WERE the correct interpretation of how to understand the Galatians passage, it would be proof that Paul didn't write I Timothy, II Timothy or Titus, and that the I Corinthians passage is an interpolation.
Beyond that, all of these admonitions apply in spades to women pastors of fundamentalist and conservative evangelical churches.
I just love the way Christians allegedly devoted to the true, inerrant word of God ...
Aren't!
July 28, 2011
#Debtmageddon: Cantor & petards, Boehner & paybacks, more
Eric Cantor says that the fault of default will all be Harry Reid's if the Senate doesn't immediately pass a House deficit-cutting bill.
Not so fast, there, Cochise. You, John Boehner and the rest of the House GOP still can't get your own bill passed on your side of the Capitol.
You unleashed the wingnut/tea partiers like Michele Bachmann. Now you have to live with her intransigence.
Meanwhile, as tea partiers continue to oppose Boehner's bill, it looks like the Speaker does know one thing: paybacks will be hell. Ohio wingnut Jim Jordan reportedly will be redistricted out of his district, with Boehner's blessing.
That said, other than punting further decisions past the 2012 elections, it is true that there's not a huge amount of difference between Boehner's plan and Reid's. That shows just how much politics is involved, namely the politics of wanting to repoliticize the debt issue next year.
But, the ultimate blame for that is Preznit Kumbaya's. He hasn't explained how much the recession has cut tax collections. At the same time, he's made Bush's wars his own and expanded them.
For Republicans who accuse him of playing politics with this, to the degree he is, he's playing at Double-A ball level at best. Of course, that's because he's addicted to compromise.
I think Obama actually believes people are that rational. I guess teaching at University of Chicago had too many Chicago School economists rub off on him.
At the same time ... NOT kicking the debt ceiling down the road past November 2012 could put Mitt Romney on the spot. (Or whomever gets the GOP nod.) That said, Obama might muff that, too.
Not so fast, there, Cochise. You, John Boehner and the rest of the House GOP still can't get your own bill passed on your side of the Capitol.
You unleashed the wingnut/tea partiers like Michele Bachmann. Now you have to live with her intransigence.
Meanwhile, as tea partiers continue to oppose Boehner's bill, it looks like the Speaker does know one thing: paybacks will be hell. Ohio wingnut Jim Jordan reportedly will be redistricted out of his district, with Boehner's blessing.
That said, other than punting further decisions past the 2012 elections, it is true that there's not a huge amount of difference between Boehner's plan and Reid's. That shows just how much politics is involved, namely the politics of wanting to repoliticize the debt issue next year.
But, the ultimate blame for that is Preznit Kumbaya's. He hasn't explained how much the recession has cut tax collections. At the same time, he's made Bush's wars his own and expanded them.
For Republicans who accuse him of playing politics with this, to the degree he is, he's playing at Double-A ball level at best. Of course, that's because he's addicted to compromise.
I think Obama actually believes people are that rational. I guess teaching at University of Chicago had too many Chicago School economists rub off on him.
At the same time ... NOT kicking the debt ceiling down the road past November 2012 could put Mitt Romney on the spot. (Or whomever gets the GOP nod.) That said, Obama might muff that, too.
June 27, 2011
Bachmann vs Bachmann on gay marriage
GOP Congresswoman and presidential candidate Michelle Bachmann has gotten plenty of press play for saying she "respects" N.Y. state's "right" to pass a gay marriage law.
The reality?
She backs a federal constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage nationwide. One that would pre-empt states that have already approved gay marriage.
And, in saying this, showed just how much an idiot she is:
The reality?
She backs a federal constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage nationwide. One that would pre-empt states that have already approved gay marriage.
And, in saying this, showed just how much an idiot she is:
Rep. Bachmann claimed that while New York's new law approving same-sex marriages which was signed by Gov. Andrew Cuomo on Friday was "up to the people of New York", the debate over defining marriage was "a state issue and a federal issue." She added that "federal law will trump state law on this issue."Try to square those two sentences. You can't.
Labels:
Bachmann (Michelle),
gay marriage
June 10, 2011
Tricky Ricky moving closer to Prez run?
That's what Matt Lewis at Daily Caller reports.
I've noted in the recent past that Texas' huge budget deficit, the hard-hearted way in which it was closed, etc., AND Perry's rebukes from his own party from time to time, like questions over his economic development board, will quickly get plenty of play if he's running.
Lewis adds a couple more things:
Second, if Perry jumps in, even though he'll be getting old aides back from Newt, he may be behind the curve on fundraising.
That all said, Lewis is right that he's near the top of the GOP charisma list, and he has a record as a winner.
But, if he wins the GOP nomination, things get more fun then.
There's the steel cage death match against Preznit Kumbaya. Perry's secession talk immediately becomes fodder, with an Obama quote something like this:
I've noted in the recent past that Texas' huge budget deficit, the hard-hearted way in which it was closed, etc., AND Perry's rebukes from his own party from time to time, like questions over his economic development board, will quickly get plenty of play if he's running.
Lewis adds a couple more things:
If Perry does indeed jump in the race, GOP primary voters will likely be reminded of how conservatives were outraged when he signed an executive order in 2007, making Texas the first state in the nation to mandate Human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccinations for sixth-grade girls. They will be reminded that he endorsed Rudy Giuliani for president in 2008. And, of course, his controversial plans to create a Trans-Texas Corridor (which were finally dropped after a large public outcry) would come up.These will come up in the primaries, long before the general election. Other candidates seeking an in with tea partiers will HAVE to raise them to show Perry is a tea party panderer. (I'd love Bachmann and/or Palin to get into a knockdown/drag-out with Gov. Helmethair.) They, Cain and one or two others will have to raise them.
Second, if Perry jumps in, even though he'll be getting old aides back from Newt, he may be behind the curve on fundraising.
That all said, Lewis is right that he's near the top of the GOP charisma list, and he has a record as a winner.
But, if he wins the GOP nomination, things get more fun then.
There's the steel cage death match against Preznit Kumbaya. Perry's secession talk immediately becomes fodder, with an Obama quote something like this:
Now, Rick, if you wanted to secede from this country a few years ago, why do you want to run it now?That's not enough? Here's more:
Education? We’re 50th in the nation in kids with a high school diploma by age 25, and 43rd in high school graduation rates. We’re 42nd in the nation in high school graduates going to college, and of those, only half earn a degree within six years.Now, no other tea party types care about the environment or poverty, so these will probably be more general election issues, should the Trickster run and get the GOP nod.
Health care? We’re first in the nation in folks without health insurance and 49th in our low-income population covered by Medicaid.
Relative wealth? We’re fourth in the nation on the percentage of our residents living below the poverty line.
The environment? We’re first in the nation in cancer-causing carcinogens released into the air, first on toxic chemicals released into the water and first in the amount of hazardous waste generated.
May 09, 2011
A new Godwin's Law — Holocaust analogizing needs a name
With a hat tip to Ed Brayton, I note that Michelle Bachmann has compared raising taxes to the Holocaust, and now Mike Huckabee has compared raising the debt ceiling to that.
So, whether we call this a corollary to Godwin's Law or a whole new law, it needs a name. Hit me up in comments with your suggestions.
The one possible consolation? Israeli Jews, including even the most Christian-tolerant among the Zionists, say "enough" to Religious Righters who keep up the Holocaust comparisons.
That said, not all inane Holocaust analogies are by political wingnuts. Hardcore antivaxxers apparently do the same.
So, whether we call this a corollary to Godwin's Law or a whole new law, it needs a name. Hit me up in comments with your suggestions.
The one possible consolation? Israeli Jews, including even the most Christian-tolerant among the Zionists, say "enough" to Religious Righters who keep up the Holocaust comparisons.
That said, not all inane Holocaust analogies are by political wingnuts. Hardcore antivaxxers apparently do the same.
Labels:
Bachmann (Michelle),
Christians United for Israel,
Godwin's Law,
Holocaust,
Huckabee (Mike),
Religious Right
April 05, 2011
Michelle Bachmann lies about family tree
Ed Brayton has all the details. Here's a summary:
1. She's not a seventh-generation Iowan;
2. Here ancestors didn't "persevere" through 1860s weather problems;
3. Her Norwegian ancestors, while fairly early to Wisconsin (not Iowa) weren't in the earliest vanguard.
This is important not just because it shines light on her character but because tea partiers have pledged to not do politics as usual.
1. She's not a seventh-generation Iowan;
2. Here ancestors didn't "persevere" through 1860s weather problems;
3. Her Norwegian ancestors, while fairly early to Wisconsin (not Iowa) weren't in the earliest vanguard.
This is important not just because it shines light on her character but because tea partiers have pledged to not do politics as usual.
April 01, 2011
Matt Dowd likes Obama's 2012 chances
He says three things have to happen for the GOP to topple him, and only one — a charismatic candidate — is in GOP control.
The other two are the economy and foreign policy.
And, in the Libya case, they're kind of linked.
If Obama can get lucky enough to get that resolved quickly (oh, by the way, B.O., to where will Gadhafi go in exile??), then oil should stay below $110/barrel through next year. But, he's going to have to do more than Kumbaya on energy policy issues.
If oil stays below that benchmark, I think unemployment will be below 8.5 percent at the end of this year and around 8.0 percent by Election Day. Not as good as Reagan had in 1984, but it could be good enough.
As for the charismatic? The most charismatic GOP candidates, actual or hinted, are also its most nutbar. That's Bachmann, semi-charistmatic Gingrich, and the in-the-wings Palin. Of course, on religious beliefs, you have the non-charismatic nutbar Mike Huckabee.
The other two are the economy and foreign policy.
And, in the Libya case, they're kind of linked.
If Obama can get lucky enough to get that resolved quickly (oh, by the way, B.O., to where will Gadhafi go in exile??), then oil should stay below $110/barrel through next year. But, he's going to have to do more than Kumbaya on energy policy issues.
If oil stays below that benchmark, I think unemployment will be below 8.5 percent at the end of this year and around 8.0 percent by Election Day. Not as good as Reagan had in 1984, but it could be good enough.
As for the charismatic? The most charismatic GOP candidates, actual or hinted, are also its most nutbar. That's Bachmann, semi-charistmatic Gingrich, and the in-the-wings Palin. Of course, on religious beliefs, you have the non-charismatic nutbar Mike Huckabee.
January 30, 2011
Faux News caves on GOP vs Tea Party
A few months back, I blogged wondering where Faux News would butter its bread if Tea Party stridency or craziness butted heads with what passes today for more mainstream GOP ideology. Well, as Frank Rich points out, through Faux shoving Michelle Bachmann's Tea Party response to President Obama's State of the Union address onto web feed only, we now know.
And, as Rich also points out, the other Rupert Murdoch organ, the Wall Street Journal, gave her little more than footnote status in print.
Why? Rich again:
But, crazy aunts can't always be trapped in cyberattics in the 21st century. Besides, as Rich adds, the GOP has many, many crazy aunts and uncles. And, like whack-a-mole, Faux and the WSJ can't keep them all batted down forever.
Neither can Speaker Permatan, John "Cry Me A" Boehner.
Realistically, this is a no duh, eh? The Tea Party's been used by the astroturfers, just like the Religious Right 30 years ago. It's all about viability, power, money to burn, etc.
That said, the next 12-18 months will be fun to watch. What if Mama Bear Palin starts pushing publicly on Faux News for it to air the likes of Bachmann more? Will Rupert Murdoch have a meltdown? It would be fun to watch ... the immovable force of unfair meet the irresistible object of unbalanced.
And, as Rich also points out, the other Rupert Murdoch organ, the Wall Street Journal, gave her little more than footnote status in print.
Why? Rich again:
What were they all afraid of? The answer cuts to the crux of the right’s plight less than three months after its supposed restoration. Having sold itself in 2010 as the uncompromising champion of Tea Party-fueled fiscal austerity, the enhanced G.O.P. caucus arrived in Washington in 2011 to discover that most Americans prefer compromise to confrontation and favor balanced budgets in name only.
But, crazy aunts can't always be trapped in cyberattics in the 21st century. Besides, as Rich adds, the GOP has many, many crazy aunts and uncles. And, like whack-a-mole, Faux and the WSJ can't keep them all batted down forever.
Neither can Speaker Permatan, John "Cry Me A" Boehner.
Realistically, this is a no duh, eh? The Tea Party's been used by the astroturfers, just like the Religious Right 30 years ago. It's all about viability, power, money to burn, etc.
That said, the next 12-18 months will be fun to watch. What if Mama Bear Palin starts pushing publicly on Faux News for it to air the likes of Bachmann more? Will Rupert Murdoch have a meltdown? It would be fun to watch ... the immovable force of unfair meet the irresistible object of unbalanced.
September 29, 2010
One good reason to vote Democratic in Minnesota
At least in state-level elections, that is. If the Democrats control the state legislature and the governorship and, as expected, Minnesota loses a Congressional seat, Dems can undistrict Michelle Bachmann's Congressional district.
April 29, 2009
Swap Michelle Bachmann for Rick Perry?
With Michelle Bachmann’s latest lunacy, this time over swine flu, evolutionary biology blogger P.Z. Myers, aka Pharyngula, says the Minnesota Congresswoman makes it hard for progressives in the Great White North to be snooty snooty about Texans. I’ve offered to swap him straight up, Bachman for Lil Ricky Perry, at No. 6 in comments. We’ll see what sort of response I get.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
