Chris Wallace asks Michelle Bachmann: Are You a Flake?

reply to post by Indigo5

"Fight against slavery"? Some in rhetoric, none in practice.

But more to the point her claim was that the founding fathers..

"worked tirelessly until slavery was no more in the United States.”

Wow!! That's definitely enough to crucify her! She is not competent to work at WalMart, much less be POTUS!

Jesus, the nerve on her! Can't keep 'em down on the farm, eh??

Now, Obama/Biden...that's a truly brilliant pair you elected there, Indigo!

Her error was not knowing that nearly 100 years seperated the founding fathers and the civil war.

She didn't? When was she asked that question? I musta missed it.

You migth dismiss it as a poor choice of words if she hadn't defended the claim with another outright affront to historians everywhere and claiming that John Quincy Adams was a founding father.

John Quincy Adams was 9 years old at the time of the revolution. His father John Adams was a founding father.

BFD. So she may have confused the elder with the junior, who was his father's secretary at age 14. How many people knew that, or cared? Even YOU didn't know that!

And if you point out the error her defenders go balistic. Ignorance championed!

Errors? ERRORS?? You mean trivia sh*t that nobody cares about! But that's all you libs have...that's all you need, since you are only interested in character assassination, eh? Try discussing the important stuff, like the issues, and you run and hide like frightened mice.

I am just waiting for the TP Movement to start to post about how John Wayne Gacey was actually a swell guy and the media is wrong about him.

Oh oh Oh! You are soooo funny and clever! Hahahaha ! What will you say next?!! Hahahaha

The fact that she instead defends her "up is down" "east is west" mistakes rather than acknowledge them is a quality that is absolutely not suited for leadership and is honestly a bit insane.

How can you say that when you voted for Obama? You cannot even recognize what is good or bad - you are not competent to pass judgement, since your own judgement has been so dismal.

reply to post by mishigas


All you ever do is try to say that Obama and Biden are stupid. You need to get it through your head. Obama is already running on his side. You need to find a candidate to beat him. Saying he is stupid so Bachmann being stupid does not convince me she is any better than say Tim Pawlenty. Get it? No matter how stupid you think Obama and Biden are, that will never make anyone else smarter. Bachmann should be judged on what she says and does. You only ever compare it to what other people do. You do the same with Palin. Today Bachmann exposed her huge ignorance of the economy by saying that if we default, it is not really default. That is the scariest little soundbite I have seen from a candidate so far. I will be voting in the primaries. I would love to think I should vote for Bachmann because Obama is stupid but Obama will not be one of the choices. Any and all GOP supporters need to figure out how to start making one of their candidates look good and stop relying on attacking Obama.

Plus, you are always accusing everyone else of erroneous deflection and yet you only ever respond to Palin and Bachmann stupidity by talking about Obama and Biden. It reeks disingenuous.

Originally posted by mishigas
reply to post by Indigo5

"Fight against slavery"? Some in rhetoric, none in practice.

But more to the point her claim was that the founding fathers..

"worked tirelessly until slavery was no more in the United States.”

I will ask that you not modify my posts when quoting. It is dishonest and against T&C.

I specifically underlined the part of her quote that spoke to her unique ignorance regarding a topic that she has made a centerpiece of her rhetoric.

EDITORIAL: Bachmann was right
The Founding Founders did fight against slavery

"Fight against slavery"? Some in rhetoric, none in practice.

But more to the point her claim was that the founding fathers..

"worked tirelessly until slavery was no more in the United States.”

Her error was not knowing that nearly 100 years seperated the founding fathers and the civil war.

Her not knowing that the founding fathers came almost a 100 years prior to the civil war is like someone claiming to be a doctor and then vehemently arguing that the flu and cancer are the same thing.

The founding fathers is a pillar of her rhetoric, yet she knows nothing about them.

I understand it is near impossible to defend such profound ignorance, why don't you just try to change the topic to someone else?

Originally posted by mishigas
Now, Obama/Biden...that's a truly brilliant pair you elected there, Indigo!

Originally posted by mishigas
indigo5

The fact that she instead defends her "up is down" "east is west" mistakes rather than acknowledge them is a quality that is absolutely not suited for leadership and is honestly a bit insane.

How can you say that when you voted for Obama? You cannot even recognize what is good or bad - you are not competent to pass judgement, since your own judgement has been so dismal.

Again, there are plenty of threads about Obama, why do you feel it neccessary to morph your own OP about Bachmann into an Obama thread? Of course the answer is that you are unable to defend the depths of ignorance that Bachmann displays and you are desperately looking to change the subject.

reply to post by Indigo5

I will ask that you not modify my posts when quoting. It is dishonest and against T&C.

I specifically underlined the part of her quote that spoke to her unique ignorance regarding a topic that she has made a centerpiece of her rhetoric.

Whoa, pal, I didn't modify anything. I did a cut and paste of your words. Apparently tags do not transfer. Try it yourself and see. You owe me an apology.

I cut and pasted the words above. Did the bold transfer? No.

reply to post by Indigo5

Her not knowing that the founding fathers came almost a 100 years prior to the civil war is like someone claiming to be a doctor and then vehemently arguing that the flu and cancer are the same thing.

Why do you continue to make things up? Where did she answer any such question, or make any such statement. And your exaggeration is absurd.

The fact that 100 yrs passed until the slaves were freed means nothing. Many issues are fought for decades before being resolved, ie, gay marriage. Don't be so silly.

The founding fathers is a pillar of her rhetoric, yet she knows nothing about them.

She probably forgot more about them than you'll ever know.

Again, there are plenty of threads about Obama, why do you feel it neccessary to morph your own OP about Bachmann into an Obama thread? Of course the answer is that you are unable to defend the depths of ignorance that Bachmann displays and you are desperately looking to change the subject.

Again, to show you that you are arguing from a point of no credibility. Your own standards of ignorance (Obama, Biden) fail so miserably that your judgement cannot be trusted.

And you keep on harping about trivia that nobody cares about. Are you so desperate? Or so afraid? Why do you libs resort to character assassination? That is such a cowardly thing to do. It's like a sniper hiding in a room full of schoolchildren.

Originally posted by mishigas
did a cut and paste of your words. Apparently tags do not transfer

Why are you cutting and pasting when there is a "quote" button at the top of every post?

Originally posted by mishigas
reply to post by Indigo5

 

Her not knowing that the founding fathers came almost a 100 years prior to the civil war is like someone claiming to be a doctor and then vehemently arguing that the flu and cancer are the same thing.

Why do you continue to make things up? Where did she answer any such question, or make any such statement. And your exaggeration is absurd.

The fact that 100 yrs passed until the slaves were freed means nothing. Many issues are fought for decades before being resolved, ie, gay marriage. Don't be so silly.

Apologies. I did not realize that you were unaware of the meaning of "until".

She claimed and then erroneously defended the idiotic claim that, and I quote, the Founding Fathers

"worked tirelessly

until

slavery was no more in the United States.”

Definition:
un·til 
–conjunction

up to the time that or when; till: He read until his guests arrived.

Bachmann deserves the support of like minded individuals and you are certainly that as I can no longer tell if your posts are uneducated or dishonest.

reply to post by Indigo5

Apologies. I did not realize that you were unaware of the meaning of "until".

She claimed and then erroneously defended the idiotic claim that, and I quote, the Founding Fathers

"worked tirelessly
until
slavery was no more in the United States.”

Definition:
un·til 
–conjunction

up to the time that or when; till: He read until his guests arrived.

Bachmann deserves the support of like minded individuals and you are certainly that as I can no longer tell if your posts are uneducated or dishonest.

Well, the FF were the ones who lit the fire fo emancipation. There were absolutely no proponents before them. So stop being so silly and desperately anxious to try to prove you are somehow right.

It Means Nothing!! Nobody cares!!

reply to post by Indigo5

Why are you cutting and pasting when there is a "quote" button at the top of every post?

Because I want to. Because I use the Reply To button to correctly format the post. Because it allows me to selectively quote small passages from a lengthy post.

Originally posted by mishigas
Well, the FF were the ones who lit the fire fo emancipation. There were absolutely no proponents before them.

Calls for abolitionThe first American movement to abolish slavery came in the spring of 1688 when German and Dutch Quakers of Mennonite descent in Germantown, Pennsylvania (now part of Philadelphia) wrote a two-page condemnation of the practice and sent it to the governing bodies of their Quaker church, the Society of Friends.

The Society for the Relief of Free Negroes Unlawfully Held in Bondage was the first American abolition society, formed 14 April 1775, in Philadelphia, primarily by Quakers who had strong religious objections to slavery.

Rhode Island Quakers, associated with Moses Brown, co-founder of Brown University, and who also settled at Uxbridge, Massachusetts prior to 1770, were among the first in America to free slaves.

Benjamin Rush was another leader, as were many Quakers. John Woolman gave up most of his business in 1756 to devote himself to campaigning against slavery along with other Quakers.

The first article published in what later became the United States advocating the emancipation of slaves and the abolition of slavery was allegedly written by Thomas Paine. Titled "African Slavery in America", it appeared on 8 March 1775 in the Postscript to the Pennsylvania Journal and Weekly Advertiser, more popularly known as The Pennsylvania Magazine, or American Museum.

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by mishigas

So stop being so silly and desperately anxious to try to prove you are somehow right.

It Means Nothing!! Nobody cares!!

Yes, it is silly. Lets just pretend that the founding fathers lived over a 100 years and freed the slaves in the civil war.

Maybe we can get started burning the history books once she is electd since she is unwilling to admit that John Adams senior, the last of the founding fathers died on the same day as Thomas Jefferson, July 4th 1826.

Jefferson being unaware of Adams passing hours earlier uttered..."Adams still lives" and that was that. the last of the founding fathers dies 50 years to the day after independance.

Let us pretend whatever is neccessary to elect ignorance to the highest office in the land.

It is silly to expect a woman running on a "Founding Fathers" platform of rhetoric to actually know when they lived, who they were, what they believed or what they did.

Lets just pretend that she is not dishonest, corrupt and woefully ignorant.

Who cares about the founding fathers anyways? Right?

See the difference between ignorant flakes like Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann and genuine patriots is that genuine patriots like myself know and study the founding fathers and the American Revolution while they simply use the founding fathers as a rhetorical punchline. THAT MUCH IS CLEAR AS DAY.

Ignorance...supported by the ignorant...all for idealogy.

No thanks. I will stick with the real and magnificient history of America. My people do not wear our patriotism like a costume for political pandering purposes. We require no flag-pins, we don't invent history, we educate ourselves to better know the country that we love.

My ancestors fought in the revolutionary war and I can recount their service records and battles fought. Ditto with the Civil War, WW1 and WW2, the Spanish War, Korea and Viet Nam and I have family in Afghanistan as we speak.

Michelle Bachmann does not even know when the revolutionary war or the civil war happened.

She wears her patriotism like a hooker wears a short skirt.

No thanks. Good luck with her though.

reply to post by Indigo5

Michelle Bachmann does not even know when the revolutionary war or the civil war happened.

She wears her patriotism like a hooker wears a short skirt.

No thanks. Good luck with her though.

The Founding Fathers wanted to create a nation where freedom of expression ruled.

We all, as Americans, deserve that right.

Unfortunately, they, too, realized that that would mean tolerating character assassination from fools.

And I doubt your ancestors fought on the side of America, given what their seed has produced.

Originally posted by mishigas
reply to post by Indigo5

 

Michelle Bachmann does not even know when the revolutionary war or the civil war happened.

She wears her patriotism like a hooker wears a short skirt.

No thanks. Good luck with her though.

Originally posted by mishigas
The Founding Fathers wanted to create a nation where freedom of expression ruled.

We all, as Americans, deserve that right.

And Michelle Bachmann exercised her right in expressing her utter ignorance, just as Americans excercised their right to call her what she is. Constitution intact.

Originally posted by mishigas

Unfortunately, they, too, realized that that would mean tolerating character assassination from fools.

You are confused on your terms.

(A) Michelle Bachmann is a character...she does not have character. It is not possible to assassinate someone's character when they have none.

(B) Pointing out that the founding fathers did not fight in the civil war is not character assassination. It is fact. If the facts do not support her claims, that is not the facts fault.

Some real desperation her in the failed defenses you are attempting to employ.

But that's what the teleprompter said to say.

"Are you a flake?"

So he said it. Gotta do what the teleprompter says.

Obey the teleprompter.

Hail teleprompter. My I offer it fruit?

I'm just giving him the benefit of the doubt.

reply to post by Genfinity

But that's what the teleprompter said to say.

"Are you a flake?"

So he said it. Gotta do what the teleprompter says.

Obey the teleprompter.

Hail teleprompter. My I offer it fruit?

I'm just giving him the benefit of the doubt.

Haha.

He doesn't use a teleprompter. He admitted it was his own question.

Thanks for the polite correction.

I wonder if Wallace was sent to Fox's time out room?

I rarely watch the Sunday morning talkies but I happened to be watching it live when Wallace said this.

I wonder what went through Michelle's mind after she heard the question.......

"I'm at Fox, right?????"

Maybe Fox is devoted to their employee, Sarah Palin.

I wonder which Republican CNN and MSNBC will endorse? (Not trying to derail the thread, just wondering as I type.)

Seriously, the presentation from the likes on MSNBC and pals are profoundly possessed by nonsense in their language and word usage. Their speech may at times come off as humorous to some less discerning minds but it is meant to show how low anyone would go to be IMPOLITE on the air.

reply to post by Genfinity

Thanks for the polite correction.

I wonder if Wallace was sent to Fox's time out room?

He's a seasoned veteran, so he doesn't need much disciplining. He apologized twice - once shortly after via video cam, but this was pretty much for the audience, and Bachmann snubbed it.

Not until he called her personally and apologized the next day did she even acknowledge the incident, treating it like a minor gnat at a picnic. She very deftly put Wallace in his place. He walked away, tail tucked between his legs.

I wonder what went through Michelle's mind after she heard the question.......

"I'm at Fox, right?????"

The look on her face said it all.

Maybe Fox is devoted to their employee, Sarah Palin.

I'd bet my bottom dollar that FOX had nothing to do with this.

I wonder which Republican CNN and MSNBC will endorse? (Not trying to derail the thread, just wondering as I type.)

I don't know...do they normally endorse? I mean, they will support whomever wins the primary, but other than that, I don't know.