As Bachmann's Star Rises, So Do The Media Attacks

[UncleMike]

That's all really interesting, rambone. Can you provide any factual evidence (links to voting records, etc.) that substantiates anything in your rant? If not....it's just an Internet rant. Are you sure that it's not just you who has a problem?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^This^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[theweakerbrother]

Bachmann defends vote for Patriot Act after fielding complaints about government over-reach - The Hill's Floor Action

 

[rambone]

Bachmann defends vote for Patriot Act after fielding complaints about government over-reach - The Hill's Floor Action

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[Jake46184]

Bachmann defends vote for Patriot Act after fielding complaints about government over-reach - The Hill's Floor Action

Only an idiot would have voted against the Patriot Act at the time. Of course she voted for it. To equate that with her dislike of big government is absurd. Two different discussions.

Is this the best you got?

 

[mrjarrell]

Only an idiot would have voted against the Patriot Act at the time. Of course she voted for it. To equate that with her dislike of big government is absurd. Two different discussions.

Is this the best you got?

You don't read very well when it doesn't suit your agenda, do you? The story is from the recent vote to reauthorise the USA PATRIOT Act, not ancient history (which other people voted against). This is recent history, from May. Is this the best you got?

 

[theweakerbrother]

Only an idiot would have voted against the Patriot Act at the time. Of course she voted for it. To equate that with her dislike of big government is absurd. Two different discussions.

Is this the best you got?

You know we're talking about 2011 and not 2001, right? Of course, I think the voting of the Patriot Act in 2001 was equally as anti-American. If you like signing your rights away, do it to yourself and not to everyone.

Rand Paul is/was doing it right, Michell Bachmann was doing it wrong. Rand is not just saying he's anti big-government, he's constantly and consistently doing things that prove he's anti big-government.

Rand Paul's Last Stand Against the Patriot Act - Politics - The Atlantic Wire

If you're voting in favor of secret wire taps, surveillance and government snooping on every level including but not limited to financial snooping, do you see that as Pro-American? I see it as Orwellian. Is that the best I have? It doesn't have to be because it's enough to not vote for a pseudo-small government potential candidate.

Part of the original 2001 Patriot Act (Title IV) was for border security. Do you think it's successful? I can go down to the local Lowe's and/or Wal-Mart or any kitchen of a restaurant and see that it has not been successful.

Remember the old quote we attribute to Ben Franklin preferring security over liberty? It applies here.

 

[Jake46184]

Then or now, it doesn't make any difference. Your reaching for something, anything, for which you can complain. You don't like Conservative Republicans....we get it.

Try to keep the level of civil discourse at a mature level in your forum posts, guys. Doing less will just give you a reputation that you don't want (I'm making an assumption here.) Then again, noting the number of posts for some of you, I may be a little late to the party with this advice to be of any help. Nonetheless, today can always be a new start. Something to consider.

 

[rambone]

That's all really interesting, rambone. Can you provide any factual evidence (links to voting records, etc.) that substantiates anything in your rant? If not....it's just an Internet rant. Are you sure that it's not just you who has a problem?

What point are you having trouble digesting? She's going to go along with all the Republicans brilliant ideas for expanding the Global War on Terror. Her support of the Patriot Act has been discussed already. Start with that. That law alone thrashes the constitution in more ways than I have time to explain.

Here's one example. She just 11 days ago she supported the $649 Billion dollar defense spending bill that grows the Pentagon and expands the war campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq. And these "conservatives" have the nerve to talk like they want to shrink the government. What a laugh!!

Here's the vote count. Every obedient Establishment Republican voted to grow government. GovTrack: House Vote On Passage: H.R. 2219: Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2012

She's definitely NOT on board with civil liberties or cutting the runaway Military-Industrial Complex.

 

[theweakerbrother]

It's not reaching. I take the Constitution pretty seriously. I see all of these modern restrictions and special circumstances as unconstitutional and they should be treated as accordingly. Freedom is dangerous, I love it that way. I love conservative and libertarian politics and ethics. I love the discussion of those and of philosophy. I would never consider Michelle Bachmann to be a true conservative because I equate the Patriot Act as nannyism under the guise of protection. I don't think it's "reaching" to give logical and valid voter record history as a legitimate criticism as to why I think someone is a pseudo-conservative and furthermore, reason as to why I think it is a bad idea for conservatives or anyone who loves freedom to continue to vote for this person.

I get your "dig" at post count numbers. Allow me to turn your strawman criticism into an invitation to particpate in one of the most fun threads on INGO:

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...e_official_status_update_thread_part_6_a.html

I'm not sure what you mean about the level of discourse... it seems pretty balanced and open ended at the moment.

 

[dross]

I don't believe in trading liberty for security. That said, I think that if our principles are also our vulnerability, then it is our principles that are at fault.

For example, pacifism is an unsustainable philosophy because the mechanism for its destruction is built in.

Our system isn't like pacifism, but there are some vulnerabilities. Rights are an absolute, but how we get wiretaps isn't, it just has to adhere to that absolute.

Some things in the Patriot Act may have gone too far. Other things are quite reasonable, and have been characterized unfairly. As a politician, you almost never get the chance to take an action that you fully agree with, so you weigh everything and come down on one side or the other. That's just how it is, and how it will always be.

There's not a single politician, not even Ron Paul, with whom I don't have some very fundamental disagreements. Does that mean I shouldn't vote until someone comes along who agrees exactly with me on important matters? It's just not how it works. Not that many people agree with me in this country. That forces me to align myself at times with people who do things I hate in order to get other things done that I think are important and can get done right now.

Otherwise we're all just waiting for the World to change.

 

[rambone]

Your reaching for something, anything, for which you can complain. You don't like Conservative Republicans....we get it.

The Patriot Act isn't "Something, Anything." Its one of the most blatantly anti-4th Amendment laws ever passed.

I don't like Statist Republicans. Or their hypocritical bloated agencies. Or their security-obsessed Police State policies.

 

[orange]

Five bloody minutes on google. Does nobody bother to make the effort anymore?

Bachmann supported S1927, the Protect America Act of 2007. Among other things this substituted the requirement of a warrant to conduct surveillance with a system of NSA controls, otherwise expanded surveillance and search powers. HR6304 later reauthorized many of the features, she also supported it of course.
Supported HR2346, a supplemental appropriation bill. Gotta pay for the wars and foreign aid.
Supported HR3961, the Patriot Act extension.
Supported HR1955, Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007. Among other gems this bit included things like criminalizing 'the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change.' Thoughtcrime much?
Opposed an amendment attached to the 2008 defense (har) authorization bill, which would've required then-president Bush to obtain congressional authorization for action against Iran. HR1585 was the bill.
Other votes show support for the wars and expansion of federal aid to foreign nations, Real ID scheme, the Clinton-era COPS funding that so helped militarization of police, others. One thing that made me smile is greater funding and social services upport for pre-K children and ther families..personally I like this, but it doesn't seem a very 'constitutional conservative republican' thing to vote for.

Then or now, it doesn't make any difference. Your reaching for something, anything, for which you can complain. You don't like Conservative Republicans....we get it.

Yup. They're just trying to push their brand of morality across the nation and erode rights and liberties while simultaneously supporting eternal wars - what's not to like? Rambone is clearly irrational and biased.

 

[rambone]

If a candidate can't even grasp the totality of our problems, then they are unfit to lead. And Bachmann hasn't figured out that bloated military, foreign interventionism, world policing, limitless war budgets, federalization of law enforcement, and a domestic police state, and involvement in perpetual foreign conflict are part of our problems. Sorry but Bush burned me out on Republican-flavored tyranny.

 

[dross]

If a candidate can't even grasp the totality of our problems, then they are unfit to lead. And Bachmann hasn't figured out that bloated military, foreign interventionism, world policing, limitless war budgets, federalization of law enforcement, and a domestic police state, and involvement in perpetual foreign conflict are part of our problems. Sorry but Bush burned me out on Republican-flavored tyranny.

Rambone's list of politicians who are fit to lead:

1. Ron Paul
2. Rand Paul

Rambone's list of politicians who are fit to lead who can win a national election.

1.
2.

 

[Pocketman]

In an effort to gain more credibility, Ms Bachman might consider a series of economic videos on Youtube.

 

[mrjarrell]

In an effort to gain more credibility, Ms Bachman might consider a series of economic videos on Youtube.

She'll have to see how her husband feels about that first.

 

[dross]

She'll have to see how her husband feels about that first.

It makes him feel pretty.

 

[rambone]

Rambone's list of politicians who are fit to lead:

1. Ron Paul
2. Rand Paul

Rambone's list of politicians who are fit to lead who can win a national election.

1.
2.

I'd take Gary Johnson too, being that he's the other GOP candidate in this very race that criticizes the exact same things I just listed. There are plenty of others who are fit to lead that are not in the GOP Presidential primaries.

But we have to choose from the candidates in the race, right? That's reality. So supporting Ron Paul is a very realistic choice for someone sick of status quo Republican Neo-conservatism.

The GOP primaries are anybody's to win. Paul is showing strong numbers in many major polls. Here's an opportunity to transform the Republican party into something palatable to the Liberty movement, constitutionalists, Libertarian party members, independents, and anti-war Democrats. Seize the opportunity.

Bachmann is going to be another Bush. Please tell me you saw something horribly wrong with the Federal government between 2001 and 2008. That kind of leadership is going to do nothing to save this country.

 

[spec4]

I've seen something horribly wrong with the federal govt most of my adult life.

 

[firehawk1]

Rambone's list of politicians who are fit to lead:

1. Ron Paul
2. Rand Paul

Rambone's list of politicians who are fit to lead who can win a national election.

1.
2.

Exactly what I've brought up several times. It's all or nothing for some, and you are not going to get "all" from anyone.

Janurary 2013, Ron Paul moves into the White House... and sits in the Oval Office and twiddles his thumbs for 4 years. Any sane person knows the Democrats OR the majority of Republicans will NOT work with him on anything of substance. A four year lame duck.

I agree with Paul on many issues, but he will not win the Republican nomination.