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

[Expat]

Political discussions/arguments while they remain civil, can be interesting.

I wonder why they are suddenly remaining at least a bit more civil?

 

[IncendiaryGunner]

How do you know this? Because the MSM told you that was the case. That's why.

Anyone that pays attention knows there is a double standard. I don't know if Palin is stupid. The press certainly spins everything to make it seem that way. I don't know if Obama is the brightest President in our time, but the press certainly wants us to believe that.

There are lots of pages dedicated to dumb things Obama has said. I never hear them quoted by the media. They used to make fun of Biden but not so much any more.

Right, because Obama is never criticized in the media. When Obama says dumb things, he is criticized. He is not off limits, because he is a public figure.

The thing is, every politician is open to public criticism - and as a general rule, they will receive it. The media will pick through every statement they make, looking for something to criticize - and people will eat it up. Why? Because politics is polarising, and people want to see politicians they do not agree with criticized.

The double standard is acting as if any of them should be off limits. When the status quo is to criticize everyone, it is silly to cry when someone that entered the political realm is criticized. They are politicians - they made the decision to run for politicial office knowing full well that will likely happen. Using a politician's race or gender as a play to demonize criticism they receive is ridiculous.

 

[Expat]

The press is wanting Bachmann's medical records, they didn't make Obama turn his over. The press is wanting Bachmann's college transcripts. They never made Obama turn over his.

I am sure with very little effort the list would grow.

 

[IncendiaryGunner]

The press is wanting Bachmann's medical records, they didn't make Obama turn his over. The press is wanting Bachmann's college transcripts. They never made Obama turn over his.

I am sure with very little effort the list would grow.

The press, for years, has perpetuated the rumor that Obama is not an American citizen. In 2008 he released his birth certificate... and the media rumors persisted.

Recently he released a full form birth certificate, and has that brought and end to the issue?

NOBODY in public office is immune to criticism, and Obama has been criticized at great lengths - just like everyone. The press can "want" anything, and it does get downright ridiculous (using questions without facts to spread untrue rumors) - but it is not limited to Bachmann.

 

[Expat]

The press, for years, has perpetuated the rumor that Obama is not an American citizen. In 2008 he released his birth certificate... and the media rumors persisted.

Recently he released a full form birth certificate, and has that brought and end to the issue?

NOBODY in public office is immune to criticism, and Obama has been criticized at great lengths - just like everyone. The press can "want" anything, and it does get downright ridiculous (using questions without facts to spread untrue rumors) - but it is not limited to Bachmann.

The MSM pushed the birther issue? You gotta be kidding. Okay, I know now that you aren't serious. Anyone that brought it up was treated like a nut. How many times did I see the Sunday talking heads beat down on the GOP leaders to disavow any members that questioned his birth status. Oh no. The only reason the certificate was ever released is because Trump didn't care if they painted him as a nut. He was the first one that was willing to bang the drum in public.

 

[Denny347]

+1. These vulgarians scare me. Oh sure, Tea Party this and that, until it's something they don't like, then boom, here comes the anti-gay speech and such. These people don't represent me, neither do any of them in Congress now. Everyday, I wake up and feel powerless in the face of tyranny from the current administration and the ala carte society that only the radical arms of both sides of the aisles provide. People such as I, middle of the road, common sense policy types that only want to compromise on the economy, don't buy into religious based "family values" and live responsibly are gone. Just like the middle class, the middle roaders are disappearing in vast numbers, logical folks replaced by zealots.

Are you reading my mind

 

[J_Wales]

Given all the press hype on Bachman's headaches, will fearless leader be releasing his medical records soon?

 

[Pocketman]

+1. These vulgarians scare me. Oh sure, Tea Party this and that, until it's something they don't like, then boom, here comes the anti-gay speech and such. These people don't represent me, neither do any of them in Congress now. Everyday, I wake up and feel powerless in the face of tyranny from the current administration and the ala carte society that only the radical arms of both sides of the aisles provide. People such as I, middle of the road, common sense policy types that only want to compromise on the economy, don't buy into religious based "family values" and live responsibly are gone. Just like the middle class, the middle roaders are disappearing in vast numbers, logical folks replaced by zealots.

Are the "middle roaders" disappearing, or are the radicals just becoming more vocal? Recent polls seem to indicate most Americans are interested in a balanced approach to the financial situation, yet it seems the left and right in Congress are digging in their heals. Leadership and governing has been replaced by perpetual campaigining.

 

[dross]

+1. These vulgarians scare me. Oh sure, Tea Party this and that, until it's something they don't like, then boom, here comes the anti-gay speech and such. These people don't represent me, neither do any of them in Congress now. Everyday, I wake up and feel powerless in the face of tyranny from the current administration and the ala carte society that only the radical arms of both sides of the aisles provide. People such as I, middle of the road, common sense policy types that only want to compromise on the economy, don't buy into religious based "family values" and live responsibly are gone. Just like the middle class, the middle roaders are disappearing in vast numbers, logical folks replaced by zealots.

Are you reading my mind

Are the "middle roaders" disappearing, or are the radicals just becoming more vocal? Recent polls seem to indicate most Americans are interested in a balanced approach to the financial situation, yet it seems the left and right in Congress are digging in their heals. Leadership and governing has been replaced by perpetual campaigining.

Let's look at the groups and interests that make up the the two main parties:

Republicans

Social conservatives
Libertarians
Gun rights advocates
Small business people
Anti-abortion groups
Cuban-Americans
Small government conservatives
Foreign policy hawks

Democrats

Socialists
Homosexual rights advocates
Pro abortion rights groups
Radical Feminists
Blacks
Hispanics
Labor unions
Teachers
Libertarians who are more concerned with social issues than economic issues

The groups that make up these coalitions are often bitterly opposed to much of the agenda of the other groups in the coalition. Libertarians are opposed to the social conservatives as much as to the socialists in the Democrat party. Same thing on the Dem side. Lots of union voters don't agree with the gay rights, abortion, or minority issues.

Even with these coalitions, the elections are very close.

No one gets what they want. No one has a politician that fully represents them. Ask ANY of these groups on the left if they're fully satisfied with Obama. None of them are.

Most of you will NEVER have anyone you really truly believe in who will have a chance to win. It's the nature of the game. A true Libertarian can't win because most of the Dem groups can't stand him and the social conservatives on the Republican side can't either.

Combine this with the fact that the vast majority of the country doesn't really care much about the economic issues, much less understand the basics of those issues. Therefore the least likely guy we'll ever elect is someone who truly believes in economic freedom. That's why Reagan was so special.

Politics is compromise. Compromise means that no one gets what they want.

Cry, complain, dislike, refuse to participate, do whatever you want. The fact is that your to your fellow citizens you are on the fringe. The ONLY chance you have at any sort of relevance, the ONLY way you can make a difference at all, is to align yourself as best you can with other people with whom you can find SOME common ground.

Or you can take your ball and go home, in which case the political system will cease to give even the tiny bit of thought it gives to you now.

But I feel you guys, I really do. I'm often very disappointed with reality myself.

 

[Expat]

It always boils down to the William F. Buckley Jr. rule. Vote for the most conservative candidate on the ballot that has a chance of winning.

 

[dross]

It always boils down to the William F. Buckley Jr. rule. Vote for the most conservative candidate on the ballot that has a chance of winning.

Sellout! Why do enjoy being lied to? Why do you mindlessly vote for the Republican? If you keep doing that, how will anything ever get better? You're what's wrong with the system!

If we'd all just refuse to particpate, or vote for the obscure libertarian who will take 1.3% of the vote from the least socialist candidate everything will get better and we'll finally have a place to raise our unicorns in freedom.

 

[Garb]

Let's look at the groups and interests that make up the the two main parties:

Republicans

Social conservatives
Libertarians
Gun rights advocates
Small business people
Anti-abortion groups
Cuban-Americans
Small government conservatives
Foreign policy hawks

Democrats

Socialists
Homosexual rights advocates
Pro abortion rights groups
Radical Feminists
Blacks
Hispanics
Labor unions
Teachers
Libertarians who are more concerned with social issues than economic issues

The groups that make up these coalitions are often bitterly opposed to much of the agenda of the other groups in the coalition. Libertarians are opposed to the social conservatives as much as to the socialists in the Democrat party. Same thing on the Dem side. Lots of union voters don't agree with the gay rights, abortion, or minority issues.

Even with these coalitions, the elections are very close.

No one gets what they want. No one has a politician that fully represents them. Ask ANY of these groups on the left if they're fully satisfied with Obama. None of them are.

Most of you will NEVER have anyone you really truly believe in who will have a chance to win. It's the nature of the game. A true Libertarian can't win because most of the Dem groups can't stand him and the social conservatives on the Republican side can't either.

Combine this with the fact that the vast majority of the country doesn't really care much about the economic issues, much less understand the basics of those issues. Therefore the least likely guy we'll ever elect is someone who truly believes in economic freedom. That's why Reagan was so special.

Politics is compromise. Compromise means that no one gets what they want.

Cry, complain, dislike, refuse to participate, do whatever you want. The fact is that your to your fellow citizens you are on the fringe. The ONLY chance you have at any sort of relevance, the ONLY way you can make a difference at all, is to align yourself as best you can with other people with whom you can find SOME common ground.

Or you can take your ball and go home, in which case the political system will cease to give even the tiny bit of thought it gives to you now.

But I feel you guys, I really do. I'm often very disappointed with reality myself.

Again, if you are partial to the Republican brand of ****, then go for it. I just can't stomach the fascism coupled with the blatant disregard for our civil liberties.

 

[IncendiaryGunner]

The MSM pushed the birther issue? You gotta be kidding. Okay, I know now that you aren't serious. Anyone that brought it up was treated like a nut. How many times did I see the Sunday talking heads beat down on the GOP leaders to disavow any members that questioned his birth status. Oh no. The only reason the certificate was ever released is because Trump didn't care if they painted him as a nut. He was the first one that was willing to bang the drum in public.

Yes, the media pushed the birther issue. I believe it originated from Hillary Clinton's camp if I recall correctly, but it was quickly picked up by many that opposed Obama down the road.

The short form birth certificate was released in 2008, long before Trump took up the issue. Maybe Trump does not care if people think he is a nut, but I do not buy into the idea that Trump's hope was to have the long form released. I think it is more plausible that he believe the American people would actually vote to elect him, and that bringing up the issue would gain him publicity. While it did gain him publicity, not all publicity is truly good publicity.

Yes, many of the "birthers" were considered nutty - and it likely hurt the political stance of those that pushed it more than it helped. The reason it was always treated as a conspiracy theory, was because everyone that claimed he was not born in America did not have any proof. It was a claim without substantial evidence to back it up - and when someone makes claims like that without proof concerning people in high political positions - most people will not believe it. It is like believing that intelligent aliens come to earth to experiment on humans without proof - it is not rational. They could exist, and not believing in aliens is not the same disbelieving in aliens - but "knowing" for sure that something exists, when you do not know for sure - will always come off as nutty.

What is important to remember, is that when silly claims are made about Bachmann, that does not mean those making the claims will not be considered nutty also. People that make claims without proof are generally not taken seriously - and those that believe irrational claims will always be considered on the fringe - no matter what political affiliation. Anyone that makes misleading claims can be called out by opposing political factions just as easily as the birthers were - so that too is not one sided.

At the end of the day, Bachmann's words are commonly used against her - because of the words that come out of her mouth. She has become notorious for not only the minor gaffes that nobody cares about (ie: John Wayne), but misleading statements about serious issues (ie: the Obama administration only issued one new drilling permit). If the left was given as much ammo by Mitt Romney (or insert other GOP candidate), they would drag them through the mud just as quickly - and any politician on the left can expect the same from the right leaning media.

Treating criticism of Bachmann as if they are always unjust because she is a republican woman, and not because of the validity of the criticism itself - will always be a lame defense. Everyone in politics will be criticized, and expecting the media to use kiddie gloves on anyone because of their gender, race, or political affiliation is ridiculous.

 

[Garb]

Yes, the media pushed the birther issue. I believe it originated from Hillary Clinton's camp if I recall correctly, but it was quickly picked up by many that opposed Obama down the road.

The short form birth certificate was released in 2008, long before Trump took up the issue. Maybe Trump does not care if people think he is a nut, but I do not buy into the idea that Trump's hope was to have the long form released. I think it is more plausible that he believe the American people would actually vote to elect him, and that bringing up the issue would gain him publicity. While it did gain him publicity, not all publicity is truly good publicity.

Yes, many of the "birthers" were considered nutty - and it likely hurt the political stance of those that pushed it more than it helped. The reason it was always treated as a conspiracy theory, was because everyone that claimed he was not born in America did not have any proof. It was a claim without substantial evidence to back it up - and when someone makes claims like that without proof concerning people in high political positions - most people will not believe it. It is like believing that intelligent aliens come to earth to experiment on humans without proof - it is not rational. They could exist, and not believing in aliens is not the same disbelieving in aliens - but "knowing" for sure that something exists, when you do not know for sure - will always come off as nutty.

What is important to remember, is that when silly claims are made about Bachmann, that does not mean those making the claims will not be considered nutty also. People that make claims without proof are generally not taken seriously - and those that believe irrational claims will always be considered on the fringe - no matter what political affiliation. Anyone that makes misleading claims can be called out by opposing political factions just as easily as the birthers were - so that too is not one sided.

At the end of the day, Bachmann's words are commonly used against her - because of the words that come out of her mouth. She has become notorious for not only the minor gaffes that nobody cares about (ie: John Wayne), but misleading statements about serious issues (ie: the Obama administration only issued one new drilling permit). If the left was given as much ammo by Mitt Romney (or insert other GOP candidate), they would drag them through the mud just as quickly - and any politician on the left can expect the same from the right leaning media.

Treating criticism of Bachmann as if they are always unjust because she is a republican woman, and not because of the validity of the criticism itself - will always be a lame defense. Everyone in politics will be criticized, and expecting the media to use kiddie gloves on anyone because of their gender, race, or political affiliation is ridiculous.

+1 I've seen Palin make an idiot out of herself on shows that are partial to her point of view, and not just because I disagreed with her either. She actually flip flopped on an issue in a matter of seconds and proved she had no idea what she was talking about. When people find out I don't like Palin they sometimes think I've been brainwashed by the liberal media, when really I only ever hear about her on Fox, and she still comes across as a moron even without being criticized.