Crafting political ads is a delicate task.

Candidates such as Michele Bachmann must carefully walk the line between aggressive and shameless, between earnest and desperate. It's hard to be effective coming from behind. Candidates must avoid the perception they are simply experimenting with provocative messages to break through media fog--flailing or despair will be read as weakness.

It's tough to put aside your ideological preferences and coldly analyze a candidate's efficacy, but it's of inestimable use to a modern campaign. So let's play Frank Luntz! Get out your imaginary focus group dials, let us coldly break down Bachmann's new spot. How's her body language? Her messaging? Do her plunging, nay, disintegrating poll numbers seem to inform her choices? In the battle for primary voters, every variable must be carefully weighed.

See how you think she did and share your thoughts in the comments.

In a two week span in which the East Coast of the United States was beset by a monstrous hurricane, states in the same area had their strongest earthquake since World War II and Colorado experienced its most violent quake since 1967, we were reminded once again of the important role played by federal government in our society.

Now, I’m no constitutional scholar - like, say, Michele Bachmann - but I remember something in that document about government’s responsibility for “the general welfare”, which I can only assume means that if the state you live in comes to resemble Waterworld there is probably a useful role for the government in helping you keep your head above water.

This is not only a progressive view of governance. It is also one rooted in reality and based on US history and culture. In the early days of the republic, the Congressional Act of 1803 provided assistance to a New Hampshire town damaged severely by a fire.

This pattern would continue as Congress would help the victims of natural disasters in the two centuries to follow - not including Lady Gaga’s performance at the 2011 MTV Video Music Awards or Tim Pawlenty’s presidential campaign, of course.

The stories like the fire in New Hampshire, however, have not formed the dominant narrative since that actor-who-climbed-into-bed-with-the-monkey transformed government into something that was on your back or just for those “welfare queens”.

Reagan and his ideological soulmates understood quite well that as Josef Stalin infamously said, while “the death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions is a statistic.”

In other words, if Americans realize that a single-payer healthcare system will help protect their parents and children from disease, then they’ll be for it. But if it can be something abstract that just helps those other people who are mere statistics at best, supplied by an amorphous “big government” with no human face, long tentacles and the ability to force you to drink fluorinated water or strictly require a pulse to purchase a firearm - well, then, it’s easy to hate.

And hate it they do. As long as it is government spending for you, and not them.

Because the truth is, with very few exceptions, conservative elected officials (of both parties) are hypocrites when it comes to spending money.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (227)

PLAYS: (1663)

Embed

Michele Bachmann had to have the most interesting campaign promise of any of the Republican candidates to date: The same woman who has never passed a single bill in her tenure in congress is telling audiences that President Bachmann will make sure Americans are paying less than $2 per gallon for gasoline.

“Under President Bachmann you will see gasoline come down below $2 a gallon again,” Bachmann told a crowd Tuesday in South Carolina. “That will happen.” “The day that the president became president gasoline was $1.79 a gallon,” Bachmann said. “Look what it is today.”[..]

Let’s first take a look at the basic claim. I have seen many people repeat her claim that gasoline was $1.79 per gallon when Obama took office, but I haven’t seen anyone fact check it. So I went to the EIA statistics, and found that the week before Obama took office (his inauguration was on Tuesday, January 20, 2009), overall retail gasoline averaged $1.90 per gallon. The week of his inauguration retail gasoline averaged $1.89 per gallon. So, there was some slight context possibly needed to qualify the $1.79 per gallon remark (probably somewhere gasoline averaged that price) but the general claim is basically correct: Prices were much lower when Obama took office, and now the current price of gasoline is $3.66 per gallon.

Just for fun — and before we examine the claim in more detail — I decided to check and see what gas prices were when Bush took office. When he first took office on January 20, 2001, gasoline prices averaged $1.51 a gallon. At the beginning of his second term in 2005, gasoline prices averaged $1.90. When Bush left office, gasoline prices averaged $1.90. However, as we know gasoline prices were hardly stable in between. During Bush’s second term — in the summer of 2008 — gasoline ran up to over $4 per gallon. The price remained at that level for almost two months before a recession brought the economy crashing down — and gasoline prices along with it.

But most families don’t fill up for the entire year on a specific day, so a snapshot of prices on inauguration day isn’t really that meaningful. Let’s consider average annual gas prices over the past few years. Beginning in 2002, each subsequent year of Bush’s administration saw higher average annual gas prices than the previous year. For six years in a row — from 2003 through 2008 — gas prices rose. Prices crossed the $2 per gallon mark in 2004 and ultimately rose to an annual average of $3.30 per gallon in 2008, Bush’s last full year in office. And the only reason gasoline prices weren’t higher than $3.30 per gallon was due to the recession-induced price collapse in the price of oil in the second half of 2008.

Beyond the fundamental idiocy of the construct, how exactly does President Bachmann think she'll achieve this particular sparkle pony? By taking an "All Of The Above" approach to energy policy, naturally.

Continue reading »

Americans can be forgiven for assuming Michele Bachmann was deadly serious when she repeatedly joked this weekend that God was using an earthquake and hurricane to send a divine message to restrain federal spending. After all, Bachmann has not only proclaimed time and again that the Almighty called her to seek higher office; in 2009, she joined an evangelical "prayercast" asking for divine intervention to halt health care reform. As it turns out, she has plenty of company among the Republican 2012 White House hopefuls. When it comes to policy foreign and domestic, from frontrunner Rick Perry on down the GOP field is offering the ultimate faith-based initiative.

For years, the leading lights of the Party of Lincoln have been turning Honest Abe's mantra ("My concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on God's side") on its head. But when it comes to making divine intervention the centerpiece of public policy, Texas Governor Rick Perry is hoping to be the chosen one.

Before entering the GOP presidential race, Governor Perry tried in vain to end the drought in Texas by proclaiming "the three-day period from Friday, April 22, 2011, to Sunday, April 24, 2011, as Days of Prayer for Rain in the State of Texas" and urged "Texans of all faiths and traditions to offer prayers on those days for the healing of our land, the rebuilding of our communities and the restoration of our normal way of life."

But while God didn't hear Perry's call, Perry heard His. As he explained last month before formally jumping into the GOP race:

"I'm not ready to tell you that I'm ready to announce that I'm in. But I'm getting more and more comfortable every day that this is what I've been called to do. This is what America needs."

If the Lord is calling on Rick Perry to lead the United States, Perry plans to call Him back when it's time to actually run it.

On August 6th in Houston, Governor Perry tunnelled under the wall separating church and state to lead The Response, an evangelical day of prayer and fasting seeking divine intervention for America. As Perry put it:

"I sincerely hope you'll join me in Houston on August 6th and take your place in Reliant Stadium with praying people asking God's forgiveness, wisdom and provision for our state and nation. There is hope for America. It lies in heaven, and we will find it on our knees."

Continue reading »

Michele Bachmann and many right leaning politicians have indicated their divine inspiration coming from the same three religious leaders: Francis Schaeffer, Loren Cunningham, and Bill Bright. In an article from the New Yorker Bachmann indicated she got involved in politics after being inspired by a video designed to bring people to a religious movement. After all - as a graduate of Oral Roberts University Law School - Bachmann is no stranger to "Christian Reconstructionism."

Their work began in the 70's and 80's when many of today's Republican candidates were in college and first getting started. Those three religious leaders came from their own projects - Campus Crusade, Youth With a Mission, and Francis Schaeffer was the author of the Christian Manifesto (the Christian version of the Communist Manifesto) and many credit with being one of the fathers of the anti-choice movement. Their mutual project was called Reclaiming the 7 Mountains of Culture, in which their aim was to take over every element of our society with their right wing ideology.

According to the video above, what these religious zealots believe is in a kind of war between good and evil that must be fought by them as part of a righteous army to save the souls of all people. Their souls, of course, can only be saved if this religious army takes over the seven elements of our culture to "shape and influence its destiny."

1. Government: which they say can either restrain evil or endorse it.
2. Education: "Where truths or lies about God and His creation are taught."
3. Media: where they believe information can be interpreted through the lens of good or evil and then inevitably distributed to the sad lost souls they feel the need to save.
4. Arts and Entertainment: the only place that values and "virtue" are either celebrated or distorted. Please note, values and virtue have no place in your home life or faith life - evidently they must be taught through arts and entertainment only….
5. Religion: "Where people worship God in spirit and truth or settle for a religious ritual."
6. Family: which can pass on either blessings or curses from generation to generation.
7. Business: "Where people build for the glory of God or the glory of man."

Continue reading »

Dan Webster's constituents react to his support for the GOP non-jobs budget.

Working America is setting up "Buyer's Remorse" booths in Minnesota, Colorado, Florida, Michigan and New Mexico to collect "return" ballots from voters who feel betrayed by their representatives who refused to pursue legislation to create jobs. During the August recess, Working America's protests will focus on Representatives Daniel Webster (FL), Michele Bachmann (MN), Tim Walberg (MI), Mike Coffman (CO) and Governor Susana Martinez (NM). At a time when job creation is the top issue on the public agenda, these lawmakers have ignored the wishes of the people and pursued an extreme ideological agenda while creating few, if any, jobs.

These Republicans all campaigned on promises to focus on job creation, but have failed to live up to their promises. Many of the policies they have pursued have made the jobs crisis in the country worse, not better.

“Working-class families feel duped by broken election-year promises,” said Karen Nussbaum, Executive Director of Working America. “Elected officials must be held accountable for failing to even attempt to create jobs and strengthen the economy.”

Thousands of return ballots have already been gathered in these states and through Working America's website. Details on each event are in the events section of Working America's Facebook page. Events can be followed on Twitter with the hashtag #buyersremorse.

Working America is an affiliate organization of the AFL-CIO that organizes workers where unions don't exist. Their goal is to give workers the tools they need to fight for their own economic interests.

(Click here for larger image.)

If nothing else, the debt ceiling crisis provided what Barack Obama is so fond of calling a "teachable moment." Hopefully, that extends to the President himself. After seeing his nominees blocked, his legislation filibustered and popular upper-income tax increases delayed by Republicans who withheld their support from his watered down stimulus and health care programs, President Obama nevertheless continued to seek common ground with those whose only goal remains his political destruction. The result was as painful as it was predictable.

As for the rest of us, here are 25 things we learned during the debt crisis.

(1) We learned that Republicans really care about the national debt, but only when a Democrat is in the White House. As Dick Cheney put it, "Reagan proved deficits don't matter."

(2) We learned that the national debt tripled under Ronald Reagan, forcing him to raise the debt ceiling 17 times. Overwhelmed by the torrents of red ink unleashed by his supply-side tax cuts of 1981, Reagan raised taxes eleven times while in office. (His deficit reduction initiatives of 1982, 1984 and 1987 relied on over 75% in new tax revenue.) It's no wonder Reagan called the mountain of debt he bequeathed to America his greatest regret.

(3) We learned that George W. Bush nearly doubled the national debt, leaving Barack Obama a $1.2 trillion annual deficit and almost $11 trillion in debt on January 20, 2009.

(4) We learned that the Bush tax cuts were the single biggest factor in erasing the projected surpluses Dubya inherited from Bill Clinton. The Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 accounted for almost half of the red ink during his tenure, and if made permanent, would contribute more to the debt over the next decade than Iraq, Afghanistan, the recession, the stimulus and TARP combined.

(5) We learned that tax cuts don't "pay for themselves" or "always increase revenues." Only in 2005 did federal tax revenue reach the pre-Bush tax cut levels of 2000.

(6) We learned that the Republicans' so-called job creators don't create jobs when their taxes are low. In fact, the data show that the far more jobs were created and the economy grew much more quickly when the top 1% of income earners paid higher - even much higher - taxes.

(7) We learned that for John Boehner, some "spending binges" are more equal than others. While spending under Barack Obama rose by about 10% from George W. Bush's last budget in FY 2009, federal outlays almost doubled between 2001 and 2009. As it turns out, the two unfunded wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the budget-busting Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 (the first war-time tax cut in modern U.S. history) and the Medicare prescription drug program drained the U.S. Treasury. Mitch McConnell, John Boehner and Eric Cantor voted for all of it.

(8) We learned that Republicans have short memories. When Eric Cantor complained recently that "what I don't think the White House understands is how difficult it is for fiscal conservatives to say they're going to vote for a debt ceiling increase," he apparently forgot that Republican majorities voted seven times to raise the debt limit under President Bush. Along with John Boehner, Mitch McConnell and Jon Kyl, Cantor and the current GOP leadership team voted a combined 19 times to increase George W. Bush's borrowing authority by $4 trillion. (That vote tally included a "clean" debt ceiling increase in 2004, backed by 98 current House Republicans and 31 sitting GOP Senators.)

(9) We learned that Republicans are bad at genetics, too. Last Friday, Texas Rep. Jeb Hensarling claimed that for Republicans, raising the debt ceiling is "contrary to our DNA."

(10) We learned that in rare moments of candor, Republicans can speak the truth. In January, Speaker Boehner acknowledged that failure to raise the debt ceiling would cause "financial disaster." And Utah Senator Orrin Hatch explained that when President Bush was in the White House, for Republicans "it was standard practice not to pay for things."

Continue reading »

A word of advice to Speaker of the House John Boehner: before you go on national television to tout your House Republican debt reduction plan, you might want to check with House Republicans first. Because as AP, the Washington Times and the Wall Street Journal among others are reporting, Speaker Boehner doesn’t have the votes from the “default deniers” in his own party, forcing him to rewrite his smaller-than-expected bill. All of which means that Democrats are going to have save John Boehner - and the country – from the Republican Party he claims to lead.

Two weeks ago, Speaker Boehner acknowledged that as many as 60 GOP Congressmen “who won't vote to raise the debt ceiling under any circumstances.” That includes, the conservative Washington Times reported, Speaker Boehner’s own bill:

“There are not 218 Republicans in support of this plan,” Rep. Jim Jordan, an Ohio Republican who heads the powerful conservative caucus in the House, told reporters Tuesday morning.

If Mr. Jordan is right, that would mean Speaker John A. Boehner would have to rely on Democrats to pass the $1.2 trillion spending cuts plan — support Democrats’ top vote-counter said he’ll be hard-pressed to gain.

As the AP explained, Boehner’s problems with his own caucus grew worse as the day wore on:

Boehner wasn't helped by an official congressional analysis late Tuesday that said his plan would produce smaller savings than originally promised — less than $1 trillion in spending cuts over the coming decade rather than the $1.2 trillion he estimated on Monday.

Earlier, responding to the conservative Republican opposition, Boehner quickly went on Rush Limbaugh's radio show, then he began one-on-one chats with wavering Republicans on the House floor during midday roll call votes.

"He has to convince a few people," Rep. Tom Petri, R-Wis., observed dryly from a doorway.

For his part, House Minority Leader Eric Cantor pleaded with his fellow Republicans to fall into line. Lamenting that “the debt limit vote sucks,” he told his GOP colleagues to “stop whining.” As Politico reported:

Republicans have three options, Cantor said: risk default, pass Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-Nev.) plan — which he thinks gives President Barack Obama a blank check — or “call the president’s bluff” by passing the Boehner plan, which not only cuts deeply into domestic spending but calls for a bipartisan commission to find more savings.

At this point, a presidential veto is the least of John Boehner’s worries. While polling shows voters back President Obama in the debt ceiling stand-off, GOP groups like the Club for Growth and presidential candidates like Michele Bachmann came out against his proposal. Meanwhile, House Democrats made clear they will not provide Boehner the votes he needs for passage of his plan. As NPR reported:

If Boehner hopes to make up the lost Republican votes with Democratic votes, Rep. Steny Hoyer had a message for him. Don't count on it…

House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (Md.) on Tuesday predicted Speaker John Boehner's (R-Ohio) debt-ceiling proposal would win scant support from Democrats.

Hoyer declined to say whether Boehner's bill could clear the House, but stated that "very few" Democrats would support the measure.

Two weeks ago, John Boehner attacked President Obama, proclaiming, “This debt-limit increase is his problem.” Less than 24 hours after going “mano a mano” with Obama, the problem is Speaker Boehner’s.

For weeks, Republican presidential candidates have been a running a gauntlet of ever-more draconian pledges put forth by party purists. Grover Norquist's anti-tax oath, the Susan B. Anthony List anti-abortion manifesto , the "Marriage Vow" and the "Cut, Cap and Balance" pledge are just some of the multiplying litmus tests now demanded by social and economic conservatives alike.

But as the 2012 primaries approach, another de facto requirement for GOP White House hopefuls is emerging. That is, candidates must not only (a) proclaim that they have been called on God to seek the presidency, but (b) declare that divine intervention is the cure for what ails America. Call it the Divine Right Pledge. And so far, it's one most of the GOP field seems more than willing to take.

Of course, the GOP has long been parodied as "God's Own Party." But now, the Party of Lincoln is rapidly turning Honest Abe's mantra ("My concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on God's side.") on its head.

Texas Governor and possible instant GOP frontrunner Rick Perry provides a case in point, with check marks in both columns of the God Pledge. As he explained his likely White House run:

"I'm not ready to tell you that I'm ready to announce that I'm in. But I'm getting more and more comfortable every day that this is what I've been called to do. This is what America needs."

If the Lord is calling on Rick Perry to lead the United States, Perry plans to call Him back when it's time to actually run it.

On August 6th in Houston, Governor Perry will tunnel under the wall separating church and state to lead The Response, an evangelical day of prayer and fasting seeking divine intervention for America. As Perry put it:

"I sincerely hope you'll join me in Houston on August 6th and take your place in Reliant Stadium with praying people asking God's forgiveness, wisdom and provision for our state and nation. There is hope for America. It lies in heaven, and we will find it on our knees."

Perry, whose faith-based policy like the governors of Georgia and Oklahoma includes asking residents to pray for rain for their drought-stricken state, later explained that the solutions to America's woes are above his pay grade:

"I think it's time for us to just hand it over to God and say, 'God, You're going to have to fix this.'

(That Perry may now skip the August 6 event in Houston may just be confirmation that God wants him in Washington DC instead.)

Rep. Michele Bachmann may not know much about history, but she does know that God is on her side. The self-proclaimed "fool for Christ," who in 2006 warned that "we are in the End of Days" and counseled "wives, you are to be submissive to your husbands," has been also called on by God.

Continue reading »

Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann has never been one to shy away from controversy. Whether she understands the subject or not, she will belt out anything that crosses her mind if she thinks it will build her street cred with the Tea Party faithful. She is, after all, a Constitutional expert dontchaknow. Monday was no exception. After touring flood damaged areas of Iowa with fellow Republican Steve King, she used the occasion to inject race into the mix:

Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann pointed to one program in particular Monday when talking about wasteful government spending: a multibillion dollar settlement paid to black farmers, who claim the federal government discriminated against them for decades in awarding loans and other aid.

The issue came up after Bachmann and Republican Rep. Steve King of Iowa toured flooded areas along the Missouri River. During a news conference, they fielded a question about whether farmers affected by the flooding also should be worried by proposed U.S. Department of Agriculture cuts.

Bachmann seconded King's criticism, saying, "When money is diverted to inefficient projects, like the Pigford project, where there seems to be proof-positive of fraud, we can't afford $2 billion in potentially fraudulent claims when that money can be used to benefit the people along the Mississippi River and the Missouri River."

Inefficient projects? Of course neither King nor Bachmann can cite any actual fraud, they just throw it out there to see what sticks to the wall. When asked by the AP for his thoughts on Bachmann's statements, John Boyd, head of the National Black Farmers Association had this to say:

"Why continue to take from those people who haven't taken part in federal programs equally and give to another group of farmers who have taken part in federal programs?" Boyd asked. "I think taking resources from a group of people who have been historically denied any relief at the Department of Agriculture is a bad idea. For the flood victims that deserve redress ... they should provide those people with relief, too."

Later in the article Boyd was quoted as saying "If Ms. Bachmann wants to be president of the United States, she should treat all people fairly." Mr. Boyd, I applaud your statement, but unfortunately, in Michele Bachmann's America, only wealthy, white Christians are worthy.