Politifact (the Pulitizer prize winning site that actually fact checks statements by politicians instead of just printing or broadcasting them) determined that Michele Bachmann's latest claim statement about health care reform is a lie.
That makes eight Bachmann statements on public policy that Politifact has reviewed, and that makes eight Bachmann statements on public policy that Politifact has shown to be false. She's batting a thousand over there; I wonder if any other political figure they research can boast a similar record.
Here's the latest Bachmann statement they evaluated:
"President Obama's bill won't bring down the costs (of health care) for average Americans -- or really for very few Americans, if any."
Michele Bachmann on Wednesday, March 3rd, 2010 in an interview on CNN's Larry King
Here's what they determined:
To test this claim, we turned first to the nonpartisan referee for such questions -- the Congressional Budget Office...
...adding it up, nearly 134 million people should see their premiums go down when subsidies are factored in. That's about 70 percent of all privately insured Americans.
What about the rest? By our calculations, about 45 million people would see their premiums stay the same. Adding them to the 134 million Americans who saw their premiums drop, you get 179 million people, or almost 94 percent of those on private insurance.
Got that? If the plan goes through, 70% of all privately insured Americans will see their premiums go down; about 24% of privately insured Americans will see their benefits stay about the same.
Politifact's conclusion:
...taking into account the subsidies, a full 70 percent would see their premiums fall. And almost 94 percent would see their premiums either fall or stay the same. No matter how you slice it, the overwhelming majority are likely to see a decline. So we find her claim False.
People sometimes ask me whether I think MB actually believes the falsehoods she spreads. My answer is that I think that sometimes she does, sometimes she doesn't. I think that the reason she makes false statements is to attract and keep the support of people who want to believe those false statements are true: the essence of demagogy, the essence of modern American conservatism.
But it doesn't really matter whether she believes the false statements she keeps making. If you make a statement, find out that it's false, but let the statement stand uncorrected--that's the same as lying and it perpetuates the lie.
And politicians are not "allowed" to lie about important matters of public concern--except in conservative circles, where doing so can make you "an American hero."
As regular MPP readers know, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) loves herself some conspiracy theories. She reliably has a new one each month. This time, President Obama is giving out judgeships to bribe Democrats and she wants an investigation. Here's what she had to say on Larry King Live last night:
BACHMANN: Because today, the president offered a judgeship to the brother of a member of Congress. Tonight, the president has that same member of Congress at the White House, pressuring him to change his vote on health care. We need to have an - an independent investigation into this matter, because we've seen the Cornhusker Kickback, the Louisiana Purchase the union loophole. And now, the big question is, is the White House trading health care votes for judgeships? This is a pretty serious issue, Larry. ...If you offer a judgeship to a brother of a member of Congress and the same night you have that member at the White House, where the president's twisting his arm to ask that member of Congress to switch his vote on health care?
(Think Progress)
I know you'll be shocked, but this is a lie. Let's examine how Bachmann came to believe in this latest conspiracy theory.
Okay... so this is what she said about the census last year:
...Rep. Michele Bachmann (R., Minn.) has said she would refuse to answer census questions other than the number of people in her home as a protest against government intrusiveness. "I think there is a point when you say enough is enough," she told Fox News last month.
Ms. Bachmann also claimed - incorrectly - that ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), the liberal group whose voter registration activities became a flash point in last year's presidential election, would be "in charge of going door-to-door and collecting data from the American public" during next year's national survey.
But this year--Bachmann has flip-flopped on this particular favorite of paranoids:
(CONTINUED)
One of the compensations of spending the past seven years covering the Bachmann beat is the "payoff you get in unintentional humor."
Frank Rich is a big-time newspaper columnist that I actually admire, but this week he put a big smile on my face without even meaning to. It seems that Rich has suddenly discovered that the Tea Party movement is filled with "nuts." I mean "real-live, the end of the world is near, it's all a conspiracy, the Dems are conspiring to end freedom in America" nuts.
The reason that's funny is that the tone of the article indicates that Frank Rich thinks that's news--a new development on the right. I know something about the right because I've been watching Bachmann for many years. So I know it's not news that so many of the people representing grass-roots conservative activism have nutty beliefs about the world and the US government.
But Frank Rich, veteran observer of US political life, did not know that. And that, to me, is funny. (CONTINUED)
A bunch of Minnesota artists and I produce a comic book biography of Michele Bachmann called "False Witness: the Michele Bachmann Story." We've done three issues so far, and today the Huffington Post featured "False Witness" on its front page.
(Well...the bottom of the front page. But it's the HuffPo, and producing False Witness is a Minnesota "published out of my garage" operation, so--not bad, eh?) The HuffPo story links to a review of "False Witness" in Talking Point Memo--another nationally known progressive blog. The reviewer was very kind to us.
As always, you can buy a copy of False Witness by clicking on the link here at the Minnesota Progressive Project. It's on the right side of the page, scroll down to the illustration that says "BUY THE MICHELE BACHMANN COMIC BOOK!" If you use that link, you'll be taken to a web page where you can listen to a little animated cartoon of Michele.
But you can get a copy for free if you call in to Two Putt Tommy's radio show at 950AM on Friday at 6pm--and answer a trivia question about Bachmann.
By the way: a name to watch out for in the GOP 2012 presidential race is John Thune, Republican Senator from South Dakota. He's very low profile, compared to Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty. But he's "in good" with the Council for National Policy, an evangelical conservative political machine that I write about in the Bachmann comic book.
That counts for a lot in the GOP these days, more than most journalists and political conservatives know. Other Council for National Policy favorites are Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, and--believe it or not--our own Tim Pawlenty. Mitt Romney, not so much--Romney is a Mormon and that's a tough sell to a political machine with a secretive, sectarian, and conspiratorial worldview. Ron Paul? He's more of a John Birch Society favorite, but that doesn't preclude him from building a bridge to the Council for National Policy. They sell conspiracy theories, too.
Here's a profile of Thune that points out that this candidate is also acceptable to the teabagger wing:
http://hotlineoncall.nationalj...
Sometimes I tell progressive and liberal friends that there are American conservatives abroad in the world who are capable of "speaking true" about matters of public concern.
The response is usually an unbelieving stare, which is understandable--because for so long the currency of American conservatism has been "lies;" "movement propaganda."
Nonetheless, I stand by my claim: there is a small, very uninfluential flock of American conservatives whose standard for speaking truth exceeds that of Karl Rove and Rush Limbaugh.
The Fargo Forum (of Fargo, North Dakota) was founded in 1878. I have received assurances that these days it is "reliably red"--a Republican and conservative paper. Here is some of what they had to say about Michele Bachmann in wake of her visit to the state:
...the fallout from the visit could very well be...to cause sensible North Dakotans to wonder why the state (GOP) and its marquee candidate--Governor John Hoeven for the US Senate-- would cozy up to Bachmann and her, frankly, loony ideas.
There's "that word" again to describe Rep. Bachmann--"loony." I can remember the day (prior to her entry into Congress and shortly thereafter) when I was castigated for identifying as such on blogs. PiPress columnist Craig Westover threatened to ban my comments his blog because I identified Ms. Bachmann as a "nut, liar and bigot." But now it is permissible for those aspects of Bachmann's character to be featured in newspaper editorials.
Why? Because that "loony" stuff is true, and newsworthy, and always has been--despite the determination of Minnesota political media to screen out that word and others in their regular print profiles of Bachmann.
The Fargo Forum gives several examples of the "loony" stuff. But I can't give you a link because they will charge you $2.50 to pull up the online editorial in their archive. (Colossal nerve, the editorial just appeared on February 12th of this year.) Here are a couple of extra paragraphs:
BACHMANN IS FUN, BUT NO FRIEND
...describing her as "conservative" doesn't do her justice. Nor is it fair to thoughtful conservatives, because she subscribes to a hat full of peculiar notions that could cause her to be mistaken for a mad hatter...
(Ed. note: Obvious, to the editors of this out-of-state conservative newspaper. How to reconcile that statement, with the fact that the obviously "loony" Bachmann is accepted by the MN political press and conservatives--as a conservative in good standing, even a "role model" for politicians?
The editorial give a very abbreviated list of Bachmann "goofy comments" and then proceeds...)
Her goofy comments aside, Bachmann's take on serious policies disqualifies her as a friend of North Dakotans. Her agenda would return North Dakota to a marginal economic outpost instead of its current role as a vibrant player in the nation's energy, research and agribusiness economies.
Facts like that are underappreciated. An extremist in office following a wacky worldview can do a lot of economic damage to the very Americans that they are supposed to be representing. They cost their constituents opportunities, prosperity, money--by chasing a fantasy ideology.
A lot of people don't see why it's so important to keep extremists out of office, out of policymaking. Believe it or not, that's true--a lot of people (including reporters!) simply don't understand why it's "a bad idea to let extremists into the government."
Here we have an example of a conservative editorial board, looking at other conservatives cheering "the loony"--and realizing: this trend could cost us big: in real money, real consequences, the real world.
In Brian Lambert's new profile of Michele Bachmann in this month's Mpls/St. Paul magazine, conservative activist Drew Emmer predicts that Bachmann will challenge Amy Klobuchar for her Minnesota Senate seat in 2012.
Disturbing; one of many disturbing comments in the article.
But where's "the book?"
"The book" I am referring to is "the book on Michele Bachmann," the first attempt at a prose political biography of this fascinating politician. (I'm already doing the first comic book attempt to document and explain her career and significance. That "counts," but I'm wondering who will do the the first serious book about her that doesn't contain "funny cartoon pictures.")
Bachmann is now a national figure and it may be that a book about her is already in the works somewhere--being pitched at least, I bet.
(CONTINUED)
to discuss Michele Bachmann with host Greg Huff on AM 950, KTNF.
I plan to talk about the profile of Bachmann just published in Mpls/St. Paul Magazine. I also hope to discuss two other recent developments:
1) A Newsweek article pointing out that the Tea Party movement is filled with conspiracy nuts and other political outliers.
2) Recent broadcast commentary by none other than Bill O'Reilly. O'Reilly used air time to point out that the tea party movement does indeed included what he calls "crazy" people, "nuts," and "loons."But O'Reilly thinks that's not really a big deal.
Don't the politicians and political commentators who attend tea party events need to tell the loons that they are not welcome in politics or the Republican party? Don't the politicians and political commentators need to publicly identify which tea party theories are "loony?" We will discuss that too, tonight, I hope.
That's AM950 on your radio dial, "Minnesota Matters with Greg Huff," at 6 p.m. tonight.
The line she's giving out today is that she's being persecuted in Twin Cities media, again...
Which is another lie, of course--the established media here in Minnesota have always been de facto Bachmann allies, making the election of a kook possible. They spiked Bachmann quotes proving her extremism, prior to her election to Congress.
After her election to Congress Bachmann launched her ongoing series of fantastic and scurrilous charges against her elected colleagues (Barack Obama is "practicing tyranny" and running a "gangster government," members of Congress with "anti-American views" need investigating, Americorps is running political re-education camps, etc. etc.)
The Minnesota political media's response was quick. Editors commissioned a seemingly unending series of "sweetheart interviews" and "what a firecracker she is" political profiles--leaving Bachmann's most inflammatory charges unaddressed, allowing her to talk about what a lovable little fuzzball she is. (Compare MN media mentions of foster kids v. "Obama is practicing tyranny/leading America in economic Marxism" mentions.)
The MinnPost distinguished itself by commissioning a fellow conservative to interview her (that's the lovable little fuzzball interview.) The City Pages, usually pretty good on the Bachmann story, agreed to allow her answer questions submitted in advance (and had the nerve to present that to the public as the "definitive" Michele Bachmann interview.)
You can look through the various Star Tribune profiles of her political career--published over a series of years--and find absolutely nothing on what she's done to address the chronic home foreclosures problem in her district. The Strib's editorial page has acknowledged that she's a conspiracy nut--but their "straight news reporting" and "analytical pieces" on Bachmann don't acknowledge that essential component of her politics.
The PiPress? Well...the PiPress is the "Fredo Corleone" of Bachmann coverage. I've been reading Bachmann coverage since 2003, I can't think of single valuable article about her that came out of the PiPress.
Andy Birkey of MNIndy posts video of Rep. Bachmann promoting the upcoming Keep God in America Rally.
According to Michele, an unidentified group within the United States seeks to end our religious freedom and freedom of expression:
"There's a lot of people in the United States that want to use the power of government to take away yours, and my, and your viewers, freedom of speech and expression in the marketplace of ideas."
...but she didn't name any names, there's an edit in the video right at that point.
I would like to know the names of these people, and I hope that reporters with access to Bachmann ask for those names. It's kind of like when she said that there were people with anti-American views serving with her in Congress. Didn't name the names (in fact she later denied having made the claim, though it was televised.) Gotta name those names, Michele---the amorphous smears are no good, that only serves to increase the paranoia and divisiveness.
And she does it again, same video:
"We have to stand up for those freedoms, because right now there's people that want to take away your liberty and mine, to express our faith and express our opinions and that is completely contrary to what Thomas Jefferson and the founding fathers bled and died to give all of us."
Same serious charge...still no naming names, though. It's free-ranging paranoia aimed at some amorphous but sinister domestic enemy--which is after all the Bachmann style.
And by the way... it is not true that Thomas Jefferson and the founding fathers "bled and died" to give us the right to express our faith and opinions. Jefferson and other founding fathers did indeed champion those causes, but the average age at which a signer of the Declaration of Independence or delegat to the Constitutional convention died was age 67. As for Jefferson, the accepted historical record holds that he survived the Revolutionary War without serious injury and went on to serve as President of the United States. He died of natural causes.
There are plenty of people who did "bleed and die" to secure American independence, but that struggle ended in 1783. The Constitution in its present form was not adopted until 1787; though many of its framers "bled," those who both "bled and died" would have been unavalable to participate in the framing.
Patriotism is cool, but making up melodrama in the name of patriotism to foster parnoia--is not.
Whoops! Looks like I may have blown a prediction. After looking at Bachmann numbers from earlier this year, I went out on a limb and predicted that Bachmann would try to get into the race for Minnesota governor or senator. Her numbers in Minnesota polling and her district had been surprisingly strong, given the fact that she's a nut, liar and bigot.
But tonight the Minnesota Independent reports that a new poll shows that Minnesotans view Bachmann unfavorably. Excerpt:
Poll: Majority of Minnesotans 'embarrassed' by Bachmann
By Paul Schmelzer 2/11/10 6:00 AM
A new survey of Minnesotans shows that a majority of residents - 56 percent - are embarrassed by Rep. Michele Bachmann. The release of the survey, commissioned by the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Democracy for America and Credo Action, follows recent high-profile statements by Bachmann that she believes President Barack Obama wants to "annihilate" conservatives, that the U.S. faces a "curse" - and extinction - if it fails to support Israel, and that government must "wean" Americans off of social safety net programs like Medicare and Social Security.
...Predictably, 87 percent of Democrats polled said they were embarrassed, while only 12 percent of Republicans agreed (58 pecent of Republican respondents said they were proud of Bachmann)...
...The survey of 600 Minnesotans gauged feedback based on gender (by four percentage points, more women favored Bachmann than men), race (55 percent of whites are embarrassed by the congresswoman, while 80 percent of people of other races held that sentiment) and congressional district.
Good news for those of us who want to see Michele Bachmann's political career go no higher than the Sixth District level. I'd feel better if it had been a conservative polling outfit that had come to these conclusions, but conservatives are unlikely to disclose findings like that.
I'm not withdrawing my prediction--yet. But this is good news for Bachmann opponents everywhere. If Bachmann is as unpopular in Minnesota as this poll indicates (it's a reversal of a trend found in a poll conducted earlier this year) it's going to be that much harder for her to convince the MN GOP that's she's the go-to candidate for higher office in the state.
And conventional political wisdom holds that a politician has to hold a serious leadership position--state governor, senator or military leader--to get serious consideration for a White House run.
So let's hope that the Progressive Change Campaign Committee/Democracy for America/Credo Action poll findings hold for the foreseeable future.
By the way: since the Minnesota Independent has done the best regular reporting on Bachmann's career in this state, changes in MnIndy are worth noting here.
David Brauer of the MinnPost.com reports that MNIndy editor Paul Schmelzer has been promoted to managing editor of newly renamed parent American Independent News Network (AINN). (Schmelzer, by the way, is the author of this latest Bachmann poll story.)
Schmelzer says that MNIndy will still be his primary duty, and MNIndy still retains Andy Birkey has a reporter. Birkey is perhaps the best regular reporter on the Bachmann story in this state.
Read the MNIndy article on poll results, paying special attention to the findings on the views of independent voters that are mentioned in the fifth paragraph:
http://minnesotaindependent.co...
Every once in a while (every three years or so, I think)--I get break on the Michele Bachmann story I've been covering since 2003.
You see, my take on the Bachmann career is not part of the "news narrative" that you get on cable broadcasting and the print media. My take on the Bachmann career is that MB is the protege of a nationally organized political evangelical movment--a discrete (that means distinct/particular) part of the American "religious right." My view has been that Bachmann has been guided by and promoted by representatives of a discrete political elite that effectively writes the agenda for America's conservative evangelical voters.
The particular group I am referring to has the John Birch Society as a political and spiritual ancestor. Like the Birch Society, it is "conspiracy haunted"--understanding the world and history via rejection of post Enlightenment standards for knowledge. Like the Birch Society, it proceeds via stealth, often working through "front groups."
Unlike the John Birch Society, this group (the one that mentors Bachmann) has managed co-opt an enormous share of evangelical Christianity in America--and uses that as a "front group" for its extremist and irrational worldview and politics.
My theory (which I refer to as "my theory") is a remarkably unpopular way of interpreting the "meaning" of Michele Bachmann's career. But this week, I got a break. (CONTINUED)
Most of the stuff in Minneapolis Star Tribune reporter Kevin Diaz' latest big piece on Bachmann is stuff you could have read on this blog at any time over the past month or so. But here's the dramatic anecdote that reporter Diaz uses to open his latest big piece on Michele Bachmann.
WASHINGTON - A few weeks into her first term in Congress, Michele Bachmann stood around a radio booth as a news reporter described her as an evangelical Christian who had the potential to be "very outspoken" on social issues.
Bachmann approached moments later to inform him, "I'm also a tax attorney."
As the Minnesota Republican rises to prominence in the national Tea Party that meets this weekend in Nashville, the two sides of Bachmann's political persona have been fused into a mirror image of the newly charged conservative reaction against government spending and much of the rest of President Obama's domestic agenda.
That's it, babe, that's the anecdote and the insight. You see? She was an attorney for the government's tax department, Diaz reports that she reminded people of that back in 2006--and this is one of the two sides of Michele Bachmann that have been "fused."
But what about the other side--the "evangelical conservative" side that Diaz mentioned? Does Diaz explain how the "evangelical Christianity" he mentioned in the first paragraph is fused to tea party anti-tax conservatism?
No, sadly, he does not. You think that this time the Strib might boldly go where no professional reporter has gone before and explain how the national evangelical political movement made an obscure Minnesota backbencher into a national political figure: but no. (At the least the Strib is willing to use the phrase the "evangelical Christian" to describe her, nine years later. Prior to this, they used a political euphemism ("social conservative") which told readers nothing about the national political movement backing Bachmann.)
CONTINUED BELOW
The papers keep telling me that the teabagging guys are grassroots, but I don't see it. I mean--the tickets to the convention in Nashville cost $549, and only 600 "delegates" were willing to pay that.
As you probably know by now, teabagger icon Michele Bachmann decided to cancel, when it was pointed out to her that a paid appearance at "for profit" grassroots event might get into some law trouble. But Sarah Palin isn't holding any office, so she's free to go--collecting her "grassroots" $100,000.
All this following Michele's "no" vote on taxing the bonuses of AIG execs who left American taxpayers holding the bag for a $100 billion dollar bailout. If you smell a rat when teabagger elected officials claim that they have the interests of the grassroots at heart--you're not the only one. Here's some teabaggers smelling that very same rat, as quoted in the Seattle Times:
...prominent voices in the (tea party) movement remain furious about the financial setup. Erick Erickson, editor of RedState.com, a conservative blog, wrote that the convention "smells scammy."
Two tea-party groups - the American Liberty Alliance and the National Precinct Alliance - withdrew from the convention in protest, as did two featured speakers, Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., and Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn. (Editor's note: That's a very kind interpretation those speakers' decisions. As I said, I think it more likely that it was not principle but fear of law trouble. I am supported in this belief by a remark by another tea bagger, who said he understood Bachmann's decision to cancel in light of the possibility of a follow-up "show trial" in Washington. Anyway:)
"The average tea-party person is going to be sitting on their couch at home because they can't afford $600 for a lobster-and-steak dinner in a fancy hotel," said Anthony Shreeve, 27, a tea-party organizer from Tennessee who is boycotting the convention and Palin's speech. "It didn't sound 'tea party' to me. It sounded more like a regular Republican fundraiser."
RIGHT you are, Mr. Anthony Shreeve of Tennessee! Give that very perceptive young man a cigar. The tea party spurted directly out pre-existing conservative activism. Same cast of characters, new name for the movement. They are no more "grass roots" than socialist activists, and they have received considerable aid and counsel from "grassroots" right wing millionaires. The fiction it's a "grass roots" movement is based on the conservative fiction that "conservative Americans are the "real" America," and all of the rest of us are dopes or a potential threat to national security.
But it is kind of fun to see the expression on rank-and-file tea bagger faces when they find that their supposedly "grassroots" movement has been co-opted so quickly and so easily by the very special interests in Washington, D.C. that they claim to be battling. It does indeed look a like a GOP fundraiser, when tickets are going for $549.
...the groups largely have united around a common cause: a don't-tread-on-me brand of fiscal conservatism and a belief that the federal government, first under President George W. Bush and now under Obama, has recklessly plunged the nation further into debt and overstepped its constitutional powers.
It is only the fabled "conservative power of reality denial" that keeps the tea party guys in the movement. After all--these conservative activists were slavish idolators of (and proselytizers) for the Bush/Cheney administration and the Gingrich/DeLay GOP Congress...
...who, between them, spent their taxpayer dollars like drunken sailors for more than a decade! Where, then, were the angry conservative mobs demonstrating against the out-of-control spending? Denial is at the heart of the average conservative--without denial to shred reality and historical fact for you, every day, you cannot be conservative. And if you're a teabagger, you've been coopted--your candidates will be Bush "big government people," too.
How do I know that already? Because one of leading lights of the teabaggers is our own Michele Bachmann--the most adoring fan of current teabagger villian George W. Bush. On the record, so many times during the past decade-- slavering over the man and defending Bush economic policies that teabaggers now regard as anathema. Literally kissing the guy!
And she's the one the teabaggers think is going to overturn the massive spending and debt incursion in Washington that Bush implemented for eight years.
Put down the tea party's acceptance of Bachmann as a principled leader as more evidence of the following--written in 1866 by a man acknowledged to be one of the most brilliant who ever lived:
"I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it."-- John Stuart Mill.
Michele told a crowd yesterday that if Dem health care reform is adopted and you criticize it--the government will withhold health care from you.
Bachmann: Criticize health care plan and forget about being treated
Posted by Eric Roper
Last update: February 2, 2010 - 11:33 AM
...
She explained that a man recently approached her to say that in Japan, which "had the government takeover of health care," the government puts people on "a list" and refuses treatment to those who criticize the health system.
Don't worry, folks, I was just on the phone to the Japanese embassy in Washington. We got the whole thing straightened out. The story's nonsense. But according to Michele, that doesn't mean that you can't use the lie against the Democrats:
(continued)
