Just think about some of her recent rhetoric. During the election, she called for an inquiry into whether members of Congress had “anti-American views.” Recently, she’s called herself a “foreign correspondent behind enemy lines” and called for Minnesotans to be “armed and dangerous.” She seems unable to control herself. Now she sees even the most benign Federal programs in stark, revolutionary terms. Here’s what she said about a proposed expansion of the AmeriCorps service program:
I believe that there is a very strong chance that we will see that young people will be put into mandatory service. And the real concerns is that there are provisions for what I would call re-education camps for young people, where young people have to go and get trained in a philosophy that the government puts forward and then they have to go to work in some of these politically correct forums.
Increasingly, Bachmann seems unable to focus on her day-to-day responsibilities to her district and her country. Instead, she’s caught up in some imagined revolution against the leadership of her country. At some point, we need to ask: At what point does Bachmann stop being a “kook” and start being a serious danger?
Yep, not good. Especially now when we need serious representation.
But if we think for a moment that a renegade Michele Bachmann is operating under the Republican radar, we’d be fools. She’s a spokesperson. What is the Republican party calling for, and who are they catering to? What percentage of the people out there want to be dangerous?
Anyway, to quell fear: It’d be easy for dems to talk about power and how the people have it as we go along fixing this terrible economy.
Also the gun thing. Dems haven’t addressed the issue — it’s not about taking guns away, anymore. (recently — Rampage killer worried about guns being taken away? Old fear.)
People voted for Michelle Bachmann, and perhaps many now regret it, however, there are many in her district who agree with everything she says.
She represents the dittoheaded Republican very well.
I do feel bad for those in her district who she will never represent, voters who Michelle Bachmann thinks of as enemies of America.
I would never consider her a serious danger, because she is helping to minimize the power of the Republican party.
Nitro said: I would never consider her a serious danger, because she is helping to minimize the power of the Republican party.
Are you sure she isn’t rallying a certain base? Renewing a call from within the party? Expressing what seems to be the extreme, but really playing on fear (a Republican specialty).
That’s all a serious danger, IMHO. It’s the Republican party taking it one step too far.
What is the consequence of declaring Bachmanann a “serious danger.” What do we do about it?
Now there’s an interesting question.
I think someone at the top asks the Republicans to deal with their own. Calling for revolution, are you? OR aren’t you? If you are not, control your people, Republicans.
I don’t think there is an already established procedure re: removing, or recalling a US Rep. but someone could look into that. Minnesota’s const. is clear about state officials, only, I believe.
As far as her constituents being sorry they voted for her… that’s a bit presumptuous. What message are they hearing, and who are they hearing it from? Many people only hear what they want to hear, and if they’re told what to think they listen even less.
But the Minnesota’s county foreclosure map shows many in Michele Bachmann’s district to be horribly hurting. Horribly! It’s terrible. So there is a way to connect with many in her district right there.
The Democrat response should be to be clear about power and who has it, etc., and how does the govn’t plan to set things right and then reduce back to simply regulating. IMHO.
If we can prove that Rep. Bachmann has committed malfeasance or nonfeasance in her time in the House, she can be recalled under MN state law. Once the petition has been filed and approved with the Secretary of State’s office, enough signatures would need to be collected to equal 25% of the votes she recieved in the most recent election.
What is not clear:
What are the legal requirments for signatures? Do they need to be registered voters? Do they need to be residents of the district she represents?
What are the acceptable definitions under MN state law for malfeasance and nonfeasance?
If Rep. Bachmann continues on the path she’s been going, I think it’s HIGHLY likely she may do or say something that would allow us to initiate the recall procedure. She may have done so already. Even a failed attempt at recall may encourage her to STFU and do her job.
While those of us not in her district may not have voted for her or technically be represented by her, she is a part of the minnesota delegation, and to some extent represents all of us. She needs to be sent a clear message that this language of hate, this deliberate attempt to stir up political and cultural fights is NOT acceptable.
Mike, the “malfeasance or nonfeasance” is pretty much limited to actual criminal acts, as I recall. Arguably, she has committed sedition by calling for armed revolt, but she can always fall back on the “only a figure of speech” defense.
In any event, I doubt that the Minnesota recall statute applies to federal office holders. She would have to be expelled by the House of Representatives.
It’s a nice thought, though.
I thought only state officials were talked about re: in our MN Constitution? What’s “state” mean, anyway, I don’t speak lawyer-esque…
— I think we’ll have to hope Michele Bachmann doesn’t ask for too much dangerous and work hard to campaign for her opponent. Actually, if her district’s Independents decide to go Democrat, she’d be out for sure. (Hey, is Aubrey Immmelman and Independent or a Republican?) —
house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/pubs/ss/ssrecall.pdf
Who can be recalled? State representatives, state senators, the governor, the lieutenant governor, the secretary of state, the state auditor, the attorney general, supreme court judges, court of appeals judges, and district judges are all subject to recall.
http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/cco/rules/mncon/mncon.htm
Sec. 6. Recall. A member of the senate or the house of representatives, an executive officer of the state identified in section 1 of article V of the constitution, or a judge of the supreme court, the court of appeals, or a district court is subject to recall from office by the voters. The grounds for recall of a judge shall be established by the supreme court. The grounds for recall of an officer other than a judge are serious malfeasance or nonfeasance during the term of office in the performance of the duties of the office or conviction during the term of office of a serious crime. A petition for recall must set forth the specific conduct that may warrant recall. A petition may not be issued until the supreme court has determined that the facts alleged in the petition are true and are sufficient grounds for issuing a recall petition. A petition must be signed by a number of eligible voters who reside in the district where the officer serves and who number not less than 25 percent of the number of votes cast for the office at the most recent general election.
Upon a determination by the secretary of state that a petition has been signed by at least the minimum number of eligible voters, a recall election must be conducted in the manner provided by law. A recall election may not occur less than six months before the end of the officer’s term.
An officer who is removed from office by a recall election or who resigns from office after a petition for recall issues may not be appointed to fill the vacancy that is created. [Adopted, November 5, 1996]
Bachmann has always been worse than crazy. What is happening is that people like her aren’t getting crazier, the rest of us are getting saner. Impending disaster has aroused us from our complacency.
Have any of the behaviors of the Radical Right ever made sense to the majority of us? Feeding the rich to benefit the poor? Promoting the widespread dispersal of assault weapons to reduce crime? Invading other countries to bring peace? Replacing fact based science with faith based religion to explain the phenomena of nature? Promoting a right to life agenda that includes capital punishment? Attacking civil liberties to preserve democracy? Protecting the unborn while neglecting children? Praising soldiers going to war, and defunding veterans programs? Opposing both birth control and abortion? Lowering taxes on the most wealthy to reduce the deficit? When were these ideas not absurd?
Think Jonestown Guyana if you want some insight into where the Republican Party is headed. These problems develop in plain sight while good people ponder how to deal with them and when to intervene. Just as in Jonestown, a drug addled leader with a microphone has convinced his followers that they are under siege and about to be taken over. Most of his followers see him as a messianic figure and will stay with him to the end. Some will take up guns and try to kill his enemies. A few will recognize that the entire group is spiraling in to lunacy and will try to escape. Few will succeed. Those that survive will be forever haunted by the collective madness they embraced without question.
This analogy is not perfect because the Far Right is a much larger and more widely dispersed group than the unfortunate followers of Jim Jones. There are many similar features however like the tightly controlled message that has religion woven into it in ways that are fundamentally incongruous. Christ asked us not to judge others. Christ turned the other cheek. Christ rebuked the money changers. Christ clothed the poor, healed the sick and fed the hungry. This is why the people of the Religious Right must use the Old Testament to anchor their beliefs. Most of their core assumptions are incompatible with Christianity. This is what happens when religion embraces politics. Mingling the sacred and the secular has always been a effective means of siezing power. In today’s world however, this is an inherently unstable relationship because we are better informed and less tolerant of the end results. We are finally coming to our senses.
Bachmann is right, Reeducation camps have existed for quite some time now. Some are brick and mortar structures and we call them Mega Churches. Others exist in cyberspace like Fox News and the EIB network of the prophet Limbaugh. Karl Rove concocted the Kool-Aid that has been distributed in these camps. They have fed it to their children. The effects are long lasting and difficult to counteract. The antidote is truth but good luck trying to administer it. Anyone who has refused this toxic brew is the enemy and can’t be trusted.
The Republican Party will recover only when the madness ends. Religion will regain its respect when it returns to its spiritual roots. This won’t happen overnight and there will be much weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth before it does.
IIII ammm a followerrr. III listennn only to Ruuuush, myyy leeeeader. Showwww meee the Koool-aiiiid. I muuuust driiink nooooow.
C”Rush”,
You are almost as childish as the drug addled gasbag himself.
Great Job!
You already have CMan, thats why you are slooooring your wooooooooords.
While I am thinking about it, have any of you seen “Jesus Camp”? I tried to Netflix it but I couldn’t get through it. I watched ten minutes before feeling uncomfortable enough to turn it off. Maybe some other night…
I think the movie does explain the thought processes of some religious folks…
http://www.jesuscampthemovie.com/
Holly,
It explains the thoughts of a lot of religious folks. It is uncomfortable to watch because seeing children so deeply indoctrinated is unsettling for anyone that wants to raise a child to enter the world with the ability to adapt.
Other documentaries that are similarly disturbing are The Trials of Ted Haggard, Friends of God, and Jonestown: the Life and Death of the Peoples Temple. CMan would have a hard time facing this fact but the only difference between the followers of Jim Jones and the followers of Rush Limbaugh is that Limbaugh’s 30 million dittoheads don’t live in total isolation. If they did, the results would be similar. Ted Haggard is the former president of the 30 million-member National Association of Evangelicals and the founding pastor of the 10,000-member New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Colorado. It isn’t coincidental that the audiences of Rush and Ted are the same size or that Ted Haggard had his own Mega Church. This is Bachmanns community.
The best way to combat the likes of Bachmann is to let her spew some hatred and bigotry with some conclusion she’s reached about what needs to be done, then demand proof. Demand the facts. Demand some logical course from point A to point B in her position. Do it constantly and in public. She will fold like the house of cards she is.
At what point is it allowable to request a psychological evaluation of an elected official?
Or left wing bloggers for that matter.
Are we as the citizens of Minnesota responsible for Representative Bachmann? If you live in her district and voted for her… you are directly responsible for her dog-whistle words that seem to be inciting violence against the legal government. I think those folks may actually want this to happen and to continue.
Someone needs to stand up and point out that her rhetoric is a trigger that sends some people off the deep end per the ambusher of police that was convinced the government was after his guns. He was a lone person driven by the rhetoric of the NRA, Beck, Limbaugh and yes, Bachmann. Each of those entities needs to come out strongly AGAINST violent action. If they do not they share responsibility for these actions. This is shouting “Fire!” in a crowded theater knowing that someone will be hurt in the panic. It is not a Free Speech issue when it crosses the line to inciting treason like she has already done.
While I realize that most people don’t sit around reading constitutional law free speech cases, everything Bachmann is saying or doing is protected by the Constitution (either the 1st Amendment or the Speech and Debate clause).
The implied call for people to take up arms against the government is shading toward the line, but she did not go in front of an angry mob and shout — “See that guy over there? Kill him.” She basically just said, “Be ready, the government is coming for you.”
She is entitled to her whacked out view of the world and we are all entitled to say what an idiot she is. It is the marketplace of ideas and people are free to accept or reject the competing ideas.
And to support the wannabe Katherine Harris/Sarah Palin a little more: since so many people in her district obviously agree with her, she is actually doing what many believe a “representative” should do — speak for the folk in her district.
duh
speak for the folk in her district.
She might want to speak to them first.
I know all you tolerating enlightened dudes would rather give ole Bachmann a hug than accuse her of anything but good intentions.
Are we not open minded here?
Michele Michele Michele…. who cares? Bad politicians come and go. She is a smart enough woman with some really bad ideas. The people she represents share some of her ideas. They are still Minnesotans (I have many relatives in that district) and are not going to take up arms because some crazy lady asks them too. They like hearing someone say some of the stupid stuff they like to believe to be true. Michele Bachmann certainly likes the attention she receives from saying really outlandish things. CMan and Michelle and a few of my aunts and uncles can all get together in a few years and drink Bud Light and talk about the old days when their ignorance and intolerance and stupidity ruled for a few short years.
In the meantime, maybe the Democratic party should consider endorsing a smart and decent conservative to replace her. If El couldn’t win it may be time to concede the fact that the people in 6th are conservative, not evil, and that helping them to find a good representative is the humane thing to do. Maybe then we can help with some of the problems they encounter up there and they will in time come around to a more realistic and healthy way of looking at things.
It should come as no surprise that Michelle is spouting her “crazy talk”, nothing has changed except she is showing herself to a wider audience. Everything she has said is protected speech, (righteous indignation noted) and she has a right to hold those views and express them. However, words can be powerful weapons (see McViegh, Tim; or Bin Laden, Osama), now I’m not comparing her directly to those 2 looneys, but they acted upon and instructed others to act on their words, “crazy talk” to most of us but to those who are easily swayed down the path of hatred and idealogical purity “crazy talk” becomes a call to action. Words have meaning, words are powerful and Members of the United States Congress should choose their words more carefully.
Crazy talk getting people angered … reminds me of Obama’s “outrage” at the AIG executives then the bus tour companies sending people around their houses…. And the death threats that required security guards.
Both sides have em….
ryan g,
“then the bus tour companies sending people around their houses…. And the death threats that required security guards.
Both sides have em…”
You did not prove the death threats were coming from the other “side”, as you put it.
I thought everyone was outraged at AIG. Is there a majority of people who were not outraged on your “side”, ryan g?
Ron said: …the only difference between the followers of Jim Jones and the followers of Rush Limbaugh is that Limbaugh’s 30 million dittoheads don’t live in total isolation.
Ack. Jim Jones. That scared the living daylights out of me as a kid. You know, Jim did nice things before he and others went off the deep end.
It’s interesting you’d use a communist group to explain your theory. That’s another difference between Jones and Limbaugh.
Crazy cultish behavior:
O - ba - ma
O - ba - ma
O - ba - ma
O - ba - ma
O - ba - ma
Doesn’t it suck when conservative women won’t cave under liberal pressure?
I would agree that what Bachmann is saying right now is covered by her first amendment rights. I don’t think she has actually broken any laws yet. Crazy though she may be, she’s not an idiot. Nonfeasance though, just means she’s not doing what she’s supposed to be doing. Doesn’t have to be any criminal activity involved. To prove that though, you would need a solid job description for her and a good record of what she is actually doing.
There was a case awhile age though, where a US rep had the recall prcedure intitiated against him because he voted for the war in Iraq but then cut funding for the military I think. I don’t know that it was in mn, but if the state it was in had similar laws to MN, it could be a useful precedent.
I just am not ready to give up and say let’s just sit here and let her badmouth our state and country to the whole world for another two years, and hope we can beat her next time. Screw that. Let’s actually get down off our high horses and DO something for once.