Is she the one to break the glass ceiling???

Michele Bachmann steals the show in Iowa

DES MOINES, Iowa — Michele Bachmann served up red meat to the crowd at the Iowa conservative principles conference Saturday, slamming President Barack Obama as a Jimmy Carter retread, dissing the Mitch Daniels "truce" call for social issues, and saying she wants a "waiver" from the last two years of White House leadership.

Talking loudly and waving her hands, a pumped Bachmann used a slide presentation of various numbers — the national debt, the cost of a gallon of gas two years ago the day before Obama took office, the corporate tax rate — to make her points and pull the crowd in.

The Minnesota firebrand gave the best-received speech of the potential 2012 hopefuls appearance at Rep. Steve King's conference and the crowd wildly applauded her brand of populism. It was a reminder that while Bachmann has been criticized for miscues in her public statements, there is a space for her to fill in the Iowa caucuses should she decide to jump into the race for the White House.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/51985.html

I'm not buying it, Aaron.

But Stephanie, she's prolly got great thighs!

You're not buying what Stephanie? I'm not a huge fan but apparently many are as she's a TEA Party darling. And if I'm not mistaken, she's the one that John Stossel interviewed on election night and it was her contention that Republican gains last November were as much a vindication of Conservative moral values and issues as they were a spending issues.

I disagree with that notion. I think the majority of Americans are as sick of Republicans and the far right that controls that party as we are Democrats and the liberal moron Marxist who now control that party.

Aaron wrote:I disagree with that notion. I think the majority of Americans are as sick of Republicans and the far right that controls that party as we are Democrats and the liberal moron Marxist who now control that party.

Aaron, and from which side of the "fence" are you crowing from?

I'm not buying that she has the potential to be the GOP nominee.

Tell that to the voters in Iowa Stephanie who appear to love her.

SamCogar wrote:

Aaron wrote:I disagree with that notion. I think the majority of Americans are as sick of Republicans and the far right that controls that party as we are Democrats and the liberal moron Marxist who now control that party.

Aaron, and from which side of the "fence" are you crowing from?

And here I thought you was a real fart smeller Sam. What part of my ENTIRE post do you not understand?

Aaron wrote:You're not buying what Stephanie? I'm not a huge fan but apparently many are as she's a TEA Party darling. And if I'm not mistaken, she's the one that John Stossel interviewed on election night and it was her contention that Republican gains last November were as much a vindication of Conservative moral values and issues as they were a spending issues.

I disagree with that notion. I think the majority of Americans are as sick of Republicans and the far right that controls that party as we are Democrats and the liberal moron Marxist who now control that party.

Aaron wrote:Tell that to the voters in Iowa Stephanie who appear to love her.

The voters in Iowa were rather fond of Mike Huckabee. So what?

So then you're saying Mike Huckabee doesn't have the potential to be the Republican nominee.

Interesting.

Stephanie wrote:I'm not buying it, Aaron.

Is there a reason you're not buying it Stephanie?

But it was still a little surprising when Paul, in the Senate less than three months, said last week that he was likely to run for president in 2012 if his father, U.S. Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, 75, didn't restart the campaign he ran in 2007-08. An adviser to both Pauls told Politico Friday morning that the father would decide in “the next month or two.”

The Pauls' timing and maneuvering coincides with that of Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, who is competing with Rand Paul for congressional leadership of the tea party, the largely Republican group that he trumpets in his campaign biography, The Tea Party Goes to Washington.

The book tells the story of his first campaign, but is also a device to promote a second one. His book tour is taking him to early primary and caucus states, beginning with South Carolina, and his first reported acknowledgement of presidential aspirations came Monday in Charleston.

But there was less national talk about the Pauls last week than about Bachmann, who made a splash with a series of appearances in her native state of Iowa, which votes first for president, and let it be known that she planned to open a presidential exploratory committee as early as May 2.

It is probably no accident that Bachmann, who has built a national following, moved closer to the race as polls showed slippage by the other leading female hopeful, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

Source

Aaron wrote:So then you're saying Mike Huckabee doesn't have the potential to be the Republican nominee.

Interesting.

I'm saying Iowa picked Huckabee, followed by Romney in 2008. We all know neither was the GOP nominee that year.

"DUH", didn't ya know, ......"fence sitters" flip, flop and/or straddle ........ depending on what the Polls tell them.



.

Aaron wrote:

Stephanie wrote:I'm not buying it, Aaron.

Is there a reason you're not buying it Stephanie?

There are reasons I'm not buying it, Aaron. However, neither Congressman Paul nor his son, Senator Paul, have a thing to do with it.

I'm curious though, did you read the article? I think this will be an interesting year for the TEA Party as Libertarians and the religious right fight for control.

SamCogar wrote:"", didn't ya know, ......"fence sitters" flip, flop and/or straddle ........ depending on what the Polls tell them.

By Gawd Sam, I think you might be starting to get it.

So who's a fence sitter?

Yes, I did read the article. What I dispute with you is that Michele Bachmann is libertarian. She is the religious right.

I've never said Michelle Bachmann is libertarian. She is the religious right, as is Palin, hence her up-coming fight with Paul for the TEA Party.

You really confuse me, Aaron. I don't have the energy to go back and look, but haven't you been slamming Palin for the same thing in another thread? This Bachmann is far worse than Palin when it comes to injecting her religious ideology into policy. I mean, have you heard her speak? Have you read some of the things she has said about homosexuals? Do you know her position on teaching intelligent design in public schools? Those views may have been able to be overlooked by independents and libertarians a decade ago but they will not fly now. Nominate Bachmann and the GOP will just hand the Democratic nominee victory.

Stephanie wrote:You really confuse me, Aaron. I don't have the energy to go back and look, but haven't you been slamming Palin for the same thing in another thread? This Bachmann is far worse than Palin when it comes to injecting her religious ideology into policy. I mean, have you heard her speak? Have you read some of the things she has said about homosexuals? Do you know her position on teaching intelligent design in public schools?

Perhaps you should try reading the post instead of scanning them Stephanie.

Aaron wrote:You're not buying what Stephanie? I'm not a huge fan but apparently many are as she's a TEA Party darling. And if I'm not mistaken, she's the one that John Stossel interviewed on election night and it was her contention that Republican gains last November were as much a vindication of Conservative moral values and issues as they were a spending issues.

I disagree with that notion. I think the majority of Americans are as sick of Republicans and the far right that controls that party as we are Democrats and the liberal moron Marxist who now control that party.

I've never said I supported Bachmann, I've merely pointed out that she is getting airtime.

Stephanie wrote:Those views may have been able to be overlooked by independents and libertarians a decade ago but they will not fly now.

That is what the fight for the TEA Party will be about in the upcoming year. I hope you're right but I have feeling the Republican establishment will squelch this uprising just as they have every other.

And that is what my "slamming" Palin has been about. The fact that she and Glen Beck have shoehorned themselves to the forefront of the TEA Party has paved the way for the Bachmann's of the world to join them.

Stephanie wrote:Nominate Bachmann and the GOP will just hand the Democratic nominee victory.

I agree whether the nominee is Bachmann or Palin.

It's not that I didn't read the posts. I have read the posts. It's that you kept questioning why I'm not buying Bachmann will be the GOP nominee. THe question was, "Is she the one to break the glass ceiling?" I said no, I'm still saying no. Now you want to change the question? OK, I say no to the new question too.

Palin and Bachmann have both had major foot in mouth moments. Palin called Africa a country, if I remember correctly. Bachmann stated the American Revolution began in New Hampshire and the Founders did not stop working until slavery was abolished.

On the issue of injecting religion into public policy, I have never heard or read anything from Palin that even comes close to statements made by Bachmann regarding the teaching of intelligent design. Nor have I heard the kind of discriminatory language from Palin concerning homosexuals and transgendered people that Bachmann uses so regularly.

If the religious right is successful at hijacking the Tea Party by making someone like Bachmann their champion the Tea Party will fracture and cease to exist. That's my prediction.

I didn't change the question. You said you weren't buying "it" and I questioned what "it" you were not buying. You stated that she wasn't capable of being the nominee. I, along with millions of Americans disagree.

Like it or not and while she's not who I would choose to support, she is a TEA Party darling and will contend with Paul for leadership in the TEA Party. The fact that she gave the TEA Party response to Obama's SOTU speech is enough to prove that.

The question will be whether her religious right will be able to wrest control from the Libertarian's of Paul followers. If so, then the movement is squelched. If not, it isn't.

The reason why I'm convinced you're wrong is Bachmann is unelectable on a national level specifically because of her views and stated desires on issues like the rights of gay Americans and the teaching of intelligent design in schools.

It isn't just the libertarian wing of the GOP that won't vote for her. Once GOP voters hear her state over and again about all those Noble winning scientists believing in creationism and ID and how she views homosexuality as a mental disorder members who are not part of the religious right will dump her like a hot potato.

Stephanie wrote:The reason why I'm convinced you're wrong is Bachmann is unelectable on a national level specifically because of her views and stated desires on issues like the rights of gay Americans and the teaching of intelligent design in schools.

It isn't just the libertarian wing of the GOP that won't vote for her. Once GOP voters hear her state over and again about all those Noble winning scientists believing in creationism and ID and how she views homosexuality as a mental disorder members who are not part of the religious right will dump her like a hot potato.

I went back and read and re-read every post and I'm convinced one of three things is happening. Either you are not reading the post, you are reading between the lines or you need to brush up on your reading skills.

I've never said she was electable on a national level. What I said was that she was the TEA Party darling and would contend with Paul for TEA Party leadership. That doesn't mean I like or support her because I don't but it is a fact.

My reading skills are fine. For Pete's sake, Aaron, you titled the thread "Is she the one to break the glass ceiling". I said I don't believe she has the potential to be the GOP nominee, you responed with "tell that to the voters of Iowa."

Can Michele Bachmann wrestle control of the Tea Party? I'm going to tell you the same thing I said in this very forum months ago. The Tea Party has been hijacked. Gingrich, Palin, Bachmann are trying to align themselves with a political movement not of their creation. What's worse, in some locations, like in WV, the Tea Party has been crashed by neoconservatives trying to convince the rest of us they want small government.

They aren't interested in liberty. They're interested in keeping more of their own personal wealth, sure, but they're not interested in reducing the size and scope of government except where it suits their personal and professional interests. In southern WV they desire to abolish the EPA, but they have zero interest in eliminating the Department of Homeland Security or repealing the Patriot Act. As a result, some of the FOUNDERS of that group no longer attend meetings.