Does Michele Bachmann Have A Clue?

January 27, 2011

- See all 34 of my articles

Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, besides many other things, is proving the need for education reform. At a Iowan for Tax Relief event this past Sunday showed a complete lack of basic knowledge of history by saying that slavery ended with the founding of the country. “The very founders that wrote those documents worked tirelessly until slavery was no more in the United States….Men like John Quincy Adams, who would not rest until slavery was extinguished in the country” Bachman said to the crowd at the Iowa event. For one John Quincy Adams was not one of the founding fathers, and two, slavery ended with the 13th amendment in 1865 and John Quincy Adams died in 1848, so he was not even alive when it was abolished.

Then again it is not really a surprise that Bachmann or any of her Tea Party friends would think such a thing, because as much as they wrap themselves up in the Constitution and worship the founding fathers, they really don’t respect or believe fully in either. So why would they be bothered by knowing basic facts? After all, they have an issue with changing or abolishing almost every amendment to the Constitution to fit their needs. Must have made for some good discussions at the first Constitution Class that Bachmann led on Monday as well.

Bachmann is so far to the right now that she only looks to the right when talking. In one of her other newsmaking events of the past week she gave the official Tea Party response to the State of the Union address she looked off to the right of the camera the entire time. All kidding aside that is merely the most comical thing about her insane rant that night. One of the most hilarious pieces of crap hurled forth from her mouth was about the government telling you what light bulb you can buy. Actually this is the most true statement to come out of her mouth that night, but only because it is in reference to a 2007 legislation signed by President Bush and done further under President Obama in 2009 dealing with bringing efficiency to the manufacturing of lightbulbs. No where in either document does it actually talk about the Government telling you which lightbulbs you can and cannot buy. Then again there is no language of death panels in the healthcare legislation so why bother with actual facts when we can spread falsities until your idiotic masses believe them to be truths. In the words of New York Congressman Anthony Weiner, Michele Bachmann has clearly lost contact with the mothership.

The other response to the State of the Union was delivered by Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan.  Unlike most republicans in either chamber of Congress he actually does offer his own plans for things, only he was not allowed to speak of them during his response, probably because they would scare the living shit out of the electorate. Part of Ryan’s Roadmap to Americas Future calls for eliminating Social Security and Medicare for everyone currently under the age of 55.

As for the response itself it seemed to be just more of the same. As the President talked about the problems we face and possible ways to take care of them, the Republicans continued to basically say the only problem with the country is Obama himself and that they have no real solutions to anything. The whole time I was watching Ryan I thought to myself, “When did Joel Osteen lose the mullet”, as the whole thing sort of had this weird televangelist vibe going on where I didn’t know if I was watching a response to the President’s speech or being asked to call in and donate money.

8 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. Anonymous
    Jan 29, 2011 @ 20:40:08

    So, hold on, let me get this straight. So by John Q. Adams fighting a gag-rule, which forced all legislation brought up about slavery to be tabled, was he not indeed fighting to end slavery. He wished to bring about legislation to end slavery, that sounds like “working to end slavery.”
    Oh and perhaps you aren’t aware that a protege of John Q. was in fact Abraham Lincoln (He abolished slavery, by the way) And she didn’t say all the founding fathers. John Adams never owned slaves and was against it yet he saw that bringing up the issue of slavery would have to wait in order for the new republic to be founded, one that eventually would be the most free country in the world. Ben Franklin? Founding father? Yes. Abolitionist? Yes. Please get your facts straight and educate yourself rather than making generalizations just because someone is of a different political persuasion than yourself. You can’t warp history to fit your personal grievances towards certain political icons. Slavery is perhaps the greatest sin of the world and of the U.S. besides perhaps genocides. So please, give credit where credit is due.


  2. The Angry Squirrel
    Jan 29, 2011 @ 21:17:08

    FFirst off you have to love anonymous comments. Second you and I are both educated on the facts you are portraying in your comment, but Bachman clearly was not. You cannot take it out of context, she clearly stated that the founding fathers worked to eradicate slavery until it was no more. Also used an example that was not a founding father and this just as Palin has a long line oof continual showing that she does not have a clue about anything in general about history other than trying to manipulate it to fit the point that she is trying to make. Then again the actual truth and facts are not really to be bothered with people like this and really just get in the way. Haven’t seen anything of those conservstive internment camps because of the census have you? Then again you would probably just say that it is because she exposed the truth, but whatever. Anyways I do not see Bachman or Palin for that matter as political icons or even have a grievence against them. I merely see them as morons without a clue about almost anything, that God help us if they actually came to any higher political office. Though I do give Bachman one edge over Palin, she does not quit and seems to be drawn towards power more than fame and fortune.


  3. Brian Kelly
    Jan 29, 2011 @ 22:02:33

    I believe she said forebearers anyway so one could say John Q was a forebearer. Were there forebearers who were pro slavery?yes absolutely. I just wish people understood that this country was not necessarily founded on slavery and the constitiution was not a doxument meant to enshrine slavery, though some tried to use it that way and interpret it as such. Frederick douglas even stated that the constitution was a glorious document of liberty if and when people applied how it meant to be that indeed like the declaration states all men are created. I just want people to acknowledge the greatness of the constitution and its impact on histoey and the greatness of the idea of america of liberty rather than always focusing on its shortcomings like obama seems to do. I fear that many people today especially academics try to trivialize america and fail to educate themselves on the real history. I apologize for my previous tone and calling you uneducated it was one of emotion rather than intelligent discourse which is the way progress is made.


  4. The Angry Squirrel
    Jan 29, 2011 @ 22:18:30

    Well I don’t see how the very founders of these documents can be misconstrued into being she said forbearers, but whatever. The context of the article was not to delve into saying that the Constitution was created enshrining slavery. I was a political science maor and no well to the fact that the founding father, men like John “I am not Quincy” Adams, Ben Franklin and others tried to get abolished at the founding of the country. This article was more to just show how Bachman continues to be an absolute moron.


  5. Brian Kelly
    Jan 29, 2011 @ 22:25:58

    But what she said wasn’t incorrect. And the example she used was entirely appropiate. Maybe she should have clarified that many fought to end it, not all. John q did fight to end it, so you cant state he didnt just because he died before abolition happened.


  6. The Angry Squirrel
    Jan 29, 2011 @ 22:40:41

    Well Brian what I think you are forgetting is that, yes you know this, yes I know this, but she does not. If you watch the whole entirety of the speech that the quoting i grab here is from the context is put further that she actually was stating that slavery ended at the founding of the union. I think this may be where you are getting the mixup here. My use of those notions were more to put the comical value on her comments, than saying that JQA and others did not work their lives to hel bring an end to slavery.


  7. CarolAnn Bailey-Lloyd
    Feb 02, 2011 @ 11:26:27

    Excellent OPED. 😉


  8. wolfinshdo
    Mar 24, 2011 @ 17:46:11

    Maybe after President Obama is done visiting all 57 States, he can lead a history class on how terrible we as Americans truly are.


Leave a Reply