Michele Bachmann’s 6th Congressional District in Minnesota is very red, and redistricting made it slightly redder. On the other hand, she no longer lives in the district, which might present a slight problem for her. Jim Graves won the DFL’s party endorsement to run against her. Ordinarily, I would’t give Mr. Graves a chance, but Bachmann may have jumped the shark with her recent antics. Her attack on Hillary Clinton’s Deputy Chief of Staff has brought condemnation from John McCain, Marco Rubio, her former campaign manager Ed Rollins, and other responsible Republicans. She has even, indirectly, tied Grover Norquist to the Muslim Brotherhood. She is losing powerful friends in a hurry.
Mr. Graves is described as a hotel magnate, which means, I presume, that he has a lot of money. I don’t know where he stands on most issues because his website doesn’t tell me. While I can’t offer an endorsement or analysis of his positions, I am confident that he’d be better than Bachmann, who really should not be allowed to continue sitting on the House Intelligence Committee.
Excuse me, McCain’s, Rubio’s, Rollins’ and others statements does not make them responsible Republicans. Just means they are trying to do a CYA maneuver in case some lunatic tries to take out the targets of Bachmann’s diatribes. Responsible Republicans would call out a lot more of the extreme rhetoric spewed by the Tright.
you carried over a modifier there. Actually, you retroactivated a modifier. Admittedly, it’s ambiguous, but I didn’t call McCain, Rubio, or Rollins “responsible.”
That suggests that “John McCain, Marco Rubio, her former campaign manager Ed Rollins” are examples of “other responsible Republicans” too numerous to list, as far as I understand that rhetorical construction. Maybe that’s not what you intended to say, but that’s what you said. Had you omitted “other” from “responsible republicans,” that would have put the former named examples into a category of republicans who are not responsible. But as it is…
the word “other” does not retreat unless you insist it retreats.
I tried polling this sentence to friends, but only got 2 responses, both from university graduates in degree discplines requiring academic composition skills, and both have backed up my reading of your sentence in that it implies that all named parties are indeed responsible Republicans.
Educated people are reading your writing and coming away with a meaning that you did not intend. Would you prefer to be right, or to be a more effective communicator, given a choice? BTW you’re not right in this matter, but even if you were…
Yeah, you did. Unless you meant they’re responsible for being Republicans or something.
Those guys never do preemptive CYA just in case some lunatic acts on rightwing delusional talking points. Hell, they don’t even bother with that after such a lunatic acts.
Where Bachmann went over the line was in highlighting Norquist and his more direct links to the Muslim Brotherhood than any links exhibited by Democratic officeholders or aides. Imagine: “GOP pols take Norquist no tax pledge. Norquist consorts with the Muslim Brotherhood. What’s their goal?”
I’d point out the irony of having Bachmann sitting on the House Intelligence Committee but that would just be crass.
Oh, Boran, color me crass, too; I was going to say the same thing.
So was I!
Her followers are TParty and Beck trained so they will assume that Bachmann is a victim of establishment McCain & his attack will be seen as glorifying her. Rubio might give them pause but hey, they’ll find some excuse to diss him.
I just doubt that ‘her people’ listen to anyone with a reasoned story so unless her emails apologize to them and/or Glenn Beck & Rush turn on her they won’t be inclined to listen to her challenger.
They’d need to see her sneaking into an abortion clinic before heads would turn.
…they will assume that Bachmann is a victim of establishment McCain …
So right! Here ya go!
Given that Bachmann’s in hot water specifically over attacking brown people, I bet I know what the excuse to diss Rubio will involve.
All of these “nut jobs” are perfectly capable of turning the crazy off and on. The crazy act is for the rubes, and it must bring in the cash because there are so man GOPers indulging in it.
Bachmann might look wounded now, but when she goes to talk with her constituents and there is no media around, she will be the normal politician.
And…something that Democrats still haven’t learned…hating government programs for everybody does not mean she hates getting favors out of the bureaucracy for her constituents. And on constituent services, the most conservative “nut jobs” run circles around liberal Democrats. Jesse Helms pioneered this way of appealing to independent voters.
This may be a proving ground for just how genuine Bachmann’s mania is. Clearly she’s proven that she knows what’s good for her in terms of how to capitalize on gov’t largesse in the past, but if she strays too far off the reservation in her rhetoric, the big money is going to have to cut her loose.
The question playing out now is, who’s going to blink? I strongly suspect that she’s a true believer in what she says, unlike most of the other hucksters on the teabagger circuit. But she likes money, and she understands power, and she knows who has it and how to play the game such that she continues to partake in both.
Or she used to. We may be watching a crazy train going over the rails here.
She is not badly wounded here. I live in this district. Her base is exurban evangelicals with identity issues. Those people aren’t going anywhere.
Keep in mind Minnesota has had a large influx of Muslim immigrants(mostly refugees from Somalia) in the last ten years. Somali culture has become quite prominent in the twin cities, and because these immigrants are still largely first generation there are some issues with poverty. Combined with the Hmong migration, another non-Christian group for the most part, your church basement ladies have had their careful little bubbles popped quite effectively of late. Their jell-o has been jiggled, so to speak.
So when she sounds like a raving lunatic to most people, these particular remarks are probably voicing the significant prejudices and fears that have built up among her constituents for a while now. Many of them are working class lutherans who have been hit hard by the economy, and they see non-Christian immigrants arriving and becoming part of the community. They resent it, they want someone to blame for their own troubles, and Somalis in particular provide an easily identifiable scapegoat.
She’s not in much trouble from what I can see. I’ll believe it when I see it.
She has the most money of all candidates in MN last I heard. I wouldn’t bet against her at this point. Much as I hate to say it…
Love the “jell-o has been jiggled” line!
Then they vote for the party that is hell-bent on turning the US into another Somalia.
.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."For what it’s worth
http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/07/bachmann-muslims-democrat-jim-graves.php
It takes a lot to dislodge any incumbent congressperson, especially one with a national constituency. To pick a not entirely analogous example, Kucinich lasted years despite being ideologically out of step with both his district and his own party’s leadership. It took his own party signing off on redistricting him out of his seat for him to lose.
Bachmann better reflects her district’s politics (or at least does so for a majority of district voters), has more national support than Kucinich ever did, and has far more people in her party’s leadership that align with her on most issues. What people on the left think of her is irrelevant (we’d never vote for her anyway), except to the extent we’re willing to raise money for an opponent, and that hasn’t been successful so far. She’s not going anywhere.