Image 01 Image 03

Reconsider Bachmann? No.

Reconsider Bachmann? No.

Taking another look at Michele Bachmann is one of the memes being pushed by people unhappy with the Newt/Romney choice in the wake of the likely departure from the race of Herman Cain.

Why does Cain dropping out make Bachmann any better than she was?

She’s still the person who built her campaign in the early summer around trashing Sarah Palin via Ed Rollins and was happy to ride that wave while it lasted.

She has not been “accurate” in her portrayal of her own immigration statements earlier in the debates, and she is running around repeating endlessly something that is patently false, that Newt Gingrich wants amnesty for 11 million people, and she has falsely termed a letter Gingrich (along with Grover Norquist, Jack Kemp and others) signed in 2004 in support of a guest worker program an “amnesty” plan.  Repeating things endlessly does not make them true, and we can do better than that.

Her performance in going after Rick Perry caused Steve Hayward of Power Line Blog to give up on her.

She has been the only candidate explicitly to try to take advantage of Herman Cain’s latest problems by saying it shows that she is the only consistent candidate.  I think this tweet is accurate:


Reconsider Perry, or consider Rick Santorum for the first time — that I understand although I don’t agree for reasons I previously stated.

But reconsider Bachmann?  I hope you will just say no.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Professor, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who’s gonna do it? Newt? Mitt Romney? Rick Perry has a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Cain, and you curse the process. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That Cain’s demise, while tragic, probably saved the election cycle. And Rick Perry’s existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to yankess, saves lives. You don’t want the truth because deep down in places you don’t talk about at parties, you want Rick Perry on that wall. You need Rick Perry on that wall.

Besides, I bet Rick owns at least eight times as many guns as any other candidate.

I will see your “NO” and raise you a “HELL NO”.

I don’t think I ever heard anyone I know express support for Bachmann. Some admiration or talking points within a political conversation, but not one declaration of support and hope that she’ll win. I’d have to seriously consider her before I could reconsider her, right? Don’t think that’s gonna happen.

I was the tip of the spear when it came to saying “no” to Bachmann…

Never, never, never. I still don’t know why she thought she would have a chance or why she thought she was qualified. I liked her as a congresswoman until she made such a hooha about getting chairmanship of some congressional committee after the 2010 elections. But when she allowed Ed Rollins to trash Palin and said nothing, she was wiped off my book of not supporting her to actively disliking her. I feel she muscled her way into the tea party movement in an effort to supplant Palin.

I would vote for Romney before I would vote for Backmann and that’s really saying something because I do not like Romney at all. He would be an obama lite.

As a woman it pains me to say this but a woman will not be elected as POTUS until she can run without allowing her gender to become a major issue and that won’t happen until we’ve gotten more familiar with the idea. A woman candidate could be the best running but it will take time to overcome prejudice against a woman as CIIC.

Electing Obama because of his race was wrong & it would be wrong to elect a woman because of her gender,

    holmes tuttle in reply to katiejane. | November 29, 2011 at 6:48 pm

    Disagree. Hillary would have won in 2008 if she was the nominee. Heck, she’d likely win rather comfortably in 2012 if Obama stepped aside and she ran.

      You’ve got that right. If Obama pulled an LBJ and dropped out, Hillary would thrash the hell out of Biden and whoever else in primaries and waltz through the GOP in November.

      Various Dem pols and pundits are only gradually coming to understand that Obama is their single biggest liability.

        BurkeanBadger in reply to JEBurke. | November 29, 2011 at 8:56 pm

        I agree. Obama graciously declining the “honor” of the American people bestowing a second term upon him and a Hillary candidacy right now would be a godsend to the Democrats. But it ain’t gonna happen. Never ever. Not as long as Obama has even 1/100th of his ego

Love the pithy headline!

workingclass artist | November 29, 2011 at 6:26 pm

Bachmann has no credibility…her ego ate it.

When she began to trash Palin, that was it for me – then, to watch her continually and falsely accuse Gingrich re his immigration platform – well, that was too much.

I admire Newt for not falling for the trashing of each other on nationial television – nothing would turn me off quicker than watching that.

So, with Cain, and likely Bachmann out of it – my vote would go to Perry or Gingrich – or, to whichever candidate has the best change of trashing Barry Soetoro….

I would be thrilled if michelle was our president. I would be thrilled if romney was president. I would be thrilled if elmer fudd was president. I would hate to see Obama be president come feb 2013.

As much as I like, admire and respect Bachmann, I think her performance over the last few months has just not inspired enough voters to latch on to her candidacy. She was definitely flying high after the Iowa caucus, but the Perry entry into the mix hurt her campaign more than any of the other candidates. I have no doubt that she would be far better for the country than another Obama term and I wish her the best in getting reelected to the House next fall.

I fault Michele for hiring Rollins but not for putting words in his mouth. Ed Rollins has been throwing trash for decades, he is obviously a free agent when it comes to bombast.

It is amusing to blame Michele Bachmann for pointing out the failings of the other candidates. While she is not my candidate of choice, she is running for the nomination not for cheerleader.

In fact, she appears to be the only one with the spine to challenge her opponents and make them more formidable in the general whoever the candidate that emerges.

What set me off about Bachmann was how she saw the TEA party “parade” and got in front of it so people might see her as leading it. She consciously decided she would present herself as some sort of founder, as if she had some responsibility for it.

Well, I attended my first TEA party before I ever heard her name in connection with the movement.

Even were that not the case, I wouldn’t vote for Bachmann; my grapevine (three degrees of separation between me and her) reports: she’s nuttier than a squirrel’s stool.

I used to like Bachmann, that tweet sums up pretty much exactly why I no longer do.

Bachmann is not going to be reconsidered, at least not in significant numbers. Nor is Perry. I don’t think we’ll see any more “reconsideration” period. Everyone is worn out on this endless cycle of building up “Not Romney” candidates, only to tear them down. They want some stability at long last. Which means, it’s Romney v. Newt. Should be fun to watch

LI commentors: consider me Bachmann supporter. When the Colorado primaries roll around, and if she is still on the ballot, I will vote for her. My reason is primarily that as a tax attorney, she more than anyone, knows of the insidious loopholes (and incredibly stupid general laws) that create the corporate cronyism that is ruining this nation.

Lest you think I am sympathetic with the Occupy rabble, this cronyism begins with the politicians that willingly sell their souls for re-election contributions, kick-backs, and future employment guarantees. The people buying our elected officials off are only less-than-scrupulous businessmen working within the rules of a corrupt government.

The rules have to change.

Perry, Gingrich, and Romney, over their respective political careers, are all mostly multitasking whores who placated their electoral constituents and satisfied their paying clients. Mind you, I would campaign and vote for anyone not Obama; just saying that I, as a voter, recognize the warts, and hope the Johns take responsibility for the diseases spread by these soiled candidates.

Professor, while I haven’t given up on Cain yet I have been taking a second look at the other candidates . I agree with your points about Bachmann’s meanness, although it seems that a bit of nastiness may be a good thing in running against Obama. It’s Rick Perry that presents the biggest dilemma.

Perry still leaves me wrestling with the image of Bush. It doesn’t seem that another Texas governor is going to go over well with voters, given the mistakes of the last one.

I have one big problem with Perry. From twenty years of living in Texas I know that the governor’s role in the state is quite weak…that most of the power rests with the legislature.

Given that, how much credit can we actually give to Perry for Texas’ healthy position? I wasn’t impressed with Bush’s skill set. It’s hard to believe Rick Perry has a better one.

    Cowboy Curtis in reply to creeper. | November 29, 2011 at 11:21 pm

    He still has to sign bills and appoint justices, right? By which I mean, act of the legislature don’t become law without his Herbie Hancock. Lower posts, too? Which isn’t to state he his king of the realm, but as I understand it, he’s centralized power unto the executive in Texas in a downright transformational way.

      Sign bills and appoint justices? Good grief, Obama does that. He’s really good at signing stuff and knows how to put in a ceremony.

      It’s not that I want a power-hungry president. We have one of those already. I’m just looking for some examples of leadership from Perry. I hear a lot about what Texas IS but not much about what Perry has DONE.

      Except for Gardasil and free tuition for illegals, nothing about Perry comes to mind. Any Texans on here who can enlighten us?

IMO, Gingrich could put this amnesty issue to bed by pointing out that in the process of securing the border (which he has said would take to 2014) and enforcing the existing laws on hiring of illegals, a fairly substancial portion of them would self deport because of a lack of money which is what drew them here in the first place. While it may be realistic to say the government can’t possibly deport all 11 – 13 million of the illegals, this smacks of giving in and then encouraging more of the unwanted behavior.

Most Americans have good reason to be sensitive about the issue because of the self righteous moralizing by liberals on both sides of the isle only to find they really don’t have the spine to deport any of them even if they are in jail. Look at California, half of the prison population is literally illegals and yet they resist deporting even these. What we want is a good faith effort on the part of government officials, a track record of enforcing the Law and not selectively thumbing their noses at the taxpayers who are forced by Law to pay for their generosity. Once credibility is re-established, then and only then can there be a discussion about what to do with the remaining ones.

Personally, while it may not be fair to the ones who are following the rules by not just showing up in downtown Chicago or NYC, I believe ALL immigration with few exceptions should be halted until the cummulative number of slots over a period of years equals the numbers believed to be in the country. We need to admit we simply can’t absorb every person who wants to come here, its not their RIGHT to come here, its our sovereign RIGHT to decide how many we want based on OUR needs. This means migrant workers too, there is no point bringing more into the country when there are plenty who have overstayed their visas could renew them and then get in line like everyone else.

btw- anyone who is an illegal who draws public assistance has committed fraud, a felony and those government officials (especially state and local) who knowingly took actions to prevent the identity of citizenship status to verify eligibility should be prosecuted as well. Any illegal caught taking public funds like unemployment, hoc, food stamps, etc, should NOT be deported but JAILED and then when their time is served, be deported to encourage all the rest to self deport.

    As a former public official who oversaw the review of thousands of documents purporting to establish legitimate residency I can assure you a federal law criminalizing the act of a public employee fraudulently or negligently accepting non-complying documents would stop the practice in every state virtually overnight, except maybe in Chicago….

Rightly so.

And I won’t consider Newt, either. Newt is the man who teamed, at Obama’s request, no less, with that vile racist and anti-Semite Al Sharpton whom Obama offered as an expert on education … and Newt, knowing better, consented to work with Sharpton.

Bachmann is a back-stabber, true. Newt is far, far worse.

I can’t say I was ever a big fan of her. I just didn’t think she was quite ready.

Original verdict upheld. Appeal denied.

There is a glaring distance between Bachmann’s campaign oratory and her actual conduct as a lawmaker.

Bachmann privately lobbied for stimulus funds for Minnesota and pork producers, sought spending earmarks that she now opposes and benefited personally from tens of thousands of dollars in federal funds for a family farm and counseling clinic owned by her husband.

Bachmann has never held an executive office ,has no leadership experience; she has a very thin political resume.

CenterRightMargin | November 30, 2011 at 10:34 am

Perry will be back. Bachmann, IMO, is tempermentally unfit for a campaign, and for the Presidency. Actually, in this way, she is similar to Santorum. But Santorum is just whiny, while there’s something more off-putting about the Congresswoman’s icey anger and self-righteousness.

Perry has an optimistic, friendly demeanor. It’s one of his core strengths. And he has enough depth that, if he can work slowly and build his knowledge base to the national-issues level, he could easily climb back into the race later on (especially with a Newt stumble, which given his lack of discipline, is likely).

I have never been impressed with Bachmann, she was elected by the residents of Minnesota. Let’s face it being elected in MN is not saying much, sorry to my birth state but they have elected such winners as pothead Jesse Ventura, Amy Klobuchar(elected by name recognition due to her father’s sports column), Mark Dayton(again to me name recognition came into play because his family owned Dayton’s), Al Franken, and the worst of all the only state to go fully for Walter Mondale(I have a theory that they were all still hung over from the Vikings win and did not realize who they were votiing for or failed to vote).

The more I learn about Bachmann the more I see just another strange one elected by Minnesotians. By the way that is my birth state and I love “God’s Country” but when they vote people they are just silly.

am4constitution | November 30, 2011 at 2:00 pm

So let me get this straight: Your reason for not considering or reconsidering Bachmann is because she attacked Sarah Palin? Or should I say her now gone campaign manager did? Now I like Palin more than anyone else, she would have gotten my vote, but that is a sorry excuse to be against Bachmann. Isn’t the name of the political game to elevate oneself ABOVE the other candidates, by whatever means are at your disposal?

Did everyone forget how mad we were at McCain in the last election that he would not attack odumbo on his past stances, policy, and his associations?

Oh jeeze you can’t have it both ways! How about we exclude or support a candidate based on their foreign, financial, moral, and political policies and positions?

Stay above the fray you say? Newt is THE FRAY!!!

[…] Will Santorum Get A Moment In the Sun? Posted on November 30, 2011 11:30 am by Bill Quick » Reconsider Bachmann? No. – Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion […]

Many supporters want Sarah Palin to reconsider running for President. Today, Conservatives4Palin will begin showing an ad on TV. To demonstrate that you think she should run, you can wear items that proclaim the message and help spread it far and wide. Please go to the link to find a t-shirt, jewelry, hat, tote bag, button, mug, water bottle or other item to advertise your support of the “Reconsider Movement”!

My beef with Michelle Bachmann is that she thinks homosexuality can be cured. It’s like the socialist, who thinks that socialism can be enacted successfully. In short, she’s incapable of learning from her mistakes, and that we don’t need in a president.

Along with her Rollins decision, there’s her choice of praising the one comedian who has called her an embarrassment and incompetent as a U.S. representative, Garrison Keillor.

She could have chosen Al Franken instead who at least said he liked her personally.

As much as I like Bachmann’s positions on many issues, with her track record in picking people for important campaign positions (and people to praise) who wants her choosing Supreme Court nominees or negotiating with other national leaders? Her lack of executive experience really shows in the important area of being able to read people and give wise responses.