• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Michelle Bachman...Moron?

JoeTheJuggler said:
FWIW, her JD came from Oral Roberts University. She has voiced some very squirrelly ideas in her public life (creationism, for one).

Even so, I tend to agree with you. I don't think she's really this ignorant. I think she's purposely telling lies. As with several others of her ilk, she seems to want a misinformed electorate.
Click to expand...

I believe back in the day ORU was a selective college.

But what was the message she was trying to get across in her complete statement. Was it basically true or not?

I guess I shouldn't ask that until i viewed the video but i saw nothing egregious or moronic in her response to President Obama's State of the Union.
 
eeyore1954 said:
I believe back in the day ORU was a selective college.

But what was the message she was trying to get across in her complete statement. Was it basically true or not?

I guess I shouldn't ask that until i viewed the video but i saw nothing egregious or moronic in her response to President Obama's State of the Union.
Click to expand...

I'm really curious how wrong someone has to be before you would qualify them as a dumb person.

Ignorance is one thing. I can tolerate that. Every person on the planet is ignorant in regards to a wide range of issues. However, most of us have the decency to acknowledge our lack of understanding, and stay away from topics we have no business discussing. Otherwise, we may look like idiots.

So what more would it take? Would she have to claim she is from the future? Start throwing feces at the audience in the middle of a speech?
 
eeyore1954 said:
I believe back in the day ORU was a selective college.
Click to expand...

Yeah. You had to be Christian and programmable.

But what was the message she was trying to get across in her complete statement. Was it basically true or not?
Click to expand...

Kind of hard to tell what that scatter-brained twit is trying to say sometimes, but it seemed to be that she was trying to convince us that there was no reason to believe that slavery had left some debilitating scars on American society that still need repairs. What she said about the Founding Father working tirelessly to end slavery was utter nonsense.

I guess I shouldn't ask that until i viewed the video but i saw nothing egregious or moronic in her response to President Obama's State of the Union.
Click to expand...

Bachmann wasn't speaking for the party, although I wish they had chosen her to make the official rebuttal speech. Ryan was the official responder.

The twit was just trying to aggrandize herself and made a laughing stock of herself instead.
 
Last edited:
eeyore1954 said:
I guess I shouldn't ask that until i viewed the video but i saw nothing egregious or moronic in her response to President Obama's State of the Union.
Click to expand...

http://factcheck.org/2011/01/factchecking-the-gop-response/

Let’s take the most egregious exaggeration: "the $700 billion bailout." That figure is grossly outdated. Bachmann is referring to the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), which President Bush signed into law in October 2008. As the CBO explained in a November 2010 report, the "authority for the Troubled Asset Relief Program was originally set at a maximum of $700 billion; however, that total was reduced to $475 billion in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act." But the estimated net cost to taxpayers will be $25 billion after the government sells its stocks and the companies repay the money, as CBO estimated in its report.
Click to expand...

Bachmann not only exaggerates but is flat-out wrong when she repeats the oft-stated false claim about the need to hire "16,500 IRS agents in charge of policing President Obama’s health care bill." As we reported previously, the figure of 16,500 originated from a House Republican report that relies on false assumptions and outright misrepresentation.
Click to expand...

Ryan also claimed: "Health care spending is driving the explosive growth of our debt. And the president’s law is accelerating our country toward bankruptcy." That claim was echoed by Bachmann, who said the law "could have a devastating impact on our national debt for even generations to come." But both politicians are wrong to make such claims.

The law is actually expected to reduce the deficit, according to the CBO, over the next two decades and beyond. It remains to be seen whether all of the cost-cutting measures will be fully implemented. But we went through various Republican claims about the supposed flaws in CBO’s analysis and found the GOP assertions to be mostly bogus.
Click to expand...

Bachmann also wrongly said this about the law:

Bachmann: "nless we fully repeal Obamacare, a nation that currently enjoys the world’s finest health care might be forced to rely on government-run coverage.

First, as we’ve said many times, the law doesn’t create a government-run system. Instead, it builds on our current system and adds a lot of new business for private insurers. Second, some studies on the quality of care worldwide have not put the U.S. at the top. A 2010 Commonwealth Fund study ranked the U.S. last among seven countries in health system performance. In other health outcome measures, the U.S. ranks 49th in life expectancy, according to the CIA World Factbook, and plenty of other countries have lower rates of infant mortality.
Click to expand...



And let's not forget the totally overlookable error of not looking into the right camera for the entire speech. I'm sure conservatives would forgive Obama for doing something like that.
 
leftysergeant said:
Bachmann wasn't speaking for the party, although I wish they had chosen her to make the official rebuttal speech. Ryan was the official responder.

The twit was just trying to aggrandize herself and made a laughing stock of herself instead.
Click to expand...

I agree she was trying to aggrandize herself ( a completely new behavior for politicians) but what did she say in the response that was really wrong or moronic that made her a laughing stock.
 
She wasn't glossing over anything. She was being wilfully ignorant to pander to her voters. Calling her a moron lets her off too easy. She's not. However, she's doing what politicians do, so whose fault is it that she acts that way? Ours. Confirmation bias and a reticence to perform even the most basic fact checking gives us the government that we deserve.
 
eeyore1954 said:
As most of us do but if you are a public figure the odd things you say are harped upon because people are watching every word that comes out of the mouths.
Click to expand...
...and because if you are an elected official you are in the dangerous position of being able to take steps to support your crazy ideas.

A Laughing Baby said:
And let's not forget the totally overlookable error of not looking into the right camera for the entire speech. I'm sure conservatives would forgive Obama for doing something like that.
Click to expand...
I heard that she was also talking to a bunch of Tea Partiers on Skype or something, so she was looking into a web camera. Why she couldn't have gotten the TV camera positioned so that she was looking into both cameras is beyond me.
 
Elizabeth I said:
I heard that she was also talking to a bunch of Tea Partiers on Skype or something, so she was looking into a web camera. Why she couldn't have gotten the TV camera positioned so that she was looking into both cameras is beyond me.
Click to expand...

You're correct. She was looking into the camera for the Tea Party's internal webcast.
 
eeyore1954 said:
But what was the message she was trying to get across in her complete statement. Was it basically true or not?
Click to expand...

No. She said that the U.S. is unique in being the only country that welcomed all immigrants and treated them all equally once they arrived regardless of who they were (the color of the skin, the language they spoke, etc).

It's not true. This isn't spin, or opinion or interpretation.

She wasn't try to make some other or larger point that is true even though these statements are false.
 
Last edited:
By addressing her Skype audience instead of the public directly, she just made herself look all the more an idiot.
 
I Am The Scum said:
Ignorance is one thing. I can tolerate that. Every person on the planet is ignorant in regards to a wide range of issues. However, most of us have the decency to acknowledge our lack of understanding, and stay away from topics we have no business discussing. Otherwise, we may look like idiots.
Click to expand...


Reminds me of the quote attributed to Winston Churchill: Better to remain silent and be thought of as a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt.
 
Hey, this thread has been here for quite awhile - and she's still a moron. And I'm being kind on that.
 
deepatrax said:
This is probably why I don't listen to politicians for history lessons.

I'd advise you to do the same.
Click to expand...

No one is doing that.

We're criticizing a member of Congress for spouting a bunch of nonsense about American history.

Do you understand that there is a difference between that and "listening to politicians for history lessons"?
 
I Am The Scum said:
I'm really curious how wrong someone has to be before you would qualify them as a dumb person.

Ignorance is one thing. I can tolerate that. Every person on the planet is ignorant in regards to a wide range of issues. However, most of us have the decency to acknowledge our lack of understanding, and stay away from topics we have no business discussing. Otherwise, we may look like idiots.

So what more would it take? Would she have to claim she is from the future? Start throwing feces at the audience in the middle of a speech?
Click to expand...
"Ignorance can be cured, dumb is forver..." :p
 
UnrepentantSinner said:
Speaking of moronic, Sarah Palin posted a note to her Facebook page extolling the virtues of a doughnut shop as a paragon of small business in contrast to government programs.
Sputnik vs. Spudnuts
http://www.facebook.com/?q=#!/notes/sarah-palin/on-sputnik-vs-spudnut/495721578434

One problem with this narrative though. Richland, Washington, home of Spudnuts, is a government town and has been since before Spudnut's opened it's doors.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richland,_Washington
Click to expand...

Clearly that makes her little story moronic.
 
DavidJames said:
Are you just defending what you feel is the misuse of the words "moron" or "moronic"?

What would you call someone who said the founding fathers ended slavery to help make their point, dishonest, confused, ignorant?
Click to expand...

I am against the general misuse of the words moronic, idiotic etc as pejoratives to describe people who obviously have at least average intelligence.

If I had to choose one it would be dishonest if I believed she meant all of them. There were certainly many of them that were very much against slavery and did fight against it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom