Still Working It

(Editorial cartoon by Steve Sack and published 5/26/13 in the Minneapolis Star Tribune.)

The Strib continues to have a good time sussing out Michele's gaffes and outright lies.  And she keeps providing her home town newspaper with the material to do so.

Bachmann, explaining how immigration reform could hurt the Republican Party, mischaracterized Obama’s 2012 executive order ending deportations of illegal immigrants who were brought into the United States as children:

“I think the president, even by executive order, could again wave his magic wand before 2014 and he'd say now all of the new, legal Americans are going to have voting rights. Why do I say that? He did it in 2012! Do you remember? Anyone who was here as a Latina under, ah, age 30, he said, ‘You get to vote.’ What? He decides you get to vote? If he did it 2012, know — take it to the bank — he'll do in 2014.”

In fact, Obama’s executive order had nothing to do with voting, whether by Latinas or Latinos. Since the interview was posted a week ago, Bachmann's comments have generally been derided as the latest example of her reputation for disregarding facts.   [Emphasis added]

This time, however, somebody on her staff stepped forward (whether at her direction or not) and clarified that what she meant to say was that hypothetically the president could conceivably do so.

Sorry, Michele:  that's a little too little and a little too late. 

It makes me wonder just what it is she intends to do after she leaves the House.

It also makes me wonder just what the Democrats are going to do about it.

Big Wheel Keeps On Turnin'

(Cartoon by Steve Sack and published in the Minneapolis Star Tribune 4/4/13.)

It's beginning to look like Michele Bachmann really is going to have to reduce her visibility, at least for a while.  Her hometown newspaper has some new revelations on the House Ethics Committee investigation.

A congressional inquiry of U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann has been referred to the House Ethics Committee, significantly raising the stakes in the Minnesota Republican’s efforts to fend off questions about her 2012 presidential campaign’s financial dealings.

A report issued Tuesday by the independent Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE) shows that its bipartisan board sent all seven cases before it last month to the House Ethics Committee, meaning they found “substantial reason” to believe they all involve potential ethics violations.

Among the cases known to be pending before the board was a probe of potential campaign finance violations by Bachmann as well as allegations that she took members of her campaign staff on a book tour to promote her personal political memoir, “Core of Conviction.” ...

Sources who have been interviewed by the OCE have told the Star Tribune that investigators focused on Bachmann’s 2011 book tour, which spanned from Minnesota and Iowa to the East Coast. Federal election and House ethics rules generally forbid candidates from using campaign funds or resources to sell or promote their own books, which are considered personal business activities.

Unlike potential campaign finance violations, which could involve top officials in Bachmann’s campaign, the book tour allegations focus on Bachmann’s personal conduct in selling her book.   [Emphasis added]

Now, if we could just get the DNC to put up and finance a Democratic candidate, we might actually pick up a seat.

I guess I ask too much.

Maybe We Won't Miss Her

(Editorial cartoon by Steve Sack and published 5/26/13 in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune.  Click on image to enlarge and then return.)

The Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Michele Bachmann's home town newspaper, points out that Michele has no intention of actually going away.  She's just not running for re-election to her House seat.

Embattled congresswoman Michele Bachmann told Fox News Channel’s Sean Hannity in exclusive interview Thursday that she is “not going away” despite her decision not to seek a fifth term.

“There’s just a time when you’ve served, and then it’s time to move on,” the Minnesota Republican said in her first interview since announcing that she is not running for reelection. “I’m not retiring. I’m not going silent. I’m not quitting my public involvement. In fact, I may run for another public office. That could happen.” ...

Given room to expound on her plans, Bachmann told the talk show host, “I’m not going away. I’m not leaving Washington. I’m not leaving the national scene. It’s just bringing a positive solution from a different perch.”

Asked about running again for president, Bachmann concluded, “I’m not taking anything off the table. But that’s certainly not my number one item that I’m looking at right now either. I’m in the game for the long haul.”    [Emphasis added]

So what does all that mean?  Who knows!

It may be that her decision not to run again for her House seat was designed to cool the Ethics Committee investigation and that she has her eye on Al Franken's senatorial seat.  Or the presidency.

Or, and I think this is more likely, she is being given a little Republican welfare.  Her appearance on Hannity's Fox News show may have been designed as a preview for a slot there.  Or she may be moving on to one of the conservative think tanks, joining such luminaries as Jim DeMint.

But if she's not leaving the public eye, than we can't and won't miss her.

I take a little perverse joy out of that.

Be Careful What You Wish For

(Editorial cartoon by Steve Sack 5/30/13 and published in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune.  Click on image to enlarge and then come back.)

A couple of days ago I put up a post which tried to figure out why the GOP stalwarts, who have plenty of money, hadn't moved on to putting up primary opponents to Tea Partiers who are costing the party voters all across the country:

For example, why aren't they grooming someone to take on Michele Bachmann.  She is being sued by an Iowa Republican leader for stealing an email list.  She is under a House Ethics Committee investigation.  She continues to spout ridiculous conspiracy theories, embarrassing her party every time she is fact-checked by the major mainstream media outlets.  The Democrats have targeted her for defeat and will pour money into their candidate's campaign (finally!).  She's from a conservative district; surely there is someone there who would do the job for the GOP.

So, shortly after the post went up, Michele announced that she would not be running for re-election in 2014 in her own patented word-salad way.  From her home-town newspaper, the Strib:

Her announcement, which came as she embarked on a congressional tour to Russia, surprised friends and detractors alike. It capped a tumultuous two-year period in which Bachmann went from leading Republican presidential contender to barely hanging on to her congressional seat while coming under investigation for campaign spending that occurred during her short White House run.

Starting as a grass-roots activist who knocked out a veteran incumbent in her first legislative race, Bachmann quickly emerged as a national conservative icon. She commanded a loyal following even after her 2012 presidential ambitions died quickly when she went all-out to win the Iowa caucuses and came up well short. Along the way, she became one of the country’s most prolific political fundraisers, with a vast network of small donors. ...

Democrat Jim Graves, who came close to unseating Bachmann last year, said his former foe’s decision makes clear that she “recognized that it would be an uphill battle for her going forward.”

Graves announced his candidacy last month and says he will battle whoever replaces her on the Republican ticket.

Without Bachmann in the race, a host of Republicans began salivating at the chance to run in a rare open seat in the state’s most conservative congressional district. As of late Wednesday, no GOP candidate had officially stepped up to run, but many were publicly assessing the possibilities.   [Emphasis added]

Michele's avowed reason is that she never considered her seat in Congress as an occupation, which is so wonderfully ironic I can hardly stand it.  She and her Tea Party colleagues have served as an occupying force in this Congress so that no work for the people could actually get accomplished.  Her backers no doubt had that in mind.

So why is she leaving?

I still don't know.  Maybe she's received a better offer, perhaps from Fox (who might want the latest iteration of Sarah Palin on staff).  Maybe her contributors have been less forthcoming this time around and she realized that Graves might beat her.  Maybe the Karl Rove traditionalists have told her it was time for her to move on and offered her a cushy spot in one of the right-wing think tanks.  Nobody seems to know at this point.

What I do know is that she has ruined the easy post for lefty-bloggers, the easy test for fact-checkers, the easy subject for political cartoonists, and none of us are happy about that.

She also has dashed the hopes of an easy victory for Jim Graves and the Democratic Party.

A mixed blessing, to be sure.

Dissin' The Function: Updated

(Click on image to enlarge and then boogie on back.)

This time David Horsey has taken a look at the sequester and points out the obvious pain it is causing, and not just to the poor and the elders.

It is not in the news much anymore, but the automatic across-the-board cuts – the spur to legislative action that resulted in no action – continue to kick in. In the aftermath of the monster tornado that struck Oklahoma last week, a detail that went largely unnoticed was that federal money for emergency relief had been slashed by $1 billion because of the sequester. The disasters won’t stop, but the money might run out.

Meanwhile, the budget for the National Institutes of Health has fallen by nearly $2 billion. That means hundreds of fewer grants for research into new ways to prevent or treat diseases.

As the wildfire season approaches, the U.S. Forest Service is asking 41 states to return millions of dollars that are part of a revenue-sharing scheme that goes back to the days of Teddy Roosevelt. Thanks to sequestration, the Forest Service says it cannot afford to share anymore. ...

Even though the federal deficit is dropping – due, in particular, to the increase in taxes for the rich that kicked in on Jan. 1 – Congress remains mired in tired rhetoric and false premises about overspending and big government. Instead of wasting time bloviating about tea party fantasies, our leaders should get busy cleaning up the mess they have made by failing to do their jobs.   [Emphasis added]

Why, yes, David.  Our leaders should pull the plug on sequestration, but they won't.  The House as presently constituted won't allow it.  The wackaloon Tea Partyists continue to rule.  Nothing of substance will come out of this Congress.

And here's what I don't get:  why aren't mainstream Republicans doing something about it.  Why aren't they primarying the worst of the lot.  Surely at this point they can't be hurt any more than they're already being hurt.

For example, why aren't they grooming someone to take on Michele Bachmann.  She is being sued by an Iowa Republican leader for stealing an email list.  She is under a House Ethics Committee investigation.  She continues to spout ridiculous conspiracy theories, embarrassing her party every time she is fact-checked by the major mainstream media outlets.  The Democrats have targeted her for defeat and will pour money into their candidate's campaign (finally!).  She's from a conservative district; surely there is someone there who would do the job for the GOP.

Karl Rove has the money, as do other more "traditional " Republicans.  Why are they holding back?

I really have no idea.

UPDATE:

Michele has announced that she won't be running for re-election.  I have to admit that I'm surprised.

Michele: Still Working The Room

(Editorial cartoon by Steve Sack and published 4/14/13 by the Minneapolis Star Tribune.  Click on image to enlarge and then be so kind as to return.)


Michele is still flashing her shiny keys around, anxious to keep her base focused on Tea Party Business rather than on her pending Ethics Committee investigation and the law suits she's involved in.  There's been all sorts of fact checking done on Bachmann's latest pronouncement, but I thought the one from the Washington Post captured things nicely.

 “So now we find out these people are making decisions based on our politics and beliefs, and they’re going to be in charge of our health care. There’s a huge national database that’s being created right now. Your health care, my health care, all the Fox viewers health care, their personal, intimate, most close-to-the-vest secrets will be in that database, and the IRS is in charge of that database? So the IRS will have the ability potentially ...to deny health care, to deny access, to delay health care.”

— Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), on Fox News, May 15, 2013

 “When people realize that their most personal, sensitive, intimate, private health-care information is in the hands of the IRS that’s been willing to use people’s tax information against political opponents of this administration, then people have pause and they pull back in horror.”

— Bachmann, on ABC News/Yahoo, May 20


With the Internal Revenue Service in the news, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) has taken the opportunity to marry that scandal with her ongoing battle against the president’s health-care law, a.k.a. “Obamacare.”

The picture she has sketched is pretty frightening — that the “most personal, sensitive, intimate, private health-care information is in the hands of the IRS” via a vast database. ...

The Pinocchio Test

Bachmann has made a sweeping claim: the “most personal, sensitive, intimate, private health-care information is in the hands of the IRS” under the health-care law. There is no evidence to support this assertion, and she is simply scaring people when she repeats it on television.

Bachmann thus continues her record-breaking streak of outlandish claims.

Four Pinocchios


(Emphasis in the original.)

Michele has spoken truthfully about one thing, however:  The Democrats are targeting her this time around.  This could be fun.

Oh My, Michele!

(Cartoon by Steve Sack and published in the Minneapolis Star Tribune 4/4/13.  Click on image to enlarge and then hustle back.)

It's one thing to have your home town newspaper come done on you for your really stupid and weak fabrications, it's something else when a major national newspaper does it.

...But we were curious about Bachmann’s suggestion that she voted against the 2011 Budget Control Act because she was worried about the impact on poorer segments of the population. ...

We searched high and low for any statements that Bachmann made at the time warning about the “calamities” that would fall on the poor because of budget cuts.

What we found instead were comments by Bachmann complaining that the Budget Control Act did not cut spending enough. She especially decried the fact that the debt ceiling was increased, arguing instead that the government could avoid default simply by making immediate and steep cuts. “We needed real cuts and a fundamental restructuring in the way Washington spends taxpayer dollars to solve the spending crisis we are in,” Bachmann said in a statement after the bill was passed. “Someone has to say NO to more spending. I will.”

While Bachmann made no mention of the impact on poorer Americans, she added: “This deal puts our national security at risk because of the severe cuts to defense that kick in should the President not do his job in the next few months.” ...

During that period, Bachmann also was just one of nine House Republicans who earlier had opposed a Republican alternative plan, known as the “Cut Cap and Balance Act,” which would have immediately reduced spending by $111 billion. In a floor speech, Bachmann said that while she embraced the bill’s principles, “the motion does not go far enough in fundamentally restructuring the way Washington spends taxpayer dollars.”

In other words, Bachmann in her statements and comments at the time wanted to cut spending even more — except for defense spending. The current sequester cuts security and nonsecurity spending by equal amounts, so presumably under Bachmann’s 2011 formula, the cutting of nonsecurity programs that she now says “breaks everyone’s hearts” would have been deeper.    [Emphasis added]

And what did Michele win for this egregious bit of flim-flammery?  A rating of "Four Pinocchios", the highest rating for lies in a fact check.

Once again, Michele has ignored the basic rule of staying alive in politics:  don't lie if there are ways to prove you are lying.  This is getting to be too easy a target.

More popcorn please.

More Michele

(Cartoon by Sack and published 4/14/2012 by the Minneapolis Star Tribune.Click on image to enlarge and then return.)

Our Michele has been packing her bags, with money instead of clothes, as Jim Graves has announced that he will be running against her again in next year's election for that House seat.

The expected rematch is on between Minnesota Republican Michele Bachmann and DFL businessman Jim Graves, who came within a single percentage point of an upset in last November's race for her U.S. House seat.

 

The new Graves campaign issued a statement Thursday morning announcing that he will make another run at the four-term congresswoman, a lightning rod for Democrats who faces ethics and campaign finance allegations stemming from her 2012 presidential run.

 

Bachmann reacted to the news with a fundraising email to supporters announcing “He’s Back.”

 

Her initial statement -- and hard-hitting video -- presaged a tough campaign:

 

“Just a few moments ago, after receiving his marching orders from the Pelosi-Obama campaign machine, my Democratic opponent from last election announced he will again try to defeat me in 2014,” Bachmann told supporters.

 

Graves emphasized his business background as founder and former CEO of the AmericInn Hotel chain. “These days Congress is all about and scoring political points rather than actually solving problems,” he said in a statement. “I’m not interested in celebrity, only in solutions.”

 

Graves came within 4,296 votes of upending Bachmann in November, a contest that featured a presidential election at the top of the ticket. President Obama will not be on the ballot in 2014. But as seen from the video her campaign released immediately upon Graves' announcement, it is clear she is going to try to morph Graves into Obama, a target that's better suited to her conservative base.   [Emphasis added]

The state DFL party has already sent money to Graves with the caveat that the campaign funds would not foreclose any other party member from running.  It just wants some parity with the lies and smears our Michele will be doling out from this point onward.

 

This is a good start.  It would be nice if the Democratic Party would ship some campaign funds as well.  Howard Dean showed how a 50-state strategy could work.  Rahm Emmanual showed how limited campaign funding fails.

 

I have no illusions that Jim Graves will be as liberal as Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton, but he has to be better than Bachmann, she who would rather raise money and lie than actually, you know, engage in rational legislation.  And wouldn't it be nice to have her off the Intelligence Committee?  I mean, the cognitive dissonance is just too much for my old brain to process.