PDA

View Full Version : Bachmann's Latest Whopper



Gayle in MD
05-15-2012, 08:51 AM
In several urgent fundraising appeals, Rep. Michele Bachmann falsely claims that biased “liberal judges” redrew her congressional district “in retaliation for repeatedly standing up to President Obama.” The truth is that only two of the five judges were Democratic appointees, and Bachmann’s Minnesota district has become even more Republican than it was before.

It’s true that a bipartisan panel of judges redrew district lines and placed the town where Bachmann lives in an abutting district represented by a Democrat. But she has chosen to again run in the 6th District, the one she has represented since 2007. And she doesn’t even have to move to do that.

Bachmann has sent out several appeals that carry the same message:

Bachmann email, May 11: A major development has just occurred in my race for the U.S. House of Representatives and I’m asking for your immediate help…

…You see, in retaliation for repeatedly standing up to President Obama on the national stage, liberal judges have redrawn the lines of my Minnesota Congressional District to try and wipe me off of the political map once and for all.

Their bias was so obvious they even gerrymandered my home — where my wonderful husband Marcus and I live –- entirely out of my District and placed it into one held by a six-term Democrat incumbent!

In the email, sent to national supporters of her failed presidential bid, Bachmann writes, “You and I must NOT allow the courts to defeat me by moving me out of my district at such a pivotal election. To hand the Obama Democrats this victory now would be to destroy all we have built over these last six years.”

The email goes on to ask donors to make “a commitment to my campaign in the amount of $2,500, $1,000, $500, $250, $100, $70, or $35 today.”

Let’s start with the bogus claim that the new district lines were redrawn by “liberal judges.” As Mother Jones reported on May 9, the redistricting was done by a five-judge panel selected by Minnesota’s chief justice, Lorie Gildea. Gildea was elevated to chief justice by former Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty (the Minneapolis Star Tribune wrote about it in an article headlined “Pawlenty’s picks keep high court tilting right“). Only two of the five judges on the panel Gildea selected were Democratic appointees. One was appointed by Gov. Jesse Ventura, who was a member of the Independence Party of Minnesota; one was appointed by Pawlenty. And one by former Republican Gov. Arne Carlson.

Contrary to Bachmann’s assertion that the development “just occurred,” the panel issued its redistricting decision on Feb. 21.

It’s true that the newly drawn plans moved Bachmann’s home in Stillwater into the 4th Congressional District. The decision to move Stillwater into the 4th District was perfectly logical, said David Wasserman, a political analyst at the nonpartisan Cook Political Report. The 4th District, which takes in St. Paul, simply had not grown as fast as the rest of the state and needed to pick up population. And the 6th District had grown so quickly, it needed to lose population, he said.

“This was not a partisan map,” Wasserman said. “Her assertions are baloney.”

Bachmann’s home now lies in the 4th District, which is considered a safe Democratic district. But Bachmann isn’t running in the 4th District. Per the U.S. Constitution, a congressional candidate doesn’t need to actually live in a district to represent it (though the candidate does have to live in the state). Immediately after the redistricting plan was unveiled, Bachmann announced she would run to retain her seat in the 6th District.

“It may be a nuisance to her that her home was carved out of the 6th District, but the 6th District actually got more Republican,” Wasserman said. “She’s even safer than she was before.”

By the Cook Report’s estimation, the 6th District was 7 percentage points more Republican than the national average before the redistricting, and now it is 8 percentage points more Republican than the national average.

The redistricting actually “strengthened her position,” Wasserman said.

But that’s certainly not the impression Bachmann leaves in the email when she states: “As the TEA Party Caucus Chairwoman in the U.S. House and one of President Obama’s sharpest critics, the Democrats are licking their chops over Minnesota’s new political map and will spend MILLIONS to defeat me.”

Perhaps that kind of opposition is mounting, but if it does, Bachmann appears well-positioned to fight back. Bachmann’s campaign fundraising is far outpacing that of her chief Democratic opponent, hotelier Jim Graves. Graves announced recently that he had donated $100,000 to his own campaign, but according to Federal Election Commission reports, Bachmann raised nearly $580,000 for her congressional campaign in the first quarter of this year alone. In all, the latest FEC report shows that Bachmann has raised nearly $5.2 million this election cycle.

– Robert Farley

Below, more of Bachmann's most memorable whoppers:



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/15...ml?ref=politics (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/15/michele-bachmann-factcheck-fundraising_n_1517511.html?ref=politics)

llotter
05-16-2012, 07:07 PM
This is HUGE. Just wait till the FBI gets wind of this and the indictment will precede the jail terms.

eg8r
05-17-2012, 10:19 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In several urgent fundraising appeals, Rep. Michele Bachmann falsely claims that biased “liberal judges” redrew her congressional district “in retaliation for repeatedly standing up to President Obama.” The truth is that only two of the five judges were Democratic appointees, and Bachmann’s Minnesota district has become even more Republican than it was before.

</div></div>How does your "truth" prove Bachmann was false about redrawing the congressional district? How does the fact that "only two of five judges" prove Bachman was false when she said "liberal judges"?

There is no reason to read any more of this BS article. It starts out as an attack with no ground to stand on.

eg8r

Qtec
05-18-2012, 03:32 AM
2 out of 5 does not constitute a majority dillhole!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">“This was not a partisan map,” Wasserman said. “Her assertions are baloney.” </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">“It may be a nuisance to her that her home was carved out of the 6th District, but the 6th District actually got more Republican,” Wasserman said. “She’s even safer than she was before.” </div></div>

Considering the fact that she is the Queen of baloney,and judging her on the number of FALSE statements she has made, anything she says should be ignored...but of course, you lap it up without knowing any of the facts.

Q

Gayle in MD
05-18-2012, 05:41 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In several urgent fundraising appeals, Rep. Michele Bachmann falsely claims that biased “liberal judges” redrew her congressional district “in retaliation for repeatedly standing up to President Obama.” The truth is that only two of the five judges were Democratic appointees, and Bachmann’s Minnesota district has become even more Republican than it was before.

</div></div>How does your "truth" prove Bachmann was false about redrawing the congressional district? How does the fact that "only two of five judges" prove Bachman was false when she said "liberal judges"?

There is no reason to read any more of this BS article. It starts out as an attack with no ground to stand on.

eg8r </div></div>




<span style="color: #CC0000"> <span style='font-size: 14pt'>What is every post written by Eh8tr?




"It starts out as an attack with no ground to stand on.

eg8r" </span> </span>

eg8r
05-21-2012, 01:44 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">2 out of 5 does not constitute a majority dillhole!

</div></div>Where in the quote was the word "majority", dillhole?

eg8r

Qtec
05-21-2012, 03:07 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">How does your "truth" prove Bachmann was false about [the] redrawing [of] the congressional district? </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 14pt'>liberal judges</span> have redrawn the lines of my Minnesota Congressional District to try and wipe me off of the political map once and for all. </div></div>

Truth.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Only two of the five judges on the panel Gildea selected were Democratic appointees. </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">“It may be a nuisance to her that her home was carved out of the 6th District, but the 6th District actually got more Republican,” Wasserman said. “She’s even safer than she was before.”

By the Cook Report’s estimation, the 6th District was 7 percentage points more Republican than the national average before the redistricting, and now it is 8 percentage points more Republican than the national average.

The redistricting actually “strengthened her position,” Wasserman said.
</div></div>

This tells all.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Contrary to Bachmann’s assertion that the development “just occurred,” <span style='font-size: 14pt'>the panel issued its redistricting decision on <u>Feb. 21</u>.</span>
</div></div>

This is just another case of Bachmann lying through her teeth in order to deceive, mislead and manipulate voters into giving her money.

Q

eg8r
05-21-2012, 03:55 AM
Your "truth" does nothing to disprove what Bachman said. Democratic appointee does not mean they are not liberals. LOL, you guys are just pissing in the wind at this point and it is making you look foolish.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
05-21-2012, 12:39 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Your "truth" does nothing to disprove what Bachman said. Democratic appointee does not mean they are not liberals. LOL, you guys are just pissing in the wind at this point and it is making you look foolish.

eg8r </div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The truth is that only two of the five judges were Democratic appointees, and Bachmann’s Minnesota district has become even more Republican than it was before.

</div></div>

Bachmann is the foolish one, because she lied, and those who deny the facts, just as foolish, as well.

G.

eg8r
05-22-2012, 12:19 AM
LOL not in this case. She may have lied about other things but in the subject of this thread based on the evidence provided here, there is no proof of a lie.

eg8r

Qtec
05-22-2012, 01:43 AM
Gayle gets it. I get it. Its very simple.

Why did,

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><u>liberal judges</u> have redrawn the lines of my Minnesota Congressional District <u>to try and wipe me off of the political map once and for all.</u> </div></div>

..and then put her into a district where,

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 14pt'>“She’s even safer than she was before.”</span>

By the Cook Report’s estimation, the 6th District was 7 percentage points more Republican than the national average before the redistricting, and now it is 8 percentage points more Republican than the national average.

The redistricting actually “strengthened her position,” Wasserman said. </div></div>

Nothing Bachmann claims is true. Two Lefty judges on a panel of 5 can't force anything through without the consent of one of the other 3.

She is lying and doing her usual martyr act in order to deceive people into giving her money.

Typical religious nutjob. They can justify anything for the cause.


Q

eg8r
05-22-2012, 03:38 AM
The redistricting was not effective. You have not proven her to be a liar just because the effort did not pan out. Again, if we were to believe everything you guys say about how Democrats think and vote then the Tea Party would not have had a chance in the beginning. Now you guys continue to try and tell us that money is what does the voting, meaning if Brown raises enough money then it doesn't matter who the Dem candidate is or it doesn't matter how mad the voters are with Brown they will still vote for Brown.

Everything you have continued to tell us as to how voters vote has been wrong. So, the liberals tried to redraw the district to force her out, which has not been proven to be false, failed. Maybe due to your reasoning she just raised more money.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
05-22-2012, 05:59 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The redistricting was not effective. You have not proven her to be a liar just because the effort did not pan out. Again, if we were to believe everything you guys say about how Democrats think and vote then the Tea Party would not have had a chance in the beginning. Now you guys continue to try and tell us that money is what does the voting, meaning if Brown raises enough money then it doesn't matter who the Dem candidate is or it doesn't matter how mad the voters are with Brown they will still vote for Brown.

Everything you have continued to tell us as to how voters vote has been wrong. So, the liberals tried to redraw the district to force her out, which has not been proven to be false, failed. Maybe due to your reasoning she just raised more money.

eg8r </div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In several urgent fundraising appeals, Rep. Michele Bachmann falsely claims that biased “liberal judges” redrew her congressional district “in retaliation for repeatedly standing up to President Obama.” The truth is that only two of the five judges were Democratic appointees, and Bachmann’s Minnesota district has become even more Republican than it was before.

</div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> So, the liberals tried to redraw the district to force her out, which has not been proven to be false, failed. </div></div>

BWA HA HA HA! Too funny for words. Talk about double talk!

She lied to try to demonize Democrats, get more sympathy and more money.

End of Story.

G.

Qtec
05-22-2012, 06:09 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">liberal judges <span style='font-size: 20pt'>have</span> redrawn the lines of my Minnesota Congressional District </div></div>

English lesson for you. Do you know what 'have redrawn' means?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You have not proven her to be a liar just because the effort did not pan out. </div></div>

She is not saying they wanted to or tried to, <span style='font-size: 17pt'>she is saying that they did do it! ie they 'have' done it.</span>


Bachmann made the claim, she has to prove its true. You have to prove its true.

Q

If this was such an outrage, why did she waits months before complaining?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Contrary to Bachmann’s assertion that the development “just occurred,” the panel issued its redistricting decision on Feb. 21.</div></div>

eg8r
05-22-2012, 07:56 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Bachmann made the claim, she has to prove its true.</div></div>Sure I can read which is why I keep proving you don't understand what the word "liar" means. She doesn't have to prove this YOU DO since you are calling her a liar. You have proven the lines have not been redrawn, the only argument was that all the judges were not liberal and only 2 were Dem.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If this was such an outrage, why did she waits months before complaining?

</div></div>Who care when she complains...that wasn't the subject of this thread. You are trying to call her a liar for saying liberal judges and your defense is that only a few were Dems. LOL, you are failing miserably but then again that is what you are used to.

eg8r

eg8r
05-22-2012, 07:57 AM
You have failed to prove there was ever a lie. What you have proven is that you don't comprehend the english language.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
05-22-2012, 11:55 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You have failed to prove there was ever a lie. What you have proven is that you don't comprehend the english language.

eg8r </div></div>
She lied. The article explains her lie completely. You refuse to accept facts.

You are not worth anyone's time on here.

G.

eg8r
05-23-2012, 02:37 AM
LOL you just refuse to comprehend what you are reading.

eg8r

Qtec
05-23-2012, 05:26 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sure I can read which is why I keep proving you don't understand what the word "liar" means. <span style='font-size: 20pt'>She doesn't have to prove this YOU DO since you are calling her a liar.</span> </div></div>

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>BS. SHE is the one making the accusations. She is the one who has to prove what she says is true.</span> You are flip-flopping around like a fish out of water.

Just to demonstrate the absurdity of your new viewpoint, I will play your game. Can you handle it?

<span style='font-size: 26pt'>I heard that its common knowledge that you and Rick Santorum are lovers.

Until you can conclusively prove that this statement is false, to me, you are Santorum's bitch.</span>

Waiting for you to prove I am wrong, DILHOLE!.


Q

eg8r
05-23-2012, 06:18 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">BS. SHE is the one making the accusations.</div></div>LOL, she has no reason to prove anything. If you think she is wrong then prove it. I don't need to prove I am not his lover. The only reason I would feel the need to prove it is if I felt threatened by your accusation. Why do common sense scenarios make you look like an idiot?

eg8r

Gayle in MD
05-23-2012, 06:46 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">BS. SHE is the one making the accusations.</div></div>LOL, she has no reason to prove anything. If you think she is wrong then prove it. I don't need to prove I am not his lover. The only reason I would feel the need to prove it is if I felt threatened by your accusation. Why do common sense scenarios make you look like an idiot?

eg8r </div></div>

She made the accusation, and THE FACTS, which are QUOTED in the article, PROVED her statements against Liberals, were lies, her district is now even more Republican, so her entire premise, was a lie, but because she has an R. next to her name, you refuse to accept the FACTS.

Same ol' Ed. Regardless of proof, if there is an R. around, he will deny it, and then accuse others of being partisan and hypocritical!


What a total crock!

I hereby award you an official AZ badge of the BS Booby cabal. Wear it with pride. You deserve it.

G.

Qtec
05-23-2012, 07:43 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><u>I don't need to prove I am not his lover. </u> </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> [ BTW, that's not an denial and totally the opposite from what you said before.]
</div></div>



<span style='font-size: 20pt'>Yes you do. </span>

You just said its up to the person who is accused to prove their innocence.

I will stop this right now if you just tell me, <span style='font-size: 26pt'>does Rick give it to you, or is it the other way around?</span>

Q..Hey, eGAYor, does your wife know you frequent Gay bars?

eg8r
05-23-2012, 08:24 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yes you do.

</div></div>Sure I don't. You can say whatever you want but it doesn't impact me. Carry on all you want but it is no skin off my back and I feel no need to disprove what you said.

eg8r

eg8r
05-23-2012, 08:25 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">She made the accusation, and THE FACTS, which are QUOTED in the article, PROVED her statements against Liberals, were lies</div></div>She made the accusation but you have not proven it was a lie. You have failed miserably.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
05-23-2012, 08:35 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">She made the accusation, and THE FACTS, which are QUOTED in the article, PROVED her statements against Liberals, were lies</div></div>She made the accusation but you have not proven it was a lie. You have failed miserably.

eg8r </div></div>


You made the accusation but you have not proven it was a lie. You have failed miserably.

G.