This hasn't gotten any press follow-up. This week Bachmann proposed expanding the Afghanistan war into Pakistan:
Bachmann expressed chagrin over the administration’s perceived unwillingness to attack fertilizer plants in Pakistan, arguably an American ally, from which insurgents are obtaining materials for bombs.Many other bizarre statements by Bachmann during a talk with Minnesota press:
“I believe we’ve made some very serous mistakes in Afghanistan,” Bachmann said, saying America had been victorious in Afghanistan at one point.(CONTINUED)
She expressed dismay over so-called insider attacks against U.S. troops in which Afghan soldiers and police, sometime during training, turn their weapons on Americans.This kind of stuff is always scary, when you consider that Bachmann has a seat on the House Intelligence Committee. I don't know where she comes up with these ideas: there are acts of terror against our troops--so the solution is to take away the ammunition of our Afghan partners?
“They have live ammunition. And they turn on the American soldiers and kill them,” Bachmann said.
Bachmann said “absolutely nothing” is being done to prevent these distressing attacks.
“My opinion is we should not have live ammunition in the guns that our Afghan partners have,” Bachmann said of training Afghan troops.
“Because they prove to be untrustworthy for our American soldiers,” she said, suggesting Afghans be trained in the United States, a move allowing for better security screening.
Afghan troops have been infiltrated by terrorists--her solution to that is to bring Afghan troops to the US? (If you are a terrorist, your dream is for a US congressmember to sponsor a legal trip for you to the US.)
I put the part about how she said America had been victorious in Afghanistan in bold--because we need daily reminders with how out of touch with reality Bachmann is. Afghanistan has been a quagmire. To understand how irresponsible that statement is: imagine how the American press, the Pentagon and the right would respond if Barack Obama told them that "American has been victorious in Afghanistan."
But Bachmann wants the US out of Afghanistan if our troops keep taking casualties. Another flip-flop from a conservative--it's a position held by peaceniks:
...if the problems of insider attacks and hidden explosives are not remedied, maybe the United States should withdraw its troops from Afghanistan immediately, (Bachmann) argued.But at the same time she suggested that the US should get out of a bloody shitstorm in Afghanistan, Bachmann voiced her own idea for a brand new bloody shitstorm with Pakistan. Bachmann made these remarks when she was speaking to the editorial board of Minnesota's ECM newspapers. I can't understand why the national and local press haven't reported this. Maybe it's because of the headline in the paper reporting her call for an attack on Pakistan:
“Right now, I would not send my sons or my daughters to that conflict,” Bachmann said. (None of her adult children have served in that conflict--or any other.)
“I wouldn’t want to send them. And if I won’t send them, I don’t want to send any other people’s children as well,” she said.
Bachmann in full campaign mode during stops in Forest LakeNext:
In theory, Bachmann's an ideal big business candidate--if all you care about is casting votes that protect big business. Her voting record is "gut the liberal state," her record of rhetoric on "protecting big business special interests" is stellar. So why has Bachmann received only $8,000 from Minnesota's corporate community this election cycle?
...Image can also affect business giving. Bachmann ran for president and is a prolific fundraiser. Yet she got just $8,000 from Minnesota's corporate community.From Jan. 1, 2011, to June 30, 2012, Bachmann's Minnesota colleague Rep. Erik Paulsen (whose business votes match Bachmann's) has received $130,338 from Minnesota businesses. The Minnesota business community's contributions to Bachmann are paltry in comparison.
"I think her ideology plays a role," (University of Minnesota political scientist Kathryn) Pearson said of Bachmann's support for controversial social issues. "She's not out there talking about business. Her votes don't differ dramatically from (Minnesota Republican Congressmember) Erik Paulsen's. But her emphasis is quite distinct."
One of the political science professor's statements ("Bachmann is not out there talking about business") is not true. She often talks about Minnesota businesses during campaigning. (For example: one of Minnesota's important businesses is medical device development and manufacture. Bachmann often claims that Obama health and insurance policy will jeopardize that industry.) And Bachmann's statements on the economy, jobs, and the need to free the private sector from government are boilerplate.
Bachmann's problem with Minnesota businesses are rooted elsewhere. First, there's that "controversial social issues" thing Pearson mentioned. Bachmann's a nut--regularly floating lies, conspiracy theories, bigotry against American gays, fighting the anti-abortion battle...that's what Professor Pearson is referring to with the "social issues" euphemism.
Second: Minnesota businesses are aware of the extremist reputation that Bachmann's acquired nationally. Bachmann and her "program" are not widely popular in Minnesota.
Her pockets of support are small but fervent. I suspect (but can't prove) that some of those Minnesota businesses don't want to be identified as "Bachmann supporters" this election cycle. Allying themselves with "that nut" is probably counter-productive in maintaining the public image of many Minnesota businesses.
Third: Most importantly, Bachmann advocates but doesn't deliver for Minnesota businesses. Ironically, Bachmann knows that liberal deficit spending by the federal government will create jobs and markets in her district. And she's regularly sought that federal deficit spending for her district. (This contradicts everything she's always her supporters about America being broke, due to the deficit,' it violates her 'I will not seek earmarks' pledge, it discredits her as a principled conservative. Her supporters don't seem to care.)
She's left a paper trail of her liberal efforts to use her office to create better markets for the Minnesota private sector. The problem is results: her liberal efforts are 'fails' in her district and in the broader state business sector. The business community responds accordingly and their contributions are negligible. In the past, Bachmann's business contributions came from the banking sector, the finance sector, and the energy sector (recall her notorious defense of BP during the oil spill: don't let victims of the spill play BP for suckers when it comes to compensation.)
Bachmann's delivered practically nothing for the Minnesota business community, and is likely to deliver nothing in the future if she's re-elected. Thus, their contributions dry up.
Regardless, Bachmann doesn't have a problem with fundraising. She's got a lot of money from around the country, channeled to her via movement conservative groups and the religious right. The fact that Minnesota businesses now recognize her as useless? Not a worry for Michele, this year.
ACTION LINK: Stop the McCarthy, this year:
LINK: Bachmann calls for an attack on Pakistan:
LINK: Bachmann blown off by Minnesota's business community this year.
ACTION LINK: https://secure.actblue.com/...