Call it the Bachmann backpedal: After saying that she’s concerned that Barack Obama “absolutely … may have anti-American views,” Rep. Michele Bachmann is now easing off that assessment — and faulting MSNBC’s Chris Matthews for the incident. On Fox 9 this morning, she said her words were “completely misconstrued,” adding that she “did not suggest the word ‘anti-American.’” On WCCO on Sunday she made a similar claim: “I’m not saying his views are anti-American. That’s a misreading of what I said.”
MPR’s Bob Collins — who puts a little blame on Matthews, saying he should “learn to be quiet after asking a question” — offers a partial transcript of the seven-minute discussion. While Matthews did first use the word “anti-American” (Bachmann used it 10 times), he did so after trying to piece together Bachmann’s logic. Using a word often associated with Stalinist Russia, she referred to four Democrats Obama, Joe Biden, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi as “a troika of the most leftist administration in the history of our country.”
Did he sense where she was going — or did he lead her on?
MR. MATTHEWS: If you have liberal views, does that mean you have anti-American views? What’s the connection? I don’t get the connection. What’s the connection between liberal and leftist and anti-American?
REP. BACHMANN: Anti-American is the point, because –
MR. MATTHEWS: I mean, if you’re liberal, are you anti-American?
What’s done is done, of course. Bachmann did say, as the tape shows, that she worries that Obama’s views may be “anti-American” and she did say that the media should look into whether members of Congress are pro- or anti-America (a fact downplayed in many of the early local news stories). And citizens cross-country are outraged: Democratic challenger Elwyn Tinklenberg has reported raised more than $640,000, which he’ll be using to buy ads later this week.













25 Comments »
Comment posted October 20, 2008 @ 9:59 am
Well then, it must be that Rep. double talk again.
Quit trying to cover your ass..we all heard exactly what you said.
Comment posted October 20, 2008 @ 10:07 am
She absolutely said that Obama “may have anti-American views” I thought that was the whole point of the her argument. If I were her, I would stick by that assessment.
However her words were definitely twisted in many other ways. For example she didn’t say he anyone except for people like Ayers are unamerican. She was suggesting that those who hangout with people like Ayers, may share some anti-american views. She did not say that Biden, Pelosi or anyone else were anti-american, yet that is what everyone thinks she said.
Comment posted October 20, 2008 @ 10:32 am
Why is it when Republicans say something as off the wall as Bachmann did, it is the REPORTER’S fault for having asked the question?
Comment posted October 20, 2008 @ 10:32 am
The Media on Hypocrisy of Senator John McCain
Community boards for programs such as the Chicago Annenberg Challenge normally comprise of volunteers with a variety of professional background and political affiliation. The first and foremost goal of any volunteer to serve or serving on such boards is to make as maximum contribution as possible to achieve the desired mission. The notion that a volunteer is to disassociate oneself from a charitable organization due to a tarnished resume of one of the co-volunteers is unheard of. It is not and should not be a measure to restrict anyone to provide voluntary service contribution in any organization. It is shameful that Senator McCain has decided to drag himself into such despicable character assassination of Senator Obama for political advantage. To my great surprise, Gov. Sarah Palin is against the idea. On October 20, 2008 during a candid interview with the reporters traveling on hers she said, “If I had my way, the McCain campaign and the Republican National Committee would not be flooding battleground states with automated phone calls tying Barack Obama to former radical William Ayers, as they have done over the last week”.
If the standard of which Senator McCain wishes his opponent to be judged is valid, it should apply to him as well. Based on his line of thinking, it can be said that his continued relationship with a convicted domestic terrorist Gordon Liddy reflects his judgment and character. How comfortable would a voter feel in voting for a presidential candidate who has a friendly relationship with a felon who committed the most catastrophic political wrong doing in the history of this nation and which led to impeachment/ resignation of a former president? How can one be a head of a government of which his friend (Liddy) would rather see some of its agents killed? One can understand the need of McCain to appease the Gordon’s talk-show audience but as leader, McCain should be embarrassed for such a relationship. This subject deserves a detailed review by the media. To an independent voter driven by judgment rather than passion, a continued association with an unrepentant Watergate kingpin is a show-stopper for any candidate’s ascendancy into the highest office in the land.
CNN, Washington Post, New York Times, The Chicago Sun, The New Yorker and The New Republic News, among others have made independent reviews of the Obama-Ayers relationship and found nothing. How come independent reviews have never been conducted relative to the McCain-Liddy relationship? In addition, why has Senator McCain’s not been aggressively questioned on his biased narrow-minded McCarthyism thinking? Why has Senator McCain not been asked about the relationship of Todd Palin with the secessionist Alaska Independent Party? This is a double standard, journalistic failure or an abrogation of responsibility by the US main media. It is important that Americans voters be provided with the relevant information before the Election Day.
Comment posted October 20, 2008 @ 10:33 am
American’s have the right to put their potential leaders under the bright lights and ask questions without being labeled a racist or a bigot. The facts are that Obama’s Dad was a life long communist/socialist, he has written about his strong aspirations to meet his father’s dreams, he has a strong, faith based association with anti-American leader and he has some sort of association with an anti-american-establishment socialist and terrorist. I’m not concerned about Ayers as much as I am concerned that Obama sympothizes with his views. Obama may be good at minimizing the significance of these things but they do exist. He is being interviewed for the job of President. These questions are valid.
Comment posted October 20, 2008 @ 10:37 am
I watched the initial showing of the congress woman. It was scarey.THe new communist/ socalist witch hunt is in the early stages. It is really scary.All one has to do is listen to talk radio at night .According to what I hear,Joe Mc is still alive.
Comment posted October 20, 2008 @ 10:41 am
I have seen Bachmann on TV programs and she is a font of misinformation… she needs a plumber to stanch the flow of muck she spews …. and I don’t mean Joe.
She darn well better backpedal considering that the Republican nominee for VP and her husband belonged to (Todd) and at least supported and may have belonged to (Sarah) a group that had nothing but bad things to say about America and wanted Alaska to secede from the Union.
Now which party has the less Patriotic person on their ticket ??
Sarah and Todd Palin supported a group that would have torn a star off the American flag.
Obama exudes pride in his country.
Comment posted October 20, 2008 @ 10:48 am
bachmann was quite clear in expressing her thoughts on the matthews show.
and, in doing so, she showed a side of america that is antithetical to what american values stand for. the conservative party has become quite myopic in its view of what is an “acceptable” american and the “christian” right is approaching dangerous ground, in that it is basing its foundation on tenets that are anything but christian.
i am proud that in this election cycle, the common masses are more involved, more interactive and more thoughtful in their assessments…and i am exceedingly happy that they are walking the walk with their pocketbooks.
that tinklenberg has increased his surplus by over 635,000 dollars, this is a resounding “shout out” that enough is enough and quite telling of the current atmosphere and opinion. there is no room in our political discourse for slander, rumor, and whisper campaigns…to debate and disagree on policy is a fair and needed discourse…it should be limited to this.
Comment posted October 20, 2008 @ 10:50 am
McCarthyism is reborn or maybe Senator McCarthy was reincarnated into Senator Bachmann…Does anyone else see devil eyes in her stare?
Comment posted October 20, 2008 @ 10:53 am
Steve
Comment posted October 20, 2008 @ 10:33 am
He is being interviewed for the job of President. These questions are valid.
*********************************************************************************************************
yes, these are valid questions. these questions have been asked. and answered.
that you may not like the response is on you.
Comment posted October 20, 2008 @ 1:04 pm
** and, in doing so, she showed a side of america that is antithetical to what american values stand for. the conservative party has become quite myopic in its view of what is an “acceptable” american and the “christian” right is approaching dangerous ground, in that it is basing its foundation on tenets that are anything but christian. **
Michele is saying that domestic terrorism ala william ayers is unamerican and unacceptable. You consider this dangerous ground? You also consider it to be myopic, so I assume that you believe that the ends justify the means. Its okay to commit acts of terror to further your agenda?
I agree that conservatives wouldn’t agree with that, neither would I.
Comment posted October 20, 2008 @ 1:21 pm
“Did he sense where she was going — or did he lead her on?”
Last I checked, she was a US Representative. I presume that makes her a leader. To have allowed herself to be led on, if that is the contention, seems hardly a valid excuse. I infer that nullifies her claim to leadership. I believe she was coaxed a little to continue going where she was already headed somewhere in her mind. As a former interrogator US Army, I may have a little insight on this.
Comment posted October 20, 2008 @ 1:26 pm
**yes, these are valid questions. these questions have been asked. and answered.
that you may not like the response is on you.**
Exactly, how DARE they question the messiah more than once. THE CHOSEN ONE HAS SPOKEN! THERE SHALL BE NO MORE QUESTIONS!
Comment posted October 20, 2008 @ 3:29 pm
Steve said about Ayers and Obama: “I am concerned that Obama sympothizes with his views.”
I guess we should also be concerned that these people share Ayers views as well? Or perhaps we should be concerned that Obama might share their views:
Other members of the Annenberg Board shared with Obama and Ayers:
Walter & Leonore Annenberg – founder who gave Bill Ayers a $49M grant. His widow, Leonore, has endorsed McCain. In fact, just yesterday the McCain Campaign released its list of Ambassadors supporting him. It included, Mrs. Annenberg, a former “chief of protocol” at the State Dep’t under the Reagan Administration. A Republican, she also DONATED THE MAX OF $2300 TO McCAIN’S CAMPAIGN IN MAY 2008.
1. David Kearns – former Deputy Secretary of Education under Bush I; former CEO of Xerox.
2. Arnold Weber – former member of Nixon Administration; former President of Northwestern University.
3. Presbyterian Minister Cynthia Campbell serves on the Board on the Woods Fund?. She got her Masters in Divinity from Harvard and her doctorate from SMU.
So why is it again the Obama should be chastised for serving on Boards with William Ayers? When the founder of the Annenberg Foundation gave $49 million to Ayers, then put him on her Board, and still to this day contributes thousands to GOP candidates across the country, should each of these GOP members be assailed for taking contributions from someone who associates with a “domestic terrorist” from the 60s?.
Comment posted October 20, 2008 @ 7:01 pm
What’s really bizarre is that no one seems to want to acknowledge that Ayers was not only never convicted of a crime, he was never even INDICTED. Mr. Liddy, as we all know, has actually served prison time. And Todd and Sarah Palin “palled around with” secessionists. Having served on the boards of several non-profits myself, should I be tarred with a broad brush should one of the other board members be accused of a crime?
In my mind, the only way someone could be “anti-american” would be to commit treason or espionage. If she’s equating Obama and his supporters with Benedict Arnold, Timothy McVeigh, and George W. Bush, then she will reap what she sows… and it looks like she’ll either be defeated or win narrowly. Considering that both houses and the presidency will be Democrat, maybe losing will be a blessing for her.
Comment posted October 20, 2008 @ 7:29 pm
Josephine McCarthy strikes American and Americans. She is correcting herself? Watch this you tube video see how clear her words are;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vbw4pdxVSOg
Copy and past ethe link on your browser.
She is a. She is a disgrace. We should all be scared of her. She should be censured and dismissed. This is not the America that we love so much.
Comment posted October 21, 2008 @ 7:42 am
“” What’s really bizarre is that no one seems to want to acknowledge that Ayers was not only never convicted of a crime, he was never even INDICTED “”
Its not bizarre because the man fully admits everything he did. So everyone takes his word for it. Whether he was indicted or not is irrelevant, but he did have a trial. He got off on a technicality due to a procedural error.
Here is a quote from Ayers about himself:
“Guilty as sin, free as a bird, it’s a great country.”
He has been on the record saying that he was not sorry for what he has done, he would do it again, and wishes he could have done more. He was photographed tramping on the american flag.
“”In my mind, the only way someone could be “anti-american” would be to commit treason or espionage. If she’s equating Obama and his supporters with Benedict Arnold, Timothy McVeigh, and George W. Bush”"
Are you saying Bush is anti-american? What about killing americans? Is that anti-american? Bombing police stations? Bombing the pentagon?
Comment posted October 21, 2008 @ 7:53 am
“So why is it again the Obama should be chastised for serving on Boards with William Ayers? When the founder of the Annenberg Foundation gave $49 million to Ayers”
Noone would be saying much if Ayers had ONLY donated to Obama’s campaign.
Obama’s political career was launched in Ayer’s living room. Obama has given speeches with him, this means that the two have worked closely together.
Comment posted October 21, 2008 @ 10:56 am
Actually, his campaign career was launched at a local hotel, Ramada Inn, I believe. The assembly at the Ayers house was a later event.
Anyway, reason and fact matter little to propagandists except for that little half-truth.
If there was a deeper connection to Ayers than serving on a board together, it would have come out in the 20 months of vetting Obama has gotten. I would be surprised if the McCain camp has not had every PI available sifting through every facet of Obama’s life and if there were anything to the innuendo then it would have surfaced.
So, Ayers (the son of a very well connected Chicago Family in the energy sector – electricity, I think) is a well respected and connected person in the Chicago and Illinois areas and invites an up and coming politician to a ‘meet and greet’.
I guess it is possible all these establishment types were planning revolution. Sure, the plan is to take a young black lawyer and have him run for presidency in a few years, then we can dismantle the republic that has allowed them all to prosper in fantastic ways, because , you know, the rich really hate the socio-economic environment that allowed them to excel while others are unable to attain their status.
That must be it, unlike very other revolution in the world, these innovators are starting a revolution among the elite who are tired of the status quo that has given them so much. It is a statement of the wealthy that it is not only the disenfranchised that can revolt!
It is time for the wealthy in America to rise up and throw off the chains of extravagance and entitlement. the first step is to destroy the capital markets by putting the unrepresented in mortgages they cannot afford and to get large firms to buy them in huge bundled lots.
Then as the mortgagees default, the great pillars of capitalism are obliterated and the dollar crashes. This then places many of the wealthy in the position they always desired, among the poor as one of them where they can lead the revolt to overthrow themselves?
It is complex in its simplicity and relies on myriad variables converging to create their perfect revolt of the upper class to finally attain the status they seek and chuck the chains responsibility for a little place under a bridge somewhere.
My god, the conservatives have uncovered the plot of the millennium, the overthrow of America by the rich for the poor. Who says we do not understand irony?
Comment posted October 21, 2008 @ 11:08 am
BTW, I am quite aware there have been many many revolts of the upper class but that is usually to take over or to enhance or preserve their power, rarely if ever was it to destroy the system that created them.
Comment posted October 21, 2008 @ 2:34 pm
Kevin,
Some very interesting things you have said there, but most are off topic. The point is Bachmann’s statements about anti-americanism.
The first point is that people like Ayers are anti-american. This is a difficult one for Obama followers, it is clear that you and others here beleive that they are pro-american even though he was part of a group that bombed the pentagon, police stations, and attempted to kill innocent people which is a difficult sell for me and others who aren’t Obama followers.
Second point is that Obama has worked closely with Ayers on a few occasions, this is true and yes your probably right about the Raddison, I believe it was Obama’s first campaign fundraiser that was in Ayer’s house.
You put the two points together and you come up with Bachmann’s question about his views.
She is basically being demonized for being rational in public. Which seems to be a serious charge among liberals. I can’t think of a logical reason why she shouldn’t bring it up. Personally, I want to know the views and values of my representatives. I would argue that it is necessary for a representative democracy to work.
Comment posted October 22, 2008 @ 12:03 pm
I can see that if Ms. Bachmann is re-elected the terrorists win … Primarily by having brought the quality of our government down to that of a banana republic.
Michele Bachmann is a pretty lady … but physical charms are of little import when one easily realizes she has no wisdom, heart or compassion and a questionable reasoning skill set …
She reeks of self-righteous evil and many of us here in Minnesota don’t think that given her nationally displayed bias, pious and narrow viewpoint she serves the public good in any ethical, logical or moral way. She is an insult to all Minnesotans and a disgrace to public office by way of the contradictory lies spewn over the past five days as she desperately tries to back away from having let all America see what she is made of … Shame on her for dishonoring her constituents and our state.
Comment posted October 22, 2008 @ 7:50 pm
Problem is that the republican’s use of smear tactics in a sound bite creates an idea/image in the minds of some people. George W. Bush used similar tactics in his manipulation to shift the country’s attention from Afganastan to Iraq, post 9/11. Once something is put forward all the retractions in the world will not dimish the original statement. There are still people in this country that really think that Hussein had WMDs,and had ties to Al Qaeda. Michele Bachmann,like McCain/Palin, make a state in a situation that has extensive media coverage than retract,apologize,backpeddle,condemn in a lower profile situation. During the lead up to this election the Republican party and it’s supporters have shown themselves as they really are, ruthless hacks that will do anything,say anything to further their agenda.
Comment posted October 23, 2008 @ 9:49 pm
“”
Problem is that the republican’s use of smear tactics in a sound bite creates an idea/image in the minds of some people. George W. Bush used similar tactics in his manipulation to shift the country’s attention from Afganastan to Iraq, post 9/11
“”
Most presidential candidates use smear tactics, yes even democrats.
Unfortunately, this is because smear campaigns work even though they are very irrational, people get caught up in the partisanship. Liberal media such as Minnesota Independant and others have been incredibly successful on the campaign smears against Bachmann and Palin while people like Tinklenberg and Obama sit back and enjoy the show, they let the media do all the bashing while they get a free pass. Despite this, Obama has run some very dishonest negative adds himself.
**During the lead up to this election the Republican party and it’s supporters have shown themselves as they really are, ruthless hacks that will do anything,say anything to further their agenda.**
If you believe only Republicans go negative, then you are surely caught up in the partisanship. And the only way politicians will stop going negative during campaigns is if the strategy stops working. That means when you see a smear from any side, I encourage you to look past the partisanship and see it for what it really is.
Comment posted October 25, 2008 @ 10:35 am
AND she calls herself a christian.
That was not christlike…
That look in her eyes was enough to make one run to the hills before she spewed more slime and hate…
She is on one crazy witch hunt. Maybe she should go work for FOX.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Leave a comment