‘False and misleading’: Bachmann responds to Clark ad

By Paul Schmelzer
Friday, June 18, 2010 at 5:35 pm

Rep. Michele Bachmann has a problem with an ad, but she doesn’t say which one. In a new post on her campaign website, Bachmann calls an ad “false and misleading,” but she refrains from linking to it or naming candidate behind it, her Sixth Congressional District challenger, DFL Sen. Tarryl Clark. 

Clark’s new ad, which begins airing on Sunday, uses Bachmann’s recent words about the $20 billion BP-funded escrow account the Obama administration pushed for. The script:

Killing thousands of jobs.

Costing billions.

It’s BP’s fault.  And they should pay.

But Michele Bachmann calls making BP pay for the clean up “extortion.”

And said “If I was the head of BP, I would let the signal get out there – ‘We’re not going to be chumps.”

If Bachmann lets BP off the hook, guess who’s paying?

Us.

Michele Bachmann: standing up for BP. Not us.

“The claims made about my statements are false,” Bachmann writes in response. “In each of the interviews I have given, I have stated that BP is liable to fully compensate victims for the damage they have inflicted on the Gulf Coast with this tragic accident. It’s important to make the victims whole, and the American taxpayer should not pay one dime for the mess created by this spill. My opponents are demonstrating with this first ad they are scraping the bottom of the barrel with distorting my views on this tragedy that’s been foisted upon so many innocent Americans, marine life and wildlife in the Gulf Coast region. Making false claims and distortions about my statements is indicative of a negative campaign style, and Minnesotans deserve better.”

Clark’s campaign provides citations for each Bachmann quote related to the spot:

“But if I was the head of BP, I would let the signal get out there — ‘We’re not going to be chumps, and we’re not going to be fleeced.’ And they shouldn’t be. They shouldn’t have to be fleeced and make chumps to have to pay for perpetual unemployment and all the rest — they’ve got to be legitimate claims.” (Washington Post, June 15)

“The president just called for creating a fund that would be administered by outsiders, which would be more of a redistribution-of-wealth fund.” (Bachmann speech to Heritage Foundation, June 15)

“(The President) continues to focus on blaming, and on extorting money out of a company instead of letting the courts make people whole.” (Minnesota Public Radio interview, June 16)

“It looks like again the president is taking this opportunity to have the federal government go in with a federal government response, take money out of private industries for yet-to-be-determined ideas that the federal government will come out with. It’s not just me saying it, there’s a number of people here in Washington saying that this is the federal government forcing a financial redistribution. ... It sounds like the federal government essentially wants to nationalize BP and this could be pushing this company into bankruptcy.” (MPR interview, June 16)


Comments

13 Comments

Dave
Comment posted June 19, 2010 @ 9:02 am

““The claims made about my statements are false,” Bachmann writes in response.”

It’s ok, even admirable to be a proven, demonstrated liar if you’re a right wing whacko, and if you’re lying for the right reasons.


Bud Smith
Comment posted June 19, 2010 @ 11:04 am

I keep waiting for the day that Bachmann is photographed chewing on her leather straps as she is transported to a mental institution.What in the hell is wrong with the people in the sixth congressional district??!!!Apparently they are as whacked out as she is.


Marilee
Comment posted June 19, 2010 @ 11:12 am

Everytime Michelle Bachmann opens her mouth she distorts the truth. And she’s done it so many times, she cannot tell the difference between lie and truth. Her statements on BP show more unbridled loyalty to a foreign multi-billion dollar oil company than to her own country. Her logic is so twisted, pandering and self-serving that I feel icky just listening to her weave her wicked web of self deceipt. That big fat wet one she laid on George Bush when she was first elected was symbolic of her being in bed with her special interests.


Randy
Comment posted June 19, 2010 @ 11:15 am

It suonds like a generic response from her campaign. “They said something negative–it must be false.” Her cultists don’t care that there are no specifics, or that the evidence contradicts her. She said it, it must be true.


Don Berg
Comment posted June 20, 2010 @ 10:14 am

If you fool actually paid attention to what was said in the attack ad against Bachmann, you would understand why she is calling it distortion and false claims. The ad claims Bachmann said that making BP pay for the cleanup is extortion. She never said that. What she did say is that making BP set up a $20 billion fund to be administered by an “objective third party” is tantamount to extortion. And she is right. Current federal law only allows for a maximum of 75 million. And for that objective third party that will administer those funds? None other than President Obama’s Pay Czar. How is that objective? How is that even legal to change the rules on BP to ignore current law allowing a max of 75 million? BP has already agreed to pay for all related costs for the cleanup. But also forcing them to pay unemployment costs to oil workers laid off because of the President’s moratorium on off shore drilling? That was not BP’s doing. That was the federal governments doing. And unnecessary at that. If you haven’t figured it out yet, our whole economy runs on fossil fuel. We don’t have a replacement fuel available to run our entire economy. So, if we want to completely destroy whats left of our economy, by all means. Lets switch to “alternative sources of energy”. Please let us know what we are supposed to run our vehicles on so we can get to work.


majii
Comment posted June 20, 2010 @ 4:43 pm

Those who call themselves Christians and support this woman who calls herself a Christian, need to ask themselves one question, “What/Who would Jesus lie about?”

The answer would tell them all they need to know about Lil’ Shelley.

She parades around with screaming at the top of her lungs, “I’m a Christian!,” and “See how much of a Christian I am!,” then turns around and tells ANOTHER lie.


majii
Comment posted June 20, 2010 @ 4:44 pm

Sorry. She parades around screaming…


DeniseGa
Comment posted June 20, 2010 @ 5:27 pm

I was born in Long Prarie in Todd county, and when people talk about the issues and the players in Minn. politics, at least for the two weeks i was there last month – And i get home about 5 times a year, they all are tired of the mess she is making of our image and the values of our state.
me I just wish she would stop telling people about the peole of MINN. cause it aint true or accurate to saddle all of us as being some how in aggreement with her.


ZeraLee
Comment posted June 21, 2010 @ 8:24 am

It’s a good thing she only has two sides to her mouth. Her message might get confused if we got it in surround sound.


Mill
Comment posted June 21, 2010 @ 12:51 pm

the Mn 6th voters deserve a full-time rep, not one who votes when it doesn’t clash with a media opportunity

the Mn 6th voters deserve a competent, well-informed rep, not one who makes up wild accusations about the patriotism of congressional colleagues, or nonsense about President Obama’s motivations

the Mn 6th voters deserve a rep who cares more about foreclosures in the district than Wall St profits

the Mn 6th voters deserve a rep who cares more about the devastation of the Gulf than whether BP is inconvenienced

it truly is time for a change we can believe in

it’s time that Tarryl Clark provide the sane, both-feet-on-the-ground, hard-working representation on the many important issues facing the district and our nation

if you agree, consider supporting Tarryl Clark for representative from the Mn 6th!!

http://tarrylclark.com/about


Mill
Comment posted June 21, 2010 @ 7:37 pm

Perhaps the false and misleading statements are the contradictory assertions by Michele Bachmann

Was she for BP before she was against BP? or visa versa?

Why is she advising their management about not being chumps when dealing with President Obama? Who’s side is she on?


Tiny Tim
Comment posted July 7, 2010 @ 12:44 pm

Wow – Some folks love to watch a TV ad and believe the excerpts apparently. Go read all of her comments from the sources cited on the Ad (each are provided for all of their excerpts). If nothing else, you will find out just how slanted Tarryl Clark is … the context of the Bachmann ads are not even close to the Clark Ads portrayal. In fact, her primary concern is not the cleanup, it’s how the President has proceeded to force BP to pay for things that are out of BP’s control. She has 100% supported BP paying for their mess, and every Rep. has stated the same. In fact, the only thing Clarks ad conveys is how desperate the Dem party is, especially herself, in an attempt to attack an active member of the house when she has NO track record to stand on herself. Take her for her word and you’ll probably be the next person she throws under the bust … and don’t even get me started about her talking out of both sides of her mouth. I’m better than Michelle, but I lie and stretch the truth just to get my way. Vote for Tarryl Clark and see how long it takes for her to throw YOU under the bus!


Bob
Comment posted July 7, 2010 @ 1:16 pm

I am certainly no Michelle Bachman fan, but these ads are misleading and inacurate. She never said that BP shouldn’t pay any claims. What she did say was that she was concerned that false claims were likely to be made, and that this was likely to impact all of us through an increase in gas prices.

Whether or not any of this will happen is yet to see, but readers here should get their facts right before they go off spouting about comments being made in a paid politcal ad.


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.