Why I'm For Bachmann

[deacon blues]

In 2000 George W. Bush was the "heir apparent" dubbed by the GOP establishment. I thought back then there were better candidates with better conservative credentials. I voted against Bush in the primaries. Of course he was the much better choice over both Gore and Kerry, but his eight years proved that he was not a fiscal conservative and a believer in smaller government. A Reagan conservative he was not.

Rick Perry enters the race with strong backing from a lot of party establishment types. He was Al Gore's campaign chairman in Texas back in 1988. He is a formidable candidate for sure. But he gives me the same feeling Bush gave me in 2000. It feels like the power brokers are hoisting him upon us and we're not being given much of a chance to consider other candidates.

Romney is loved by the media establishment, as much as they can love a GOP candidate, much like they did in 2000 with McCain as well as in 2008. They always love the "moderate" GOP candidiates like Dole and McCain only to turn on them once they are up against the Democratic candidate. Moderate Republican candidates for president are destined for failure. Romney is not a true conservative.

Bachmann is the true conservative among the three. She is a bulldog on the issues and is consistently conservative and constitutional in her policies. She is not beholden to the establishment and has a compelling story that resonates with many average Americans. We need a Bachmann type candidate who will not only steer the country back from the brink but one that will shake up the culture of Washington DC in the GOP. Bachmann is the Reagan conservative.

Newt is brilliant and could make minced meat of anyone in a debate, but he is past his prime and couldn't be elected. Santorum is a true conservative but also unelectable. Paul is too kooky. Huntsman is another "moderate", too much of a soft leader. Cain would be a great president but also couldn't make it through the primary process.

I would like a Bachmann/Cain ticket or a Bachmann/Rubio ticket.

[Pressing-On]

She totally misrepresented (lied) about the Gardasil issue in Texas. No one was forced to take that vaccine. Like with ALL vaccines in this state, they all come with an opt out.

And she has harped on the SS issue enough to also be two-faced about Perry calling it a Ponzi scheme. Charles Krauthammer said, "It is a Ponzi scheme. You just aren't supposed to say it." She and Romney are both hypocrites.

She lost any support I may have had for her last night.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

Rick Perry enters the race with strong backing from a lot of party establishment types. He was Al Gore's campaign chairman in Texas back in 1988.

Al Gore was a pro-life Democrat, back in the day. Texas used to be heavily dominated by Democrats just like it is now with Republicans. The first GOP primary, in Haskell County, wasn't held until 1990. That is when Perry ran for Agricultural Commissioner. The Democrat party, back in the day, was totally different than what it has become. So, the argument about Perry working with Al Gore is a non-issue.

[deacon blues]

Perry lied about the $5000 contribution. Just heard a news report on radio that said in total over the years the drug company named has given Perry about $400,000 in contributions. A slight understating of the facts. I'm sorry but this cocky, cowboy persona reminds me too much of many preachers that are slick and polished, but are hiding corruption and palm greasing. He reminds me of LBJ, Bill Clinton and Richard Nixon. I'm telling you, we'll regret nominating Perry. Sure anything is better than BO right now, but we need someone who doesn't play the game. Perry gives me that master politician feeling. He'd beat BO, but we've got to have someone who can do more than that. We don't need four to eight years of scandals. We can't go simply with a nice smile and good looking hair! Too many Americans vote on persona and charisma as it is---and look what it got us in 2008!

You dismiss MB b/c she upstaged your guy on that vaccine issue that everyone else on the stage seemed to agree with her about. So who's lying, everyone else, or $perry?

[Hoovie]

I'll pretty much take any ov'em at this point.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

Perry lied about the $5000 contribution. Just heard a news report on radio that said in total over the years the drug company named has given Perry about $400,000 in contributions. A slight understating of the facts. I'm sorry but this cocky, cowboy persona reminds me too much of many preachers that are slick and polished, but are hiding corruption and palm greasing. He reminds me of LBJ, Bill Clinton and Richard Nixon. I'm telling you, we'll regret nominating Perry. Sure anything is better than BO right now, but we need someone who doesn't play the game. Perry gives me that master politician feeling. He'd beat BO, but we've got to have someone who can do more than that. We don't need four to eight years of scandals. We can't go simply with a nice smile and good looking hair! Too many Americans vote on persona and charisma as it is---and look what it got us in 2008!

You dismiss MB b/c she upstaged your guy on that vaccine issue that everyone else on the stage seemed to agree with her about. So who's lying, everyone else, or $perry?

I did hear that on the news today and was surprised by it. I've never seen it in my research, so we will have to look a little closer.

I don't trust any of the politicians on stage totally, but Bachmann pushed it way too far. For a Texan, that made me mad because I knew why she did it. Her numbers were not going anywhere and she appealed to the passion of the audience to save herself and get a shot in the arm during this debate. It totally turned me off, because I very well knew we had an opt out. Pushing this mandate and the forcing of it is a lie. And the audience agreed with her because many are not understanding we had an opt out. Perry mentioned it once, but should have pushed that further. He did later in an off stage interview.

So, really, she isn't any better than anyone else on the stage. But, all of them are better than who we have now. Well, except for Huntsman. What a freak. LOL!

And, IMO, the reason Gingrich didn't attack him is because he knows he will probably win. Cain didn't attack him because he wants the Senate seat in Georgia.

[canam]

What about MB applying for every peice of stimulous/welfare she could find though etc?

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by canam

What about MB applying for every peice of stimulous/welfare she could find though etc?

Not sure I hold this against her. If the business qualified then perhaps it would have been unwise NOT to take Gov assistance... the bigger question is whether she was/is willing to oppose the programs even while her company was benefiting.

I personally refused welfare/food stamps etc even though we qualified early in our marriage. Yet, if someone received them and still opposed them on a policy level, I am not sure it's hypocritical.

I DO use child tax credits which lowers my tax liability, is that welfare?

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I did hear that on the news today and was surprised by it. I've never seen it in my research, so we will have to look a little closer.

I don't trust any of the politicians on stage totally, but Bachmann pushed it way too far. For a Texan, that made me mad because I knew why she did it. Her numbers were not going anywhere and she appealed to the passion of the audience to save herself and get a shot in the arm during this debate. It totally turned me off, because I very well knew we had an opt out. Pushing this mandate and the forcing of it is a lie. And the audience agreed with her because many are not understanding we had an opt out. Perry mentioned it once, but should have pushed that further. He did later in an off stage interview.

So, really, she isn't any better than anyone else on the stage. But, all of them are better than who we have now. Well, except for Huntsman. What a freak. LOL!

And, IMO, the reason Gingrich didn't attack him is because he knows he will probably win. Cain didn't attack him because he wants the Senate seat in Georgia.

He admitted it was a mistake. And she wasn't the only one who attacked him on it. And to say parents had an opt out? Why not give parents the option to get the vaccine in the first place versus a mandated shot through executive order? And the connections to his former chief of staff and the pharmecuetical company looks highly suspect.

[Whoop Harted]

Bachman is a joke, she has no hope of winning.

If you want obama out then you will have to vote for the one most likely to do that.

I think you will find out that it wont be Bachman.