Michelle Bachmann Is A Very Bad Person


I am fairly conversant in the history of presidential campaigning and cannot recall an era, let along a larger number of candidates, that believe that telling lie and after lie will get them elected. Exhibit A in this regard is Michele Bachmann, whose stock has most fortunately fallen as fast as Rick Perry’s has risen.

Call them lies, obfuscations, fibs or whatever, but Bachmann is proved herself to be pathologically incapable of being honest, or at least doing us the courtesy of checking her facts before she steps up to a microphone and begins blathering.

That is no more evident than her claim during a debate last week and in interviews afterwards that Gardasil, a vaccine to prevent HPV, a sexually transmitted infection that can cause cervical cancer, is “dangerous.” Never mind the controversy over whether young women should be required to take Gardasil, a drug created by Merck as a profit center. The vaccine has proven to be safe in the vast majority of cases and is indisputably a life saver.

Bachmann soon backtracked and acknowledged in the face of outrage from doctors and public health officials and she was not a doctor or a scientists. The damage had already been done.

As it is, Gardasil use is low, which probably is a result of fears over vaccines in general following claims by researchers, later proven to be false, that certain vaccines cause autism.

As incredible as it seems, Bachmann’s assertion that the vaccine was dangerous was based on what a distraught women told her after another president debate in which she attacked Perry for ordering the vaccine to be given to school-age girls in Texas.

And we would trust her with the Nuclear Football?

  

14 Comments

  1. “And we would trust her with the Nuclear Football?”

    Relax, Shaun.

    President Bachmann, I am sure, would base her decision to launch a nuclear strike on corroborating evidence from at least two distraught passersby.

  2. Oh Shaun you are digging right into the core of the real issue: “Is Bachmann qualified to be President of the United States”.

    Answer: Yes

    ..and this is why the Constitution needs to be changed and for Jesse’s sake HURRY before one of these “learn the hard way” people get elected!

  3. Vaccines are the future for curing cancer. Of course, that’s all “sciencey” stuff that the GOP staunchly opposes (while they fund creationism museums showing dinosaurs and man in peaceful co-existence and spend more time & money executing people than helping people).

  4. Allen:

    Facetious or not, there is merit to your suggestion. As a commenter notes over at the NYTimes, we require minimal standards or plumbers and dry cleaners, then why not presidential wannabes?

    I’m just not sure where I would get an oar in the water on this one.

  5. Allen and Shaun,

    I don’t know how serious you are being, but obviously such a thing would be anti-democratic for the same reason that minimum standards for voters would be a bad idea.

    If you think lobbying now is bad, just imagine when the lobbyists get the phone numbers of the people who write the minimum standards. Yes, I’m sure the standards committee will be made up of impartial public servants.

    Voters have proven themselves to be somewhat unreliable in picking effective leaders, but, to paraphrase a wise saying, it’s the least bad system of choosing that we have.

    But yeah, a President Bachmann would scare me too.

  6. “Call them lies, obfuscations, fibs or whatever, but Bachmann is proved herself to be pathologically incapable of being honest,…”

    Doood. Seriously?

    You’ve obviously never done much public speaking, dictated by a brutal schedule propelled by frantic travel.

    Are ‘lies, obfuscations, fibs’ your conclusion for Obama’s gaffes?

    *’Cambridge police acted stupidly’
    *Insulting the Special Olympics
    *’57 states’
    *’you’ve made enough money’
    *’Corpse-man’
    *confusing German for “Austrian”
    *Shouldn’t ‘raise taxes in the middle of a recession’
    *ObamaCare ‘will lower costs’
    *laser focused on jobs, except when he’s not
    etc, etc, etc…

    I think a more reasonable explanation for Bachmann’s gaffes are that she’s simply overwhelmed or exhausted and is not very well prepared.

    But the bigger point she was trying to raise was Perry’s personal agenda by fiat via Exec orders. This by-passes the legislature – something Obama relishes, and much of the electorate disdains.

  7. loco:

    Nice try but no cigar. Bachmann was factually incorrect. With one and a half exceptions, Obama was not addressing the things you cite as factually correct or incorrect.

    The one exception is that ObamaCare is demonstrably lowering costs pretty much across the board. Two examples: As someone with Medicare looming on the horizon, my out-of-pocket costs will be less than in the past. As a parent, my kids can be covered on my health insurance policy until age 26 if, God forbid, they become unemployed.

    The half exception is that laser focus on jobs.

  8. I think Bachmann’s a very bad candidate, but calling her a very bad person implies a level of malice I don’t think exists. My take is she just isn’t very bright and like a lot of people honestly believes she is doing the best thing for everybody.

    On Gardasil I believe the biggest holdup to widespread usage is it’s cost and not fear of vaccines. Same problem with the shingles vaccine.

  9. Ignorance can be just as dangerous as malice. In any case, I think you’re being kind in your defense.

  10. I would have to agree with DaGoat. I can’t see evil in this particular situation.

    As for Gardasil, I would also have to agree, pointing out of course, that it is fully available in every modern country but the United States without charge, if desired or not considered contra-indicated.

    Our little girls would have it also if the evil greedy Republicans had not lied to our public making them believe that socialized medicine is a secret communist plot to destroy America. So thanks guys, you are crooks.

  11. DaGoat:

    I stand by my description of Bachmann with the caveat that I never referred to her as or inferred that she was “evil.” There is a fair amount of real estate between “very bad” and “evil,” and if you need a definition of evil, go to the dictionary and there will be a picture of Dick Cheney.

    Just because Bachmann is willfully ignorant does not excuse the effects that her lies cause.

    Just because she seems oblivious to those effects and turns on a dime once called out does not make her not “a very bad person.”

    She is “a very bad person,” and I have to wonder how many unvaccinated young girls will die of cervical cancer as a result of HPV because their mothers bought into Bachmann’s lie.

    Ponder that and then get back to me.

  12. Krykee doodle.

    We’re on the same page, Shaun Mullen, in regards to Bachmann being incorrect. She was flat out wrong.

    But now your sliding sideways with your argumentation.

    The point of your post is that Bachmann is a very bad person who “lies, obfuscations, fibs or whatever…”

    Being wrong or gaffe prone does not make her a liar, merely ignorant and possibly incompetent.

    Your rebuttal didn’t make your case, either.

  13. adelinesdad-

    I’m very serious and we only have to look at representative democracies more successful, and more modern than ours to take examples from. You must be forgetting that we are not unique nor are we the most astute and certainly not the wave of the worlds political future. We can change our government into whatever we wish via legal constitutional construct as long as the Bill of Rights remain intact.

  14. Allen,

    I think you’ll have to give me more specifics on your proposal. I can’t think of a way to do it that wouldn’t either be redundant (if the standards are determined by an elected body) or aristocratic (otherwise), not to mention impractical to implement.

Submit a Comment