Bachmann: I Would Close Our (Non-Existent) Embassy In Iran

That woman is dumb as a stick.

The Viking wrote:

Kate wrote:

The Viking wrote:

Kate wrote:

The Viking wrote:

Kate wrote:

The Viking wrote:

Kate wrote:

chickaree wrote: I've got to go with Viking on this one, voting ages, number of states can be mistakes caused by fatigue. Missing a major fact in your supposed area of expertise? Not good.

And yet Rick Perry is running for President, something which he wants us to think would be his expertise. When he can't remember the Departments he wants to cut, what are we to think?

The point here is that Viking has an infatuation with Governors named Rick Perry. If you are one of those Governors, then the rules he has for the other candidates do not apply.

he admitted he screwed up on that. he remembers them now and it won't change his great policies. So who cares. Go by his policies and accomplishments. Bachmann doesn't have great accomplishments to fall back on.

I really don't want to defend Bachmann, but will you give her the same consideration when she admits that she screwed up, or will you continue to attack her while making excuses for your guy?

Sure if she admits it. Of course I will. Although it is scary that is the department she serves on and it is our biggest foreign issue and her plan to close our embassy in Iran doesn't even make sense because we don't have one there. But if she admits her mistake unlike Cain who blamed everything and everyone else for everything, then I will let it slide.

Good. Although it is scary that a man running for President doesn't even know which departments he plans to close.

You do know that he put forth a couple of very comprehensive plans on taxes and energy right before that debate right? And he was working out the details for his government overhaul plan to announce a couple weeks later. He had hundereds of details in his head. And he wanted to cut several other departments so he just couldn't remember which one he wanted to cut and which he wanted to eliminate for a minute. Not a big deal. He knows which ones. And he and Paul are the only ones who hae the guts to go after those departments.

This is another example of how you only see the good in those named Rick Perry and bad in any other candidate. You're making excuses for his forgetfulness, which is ever so sweet.

Bachmann just lost my respect. She is pulling a Cain. Blaiming us on misunderstanding her. They said
"Her remarks are being taken out of context" And it was hypothetical. Michelle Bachmann told a crowd in Waverly, Iowa, today that she would close the U.S. embassy in Iran. How is that taken out of context?

Perry is the only one so far who takes responsibility for his actions and mistakes.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/69492.html

Oh bullpoop... you don't have respect for anyone except bottom of the heap Perry. The way you have been going on about everyone, you actually think anyone believes you just lost respect for Bachmann... sure... and I just had my first bowel movement in 43 years.

I wonder if we should contact the Perry camp and give them a heads up about Viking?

The Dude wrote: I wonder if we should contact the Perry camp and give them a heads up about Viking?

That's probably unnecessary. I'm sure that a restraining order has already been issued.

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: I feel like I'm being taught by a third grader.

Gawd, I'm glad someone finally said that.

You know Viking, I'm with you on about 90% on issues...you seem to be pretty conservative and I'm assuming you want Obama out as bad as I do. I also read in one of your posts that the reason you are so active in your opinion (especially on FB), is because you hope to inform people who may be on the fence that the conservative way is better for America than the liberal agenda of Obama.

BUT, when your precious Perry starts to go down the drain, you employ the same tactic as he did...ripping down every Republican candidate and basically telling all your friends that the entire GOP field is bad and only Perry is good. Does that really help the cause of removing Obama? What if every conservaative was like you? Do you really think that helps get Independants on board, or will your friends say "wow, even that super conservative guy on FB thinks the GOP sucks"?

The reason Gingrich was able to rise in the polls is because he not only spoke intelligently and connsistently, but more importantly he didn't tear down the entire field like Perry and Bachman because they were floundering. Gingrich coud have tried that staregy, but he knew it was more important to get Obama out, even if he wasn't the nominee. Gingrich even complimented many of the other candidates in some way recently which just makes him look like more of a unifier than a divider.

And if Perry's going negative wasn't bad enough, he then became the biggest JOKE of the race. While I think it was just a natural brain fart any one of us could have, forgetting one of three departments he would close and then looking like a deer in the headlights, the media was able to run with that and turn it into a huge joke. One thing anyone with a scrap of common sense would know that being the butt of a joke is not a possitve when running for office, it's usually a political death sentence.

So all I'm saying is that if you really wanted to help the cause to get Obama out, and you think you have some sort of influence on your FB friends (I doubt you'll change any minds here), you should stop tearing down everyone but Perry and just realize there is a bigger picture. I know Perry is part of that big picture, but I hope he acts more like Waldo at this point.

Here's my question then... when Cain had allegations and actual women coming forward and the rest. assoc. verifying payouts to two women, the voters didn't care BUT when it comes out that he had a consensual affair, they do. I don't get it. I am outraged that there was no outrage about him using his position of power to exploit women.
So, now it will come down to this.. Gingrich is out front so time to dig into his record and past. The man has had many affairs - will that affect the voters? He was run out of Congress by his fellow Republicans and has his "empire" businesses all set up at 14 1/2 K Street and he's raked in millions and millions from catering to the 1% and lobbying for Freddy Mac. I can't imagine the GOP voters will allow that kind of record to allow him to rise to nominee of the party.

So it finally leaves Romney. I think Romney has two issues against him - he's a chameleon and he's a Mormon.

Here's a guy worth listening to, for all our sakes - I have not dug in deep to look into his record, but I have liked what I have heard when he is being interviewed. Neither party wants him to be heard by the voters, I am sure.

http://2012.republican-candidates.org/Roemer/

LLIB wrote: You know Viking, I'm with you on about 90% on issues...you seem to be pretty conservative and I'm assuming you want Obama out as bad as I do. I also read in one of your posts that the reason you are so active in your opinion (especially on FB), is because you hope to inform people who may be on the fence that the conservative way is better for America than the liberal agenda of Obama.

BUT, when your precious Perry starts to go down the drain, you employ the same tactic as he did...ripping down every Republican candidate

So this is a question I have never had answered. WHEN did Perry attack all the candidates? I know the media tells people that but other than one attack on Romney in that debate, I don't recall any attacks. Can you point them out? And like I said, the last debate everyone attacked everyone even more than Perry ever did but people only talk about Perry. And Newt and Paul and Bachmann have all put our attack ads. But people just keep saying it about Perry. Why is that?

LLIB wrote: You know Viking, I'm with you on about 90% on issues...you seem to be pretty conservative and I'm assuming you want Obama out as bad as I do. I also read in one of your posts that the reason you are so active in your opinion (especially on FB), is because you hope to inform people who may be on the fence that the conservative way is better for America than the liberal agenda of Obama.

BUT, when your precious Perry starts to go down the drain, you employ the same tactic as he did...ripping down every Republican candidate and basically telling all your friends that the entire GOP field is bad and only Perry is good. Does that really help the cause of removing Obama? What if every conservaative was like you? Do you really think that helps get Independants on board, or will your friends say "wow, even that super conservative guy on FB thinks the GOP sucks"?

The reason Gingrich was able to rise in the polls is because he not only spoke intelligently and connsistently, but more importantly he didn't tear down the entire field like Perry and Bachman because they were floundering. Gingrich coud have tried that staregy, but he knew it was more important to get Obama out, even if he wasn't the nominee. Gingrich even complimented many of the other candidates in some way recently which just makes him look like more of a unifier than a divider.

And if Perry's going negative wasn't bad enough, he then became the biggest JOKE of the race. While I think it was just a natural brain fart any one of us could have, forgetting one of three departments he would close and then looking like a deer in the headlights, the media was able to run with that and turn it into a huge joke. One thing anyone with a scrap of common sense would know that being the butt of a joke is not a possitve when running for office, it's usually a political death sentence.

So all I'm saying is that if you really wanted to help the cause to get Obama out, and you think you have some sort of influence on your FB friends (I doubt you'll change any minds here), you should stop tearing down everyone but Perry and just realize there is a bigger picture. I know Perry is part of that big picture, but I hope he acts more like Waldo at this point.

And you are right. I let peoples attacks on Perry for the stupidest petty things instead of comparing their records on dozens of things where he blows away the other candidates, get to me. And I do say that they really need to educate themselves and if they are voting on a couple brain farts instead of the obvious best record and plans then they are uneducated. I should probably reword that but it is so frustrating to see the voting metality of many Americans anymore. Perfect example. Most Cain supporters say they wanted an outsider. First of all he was the biggest insider we had running the most corrupt Federal Organization in our history, the Federal Reserve. But my point is that here is how clueless and fickle voters are. They say thay are tired of insiders and wanted the outsider businessman. Their second choice? Newt! The biggest insider, politician, lobbyist and person who has taken more money than all the other combined 10 fold from Feddie Mac, Insurance companies, and other big corporations. So voters really have no CLUE what they want. You can't say you want one thing and then when that candidate falters, you go to the most opposite candidate there is. It shows that they are jst voting on emotions and are not at all educated. I have been consistent. Perry and then Newt. Perry's record destroys Newts if you put them side by side. And then you throw Newt's thousand pounds of baggage on top and Perry has maybe 50 pounds and it is no contest. But voters put that all on one side of the scale and then on the other they put the debates (which as a President you will never have one so who cares), and their Gaffes, (which Newt has had tons more but they were all years ago so they forget about those). Newt is most famous for his screw ups and offensive statements, but people put Perry's few gaffes on the other side of the scale and say it outwieghs all the other accomplishments and plans. THAT to me is uneducated and not really looking out for the long term of this country but more so voting with emotions in this media driven age where people point out the gaffes as the most glaring issues for a President. Are you kidding me?

OK, so I will ask for about the 10th time, (not expecting a responce again because it will have to make people think and look at the facts). What are the most important issues that you look for in a candidate when it comes to their records. Such as jobs, border, social issues, laws passed, experience, positions supported, and baggage. Anyone???.........