The MSM has begun their attacks on Michele Bachmann. The LA Times is trying to link her to a serial killer, because she got John Wayne’s birthplace wrong.
But the day was marred slightly by a slip that quickly erupted into a media squall all its own. In an interview with Fox News’ Carl Cameron, Bachmann referred to Waterloo as the home of John Wayne. But Wayne, it was soon pointed out, wasn’t from Waterloo, but from Winterset, Iowa, a town more than 100 miles away.
John Wayne Gacy, the so-called “killer clown” who murdered more than 30 young men in Chicago during the 1970s and stored their bodies in his home, lived in Waterloo, where he started down his sordid criminal path with a sexual assault conviction.
Asked about the misstep by Hannity, Bachmann ignored (as any candidate would) the whole serial-killer thing, and simply reiterated that on John Wayne, the actor, she had gotten the state right.
“Clearly he was born in Iowa,” Bachmann said. “The point is John Wayne represents patriotism –and great American values.” (She also told CNN Tuesday that she “misspoke” about Wayne’s hometown.)
Well the Honolulu Strangler was from our 57th state…
…where Obammi was born
Quit insulting my name!
signed,
The Bamster
🙂
Really? Someone decided to look that desperate so early? That’s amazing. John Wayne was born in Iowa? But not Waterloo. That’s important to note.
That stated, damnit, this is why neither Bachmann nor Palin are electable. They must know the MSM is hanging on every word they say looking for a gotcha. Why present irrelevant details when they don’t know the details? Sure, one must present details on occasion, but when you do, make damned sure you know what you’re talking about. Yes, Obambi and any other libtard gets a pass on it. Conservatives don’t. The hypocrisy is clear enough, they don’t have to feed the monster, it will feed itself.
Whoever gets the nomination. The first thing they should do is force Obama to run his first campaign again. An easy score for points would be having a reporter ask about running only on matching funds. Then demonstrate the pathology of Obama and his aversion to the truth, and his lack of honesty.(He demonstrably lied.) Start there and don’t look back. Bring up Guantanamo and tease Bambi about having to be in office to understand its importance when Joe six pack understood it over 4 years ago. Laugh at him. Afghanistan is wide open. Just pick through the minefield (we have a map) and show where 4 years ago Bambi didn’t know squat, and now he’s less competent than previously thought.
The best candidate would be one that was demonstrably against the bailout and stimulus both. And then hammer him for the $2 trillion dollar give away. Remind citizens that he asked Bush to release the second half of the bailout prior to his taking office. Hammer him some more on the length of the economic lethargy. I don’t ever remember an unemployment rate this high for this long w/o changing presidents. Though it did happen with Roosevelt.
The keys are hammer, ridicule and point out the factual basis’ of both. (Showing where Obambi is a pathological liar along the way is important.)
Obama has delivered on his promises. Skyrocketing energy prices, and changing the US (into a mess.)
Technically, John Wayne was not born in Iowa. Michael Marion Morrison was born in Iowa. he later changed his name to John Wayne.
At least Bachmann knows Iowa is one of 50 states.
It’s all they know. And it’s natural for them (the media) to do this. And why shouldn’t they? They got away with it ever since McCarthy and Roy Cohn.
There is a long unbroken list of incessant media smear victims Goldwater, Nixon, Agnew, Ford, Reagan, Donovan, John Tower, Ed Meese, Oliver North, Judge Bork, Quayle, Clarence Thomas, Ken Starr, GWB, Cheney, Libby, Monckton, Sarah Palin, to name a few.
Disagree about electability of either Palin or Bachmann. If Dumbo could get elected, the most liberal Senator of 100 (that *is* an accomplishment and McGovern would agree), and is the most immature person yet in that office (actually said: “let me give a shout out to …”), and by far the most radical leftist progressive neo-communist that ran (remember the previous standard, Henry Wallace was one heartbeat away).
Electability seems to contain a parameter of fear built into the algorithm, fear of ‘what will others say about this candidate!’.
The answer is to not play along. Just say *No* to Political Correctness.
Most of the Founding Fathers were against slavery. Many were abolitionists. Few had slaves. But the arrogant left wing media tells us over and over that the Founding Father were actually for slavery and that the Constitution is a slavery document. The media is easily wrong. Michele Bachmann is easily right. I don’t think she realizes how easily correct she is.
John Adams, Samuel Adams, Benjamin Franklin, John Jay, and many others were abolitionists.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shbiQMMLc3s
Maybe if Michele had been in the Marine Corpse,(sic) during WWII, like Obumster’s daddy, she would have memorized John Wayne’s life story.
The “3/5ths clause” of the Constitution was actually anti-slavery. But the educational system in America, and the media, incessantly says it is pro-slavery. Even Frederick Douglass, the most famous slave in American history, said the “3/5ths clause” was anti-slavery:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUVONzyPRhU
Technically, the “3/5ths” clause was pushed by the anti-slavery faction. But it in and of itself was not anti-slavery. The “strange bed-fellows” of politics was that the slave states were pushing a 5/5ths solution.
(Half) right you are, because while slaves couldn’t vote, they would count towards a state’s relative representation both in the House of Representatives and also in the Electoral College. The abolitionists wanted slaves to not be counted at all, reducing the power of the slave-owning states.
Also, Indians didn’t count at all.
Stark – I agree with you, so I am perplexed at the half you do not agree with me on?
As for the Native Americans, part of the reason the government pushed for the “reservation” system (adopted by South Africa a century later as “homelands”) was to deprive them of rights of citizens of the US. By making them separate nations, they were not considered Americans and thus had no say in their treatment. Sneeky, and diabolical when you think about it.
The 3/5ths clause was a compromise, not “pushed” per se.
I guess I misspoke though, because you’re actually at least 9/10ths right. I apologise.
Frederick Douglass said the 3/5ths clause was anti-slavery. It’s very hard to argue with a man so well acquainted with the issue.
Well, *not* pushed by the anti-slavery faction, because they (for what they were in 1787) were not represented by the delegates that convened. The factions for lack of a better word, were really pro-Northern colony or pro-Southern colony representation/power in the future government.
The reason people react to this issue today is because of the massive disinformation by the (D) Democratic Socialist party, the impression was left to stupider generations of (D)’s that 3/5th of a person is how the Founders felt about black folks. THAT IS THE BIG LIE. And it *is* Evil.
For those from other countries confused by us in the USA and to those of the above mentioned stupider generations that bought this crap hook, line and sinker, let’s end it now …
Delegates from Northern states (to the Constitutional Convention) did not want slaves in Southern states counted at all in the proposed Constitution: they wanted slaves counted as 0/5ths. Anything more than that would be extra power for the South in representation
Delegates from Southern states wanted slaves in Southern states counted the same as free persons: they wanted slaves counted as 5/5ths. Anything less than that would be extra power for the North in representation.
The compromise of 3/5ths was enacted. As AAIM mentioned, Frederick Douglass figured this out all by himself by reading the notes of the convention and he himself had a epiphany. This should be a clue that over 150 years ago the thought control propaganda had already started and was actually well established.
It is very difficult to believe that this was aimed at stalling or speeding up abolition because I believe only one seat in Congress was at stake anyway. It sure looks to me like a simple power play where slaves were the pawns on the chessboard. It also led to VERY interesting conflicts later when abolitionists were criticized by their fellow lukewarm northern politicians that feared that freeing all slaves (more numerous in the 1850’s) would cause a large shift in Congress, so ‘maybe we should re-think this abolition thingie’. Oops. Anyway, there are plenty of people to point fingers at on both sides.
There has been a lot of revisionism since then but the real villains to me are those that sought to re-cast this simple event in 1787 to their political favor, mostly 20th century (D) politicians who had no choice but to mask their unbroken streak of racism ever since they had a party (which is not Jefferson BTW). And what else could they do? Slavery segregation, Jim Crow, KKK, Faubus, Wallace, etc., were all on their resume. Having lots of brainwashed (D)-bots in my own black family and friends, it has been an uphill battle but worth every fight. What is priceless is the expression of shock when I say: You think 3/5ths is bad? Northerners wanted us counted as 0/5ths. Stupid! Lincoln and Frederick Douglass were not Dummycrats!
Anyway, then came the internet (which I am sure that Al Gore is now glad he invented it) and now it is finally becoming well-known. I was so thrilled to see this topic discussed on the Black Founders episode of Founders Friday on Glenn Beck.
Part I … Part II … Part III
This was Beck’s finest moment IMHO (and worth saving to the harddisk, use KeepVid.com, in case they get disappeared). Not because Beck is all that great (he really is a newcomer conservative), but mostly because of the guests and the audience. His heart is in the right place but way too much of a pacifist for me, if you saw Tuesday’s show, (3rd to last) you know exactly what I am talking about.
Stark – no apology necessary. And you are again correct. I misspoke when I said “pushed”. It was indeed a compromise.
I hope Michele Bachmann realizes at some point that she will never satisfy the media, no matter what she says, and will turn her energies to talking to the people of America instead.
Until candidates like Bachmann realize that the situation we’re in is akin to The Invasion of the Body Snatchers, and that consequently they’re up against Pod People (so to speak), they’re going to get tripped up again and again. Quite frankly such complacency at this late date is depressing. I think at least Palin is beginning to get it. (She should; she was driven out of office by these people, for Christ’s sake!)
The more time goes by the more I see Sarah Palin is shallow. The sexy sashay she now has has completely alienated me from her. I do not want her to be President.
I am still solidly in her (Palin’s) camp. She has the experience and the vision to be a good president. The office can chew you up and mangle you and there is that danger, but given her life history, I think she is a survivor.
Bachmann is my second choice. I think she only lacks the experience (executive), but her life experiences are worthy of strong consideration.
Cain and Perry are both acceptable. The rest of the field not so much. But as one talk show host noted – ANY of them are far preferable to the clown in office today. And vastly more competent.
I tend to agree with you. On the other hand, I am (somewhat) heartened by her recent spirited criticisms of Obama. She has a certain toughness, although I’m discomfited by the fact that she didn’t dig in and fight when she was governor.
An afterthought:
Amino, your response reflects the very complacency I’m talking about. When you have Justice Dept. officials unwilling to prosecute people who physically intimidate voters, when you have the head of White House communications (or something like that) saying that she’s fond of quoting Mother Theresa and Chairman Mao, when you have the NYT denigrating citizenship in discussions pertaining the illegal alien problem, etc. etc., it’s no longer important that Sarah Palin is shallow. She’s not a Pod Person, and at this point that’s what’s significant.
O’bammie, Biden, Clinton, Pelosi, Reid, Kerry, Frank, and on and on…
…have all been caught flat out lying, more than once
The whole John Wayne thing is a tempest in a teapot, but was amusing.
About as amusing as O’bammie getting caught saying “clinging to their guns and religion”….
….he’s such an elitist stuck up nobody, he doesn’t even realize he would not have won if some of those hicks hadn’t voted for him………
Steve,
Link Limbo Above
Actor J Wayne’s parents both lived there. He (actor JW) lived 150 miles or so away from there.
Not really a slip up.
Can we focus in on jobs now that that essential detail cleared!