View Full Version : What was Bachmann thinking?
Fathead
08-08-2011, 08:53 PM
I don't want an answer to that question, but apparently she didn't prescreen the picture they were going to use?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/all-eyes-on-bachmanns-newsweek-cover-photo/2011/03/04/gIQAUu7T2I_blog.html?hpid=z5
Ibleedburgundy
08-09-2011, 09:02 AM
Maybe she should have gone to glamour shots and just submitted her favorite picture. Regardless, I hope she wins the Republican nomination. She is a perfect representation of the modern conservative movement.
CNYSkinFan
08-09-2011, 09:06 AM
Maybe she should have gone to glamour shots and just submitted her favorite picture. Regardless, I hope she wins the Republican nomination. She is a perfect representation of the modern conservative movement.
unless she wins...and the way Obama is handling things right now I am deathly scared that the GOP nominates a joke candidate and Obama STILL loses to them
dj_stouty
08-09-2011, 09:58 AM
Terrible picture, but apparently she wasn't given a choice by the publication. They simply ran with it. I'll be the first to say she is a dimwit of a canidate, but I'm not sure why the magazine would purposefully use a terrible picture of someone who sat down for an interview with them.
CNYSkinFan
08-09-2011, 09:58 AM
Terrible picture, but apparently she wasn't given a choice by the publication. They simply ran with it. I'll be the first to say she is a dimwit of a canidate, but I'm not sure why the magazine would purposefully use a terrible picture of someone who sat down for an interview with them.
because we are talking about it and more people will go out and buy the magazine....
RedskinsDave
08-09-2011, 10:29 AM
Because the media is part of the problem.
Keino
08-09-2011, 02:09 PM
Because the media is part of the problem.
Everything is newsworthy when you have a 24 hours news cycle to fill. I agree that media is a huge part of the problem. 24 hour cable news shows are the scourge of the country.
RedskinsDave
08-09-2011, 02:30 PM
It's just gotten to the point where there is almost no one left who even tries to appear impartial. Fox is Fox and MSNBC is just as comical in their attempt to one-up them. Now the news magazines have gone that way too since they are always a week behind.
Then you have the idealogues who still think "their" side is better than the other. The Tea Party folks are aiming the Titanic at icebergs and the left is standing at the bow waiting until there's a collision before chiming in.
BostonSkins
08-09-2011, 07:20 PM
Totally unfair from what is supposed to be a respected news source. And to be clear, I'm not a Bachmann fan by any means.
shally
08-10-2011, 08:40 AM
unless she wins...and the way Obama is handling things right now I am deathly scared that the GOP nominates a joke candidate and Obama STILL loses to them
we need a third party run by actual adults... ZERO chance of that happening because the public are fools and knaves. no shared sense of sacrifice.. this country is heading down the tubes
Keino
08-10-2011, 09:07 AM
we need a third party run by actual adults... ZERO chance of that happening because the public are fools and knaves. no shared sense of sacrifice.. this country is heading down the tubes
How scary is it that I find myself agreeing with Shally and Dave?
akhhorus
08-10-2011, 10:33 AM
3rd party is never going to happen unless one party dies. The gridlock, imo, is because both sides believe that the next election will provide a landslide for their side. Thats why no one sees any incentive to compromise and why no cohort from either party will f*ck their old party to create a new one.
As for Bachmann: Stewart put it best, "why take a picture to make her look crazy when her words will do that just fine" lol. And newsweek's gone to hell since Tina Brown bought it. Kurtz and Sullivan have gone from insightful to unreadable(among others).
shally
08-10-2011, 10:48 AM
3rd party is never going to happen unless one party dies. The gridlock, imo, is because both sides believe that the next election will provide a landslide for their side. Thats why no one sees any incentive to compromise and why no cohort from either party will f*ck their old party to create a new one.
As for Bachmann: Stewart put it best, "why take a picture to make her look crazy when her words will do that just fine" lol. And newsweek's gone to hell since Tina Brown bought it. Kurtz and Sullivan have gone from insightful to unreadable(among others).
i saw EXACTLY that kind of feral gleam in the eyes of the wackos walking up and down my street in the days just before Katrina.. It was the same thing going on...Order had not been very kind to them and they were looking forward to the coming anarchy with relish and delight..
Same damn thing with Bachman !! Politicians like her are stimulated by the throes of misery the country is undergoing. Demagogues and carpetbaggers just waiting for the opportunity to sell their snake-oil to a scared, disgusted and selfish population
shally
08-10-2011, 10:51 AM
3rd party is never going to happen unless one party dies. The gridlock, imo, is because both sides believe that the next election will provide a landslide for their side. Thats why no one sees any incentive to compromise and why no cohort from either party will f*ck their old party to create a new one.
As for Bachmann: Stewart put it best, "why take a picture to make her look crazy when her words will do that just fine" lol. And newsweek's gone to hell since Tina Brown bought it. Kurtz and Sullivan have gone from insightful to unreadable(among others).
I would normally agree with you, but Perot showed that it is indeed possible.. if he had been a little more sane and reasonable, he might have pulled it off.
I do agree that 3 parties is a very unstable number and what would happen would be that if a 3rd party became truly viable, it would take over one of the 2 remaining parties, depending upon which one was wounded and weakened the most by the 3rd party
akhhorus
08-10-2011, 10:57 AM
I would normally agree with you, but Perot showed that it is indeed possible.. if he had been a little more sane and reasonable, he might have pulled it off.
I do agree that 3 parties is a very unstable number and what would happen would be that if a 3rd party became truly viable, it would take over one of the 2 remaining parties, depending upon which one was wounded and weakened the most by the 3rd party
Switch to a parliamentary system and there will be 4-5 parties(coastal Liberals, Blue Dogs, GOP and Tea party). Until then, Duverger's law reigns.
Ibleedburgundy
08-10-2011, 12:30 PM
Congress is only doing what the American people want. Just look at the polls. Solid majorites are opposed to spending cuts for infrastructure, medicare, medicaid, social security, education, and defense. Majoritites even oppose cutting aid to farmers and funding for the arts. Combined these things are approximately 99% of the budget.
Majorities also oppose tax increases (although majorities favor tax increases on the wealthy).
Seems to me congress is merely doing our bidding. Big spending + lowest effective tax rates in 60 years = massive debt.
shally
08-10-2011, 03:18 PM
Congress is only doing what the American people want. Just look at the polls. Solid majorites are opposed to spending cuts for infrastructure, medicare, medicaid, social security, education, and defense. Majoritites even oppose cutting aid to farmers and funding for the arts. Combined these things are approximately 99% of the budget.
Majorities also oppose tax increases (although majorities favor tax increases on the wealthy).
Seems to me congress is merely doing our bidding. Big spending + lowest effective tax rates in 60 years = massive debt.
Yup. "i got mine" and pass the bill on to the kids, grandkids, and great grandkids
in the history of this nation there has never been a generation as selfish as the boomers.. sad to be among that number
justinskins
08-10-2011, 03:41 PM
Congress is only doing what the American people want. Just look at the polls. Solid majorites are opposed to spending cuts for infrastructure, medicare, medicaid, social security, education, and defense. Majoritites even oppose cutting aid to farmers and funding for the arts. Combined these things are approximately 99% of the budget.
Majorities also oppose tax increases (although majorities favor tax increases on the wealthy).
Seems to me congress is merely doing our bidding. Big spending + lowest effective tax rates in 60 years = massive debt.
Isn't democracy grand?
BIGREDSKINSFAN1963
08-13-2011, 12:09 PM
i don't follow politics,but i thought the guy asking bachman would she be submissive to her husband if she was elected president was really just wrong and unfair.
vBulletin® v3.6.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.