Bachmann quotables

There is a controversy among scientists about whether evolution is a fact… hundreds and hundreds of scientists, many of them holding Nobel prizes, believe in intelligent design.”

Michele Bachmann supports the teaching of intelligent design in public school science classes.[86]

During a 2003 interview on the KKMS Christian radio program 'Talk The Walk', Michele Bachmann said that evolution is a theory that has never been proven, one way or the other.[87]

Michele Bachmann co-authored a bill [that received no additional endorsement among her fellow legislators] that would require public schools to include alternative explanations for the origin of life as part of the state's public school science curricula.[88]

In October 2006, Michele Bachmann told a debate audience in St. Cloud, Minnesota "there is a controversy among scientists about whether evolution is a fact or not.... There are hundreds and hundreds of scientists, many of them holding Nobel Prizes, who believe in intelligent design."[89]

What we saw last week is the markets unfortunately agreed with me. Because the markets saw what happened in Washington when Obama got a $2.4 trillion check. And one thing you learned is you can't fool the markets. …We just raised the debt ceiling and added $2.4 trillion more to the debt.…The reason why they [Standard & Poor’s] lowered the rating is because we dumped another $2.4 trillion in debt on the backs of Americans of the next generation.”

— Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), August 8, 2011

But does her story about the debt limit — and her opposition to raising it — match the facts? Did markets decline because the federal debt ceiling was increased by $2.4 trillion? And did Standard & Poor’s lower the government’s credit rating because the debt ceiling was increased?

...S&P analysts voiced concern that “the statutory debt ceiling and the threat of default have become political bargaining chips in the debate over fiscal policy.” The company expressed relief that the debt ceiling had been lifted, saying the action “removed any perceived immediate threat of payment default posed by delays to raising the government's debt ceiling.”


The Pinocchio Test

Bachmann’s opposition to the debt-ceiling increase does not give her license to reinvent what happened after the deal was struck between Congress and the White House.

It is simply wrong to say S&P lowered the rating on U.S. bonds because the debt limit was increased; the agency wanted the debt limit increased, in direct opposition to Bachmann’s views. And while S&P’s downgrade appears to have played some role in the market turmoil, broader economic concerns in the United States and abroad have been a much more important factor...

Here's one - it shows she has a heart.
http://www.hollybaby.com/2011/07/01/...e-sarah-palin/

"“no matter how many children were brought into our life, we would receive them because we are committed to life.""

Dick Cheney also has a heart.

Now pray the gay away and get with the program.

After that I promised I would never again use President Obama's teleprompter and I intend to keep that promise.

I don't care how conservative a candidate is, if they're for teaching intelligent design in school I can't bring myself to vote for them.

'Course, I'm not sure I can bring myself to vote for someone who wants to raise taxes and increase deficit spending either; a fiscally conservative scientists's life is full of tough decisions...

I don't care how conservative a candidate is, if they're for teaching intelligent design in school I can't bring myself to vote for them.

'Course, I'm not sure I can bring myself to vote for someone who wants to raise taxes and increase deficit spending either; a fiscally conservative scientists's life is full of tough decisions...

Over the next five years (during which time CBO projects that the economy will still be below potential), Chairman Ryan’s Medicaid proposal would cut the program by $207 billion, which includes both eliminating the Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act and even deeper cuts to the Medicaid program. Using a standard macroeconomic model that is consistent with private- and public-sector forecasters, we find that a $207 billion cut would result in a loss of 2.1 million jobs over the next five years, or 2.9 million full-time equivalent jobs.[3] These figures are in job-years, which refer to a job held for a single year, meaning that five jobs lost in a single year is the equivalent to one job lost over five years.

Furthermore, the job loss would overwhelmingly be in the private economy. Medicaid has very low overhead, as about 96% of the program’s funds go toward benefits which are spent in the private sector. Assuming the 96% ratio is relatively constant across states (or at least not systematically biased in one direction), Medicaid cuts of this magnitude would result in the loss of just under 2 million private-sector jobs, or 2.8 million full-time equivalent jobs...

Well, which ill-considered, faith based policy is more likely to damage the country over eight years, keeping millions out of work, versus amounting to an eccentricity of little impact? US Presidents don't get to decide what's taught in local schools.

These are not ordinary times.