We seem to be in another "sucky" situation

"Any Democratic infighting would benefit Bachmann, who will be able to store up her money and energy for the general election." That is a line from CQ's article on Tinklenberg's announcement that he will not be bound to respect the DFL's endorsement of a different Dem candidate to run against Bachmann, the next time around. The CQ article is a re-hash of the Eric Black blog piece. There's not much new in this version, but that last sentence (quoted above) should be engraved in stone; either that or on Tinklenberg's head. I am sure that they started doing cartwheels over at the Bachmann camp when they heard Tinklenberg's announcement, as reported by Black. A decision by Tinklenberg to ignore a non-Tink endorsement and split the Dem party in the district is almost certain to benefit Bachmann; perhaps even ensure her re-election. I guess there are not enough foreclosed homes and lost jobs and wrecked local economies in the 6th district for Elwyn Tinklenberg. I could understand a Tinklenberg decision to run and run hard against DFL competitors *prior* to the endorsement. But an announcement that he will stay in the race *even if* he loses the endorsement is announcement that Bachmann will win--and that Tinklenberg believes that Bachmann *should* win (despite what he says.) It's hard for me to believe that Elwyn Tinklenberg really thinks "it's all about him," but what else can I think? Regular readers of this blog know the "voting demographic" reasons why Bachmann (a nut, liar, and bigot) can be elected and re-elected in this peculiar congressional district. But I'll repeat them again, for benefit of visitors: 1) It's basically a GOP district, in terms of demographics. *Any* conservative Republican can win the 6th district--even at the worst of times for the Republican party. The simple fact is that there are enough die-hard Republican votes for conservative GOP candidate to win. There are even enough non-Dem votes here to ensure a *majority* for a conservative Republican candidate. But Bachmann never gets that majority, because too many of those loose non-Dem voters know what she is: 1) a publicity junkie nut, liar, and bigot, who's also 2) a non-achiever and opponent of the economic interests of the district, 3) a virtual zero as a legislator out to create good laws or repeal bad ones. The election numbers show that most of the people in the district just don't want her. But they continue to get her, because any conservative Republican can win with a plurality in this weird district. The main reason that Bachmann got the nomination (instead of some other, saner Republican anti-tax conservative) is GOP fear of a statewide evangelical backlash if Michele was passed over or dropped. Tinklenberg knows all of the above, but announces that he's going to stay in anyway. Regardless of the party's decision, regardless of the economic situation in the district, regardless of the fact that a split in the Dems through the next election day guarantees returning this nut, liar, and bigot to office. Thus I conclude: Tink thinks it's all about Tink, and the hell with the people in the district. Tinklenberg may be suffering from the delusion that the millions in grassroots contributions that poured in to his campaign during the last moments of the last election cycle came in because of his personal charm and political vision. That's crazy; the money came in because those out of state grassroots people loathed Bachmann's McCarthyism. I can assure Tinklenberg that he did not receive those funds because those liberal netroots contributors supported his Blue Dog Democrat principles. Tinklenberg would make a better congressman than Michele Bachmann. (Practically anyone who's not a neo-Nazi or communist would.) Tinklenberg is not stupid; he's smart, and he's articulate, and he knows Minnesota and district politics. We can only assume (over his denials) that his announcement means that he would prefer that Bachmann win, next time around. 2) But those facts about the strength of GOP in the 6th are only part of the math of the district. Tinklenberg and Reed both understand that part of the reason Bachmann is able to win and stay in--is that any unqualified idiot can run as an Independent (even without the support of the Independence Party) and tie up ten per cent of the vote, denying any part of it to the DFL candidate and drawing away "independent" voters no matter how unhappy they are with Bachmann. That benefits Bachmann. Even if *all* the Democratic support is organized lock-step behind one Bachmann DFL challenger--a victory over Bachmann would be a very close thing, in this GOP gerrymandered district. Because that ten per cent Independent voters will vote for anything that is not a Republican or a Democrat, regardless of what the Independence Party of the district tells them to do. Tinklenberg knows that. He knows that if he splits the Dem strength--even by a few per cent--Bachmann is sure to win, because the ten per cent of the Independence voters will not support him and cannot be swayed to vote for him. Even when Bachmann's reputation is at its lowest ebb! But he announces he's staying in anyway, when an official DFL nominee needs every vote she can get to even have a chance? This just selfishness and empty careerism, a complete disregard for the need of the voters and families in the district. 3) Another reason that Bachmann got in and could stay in was the horrifying ineptitude of the state's professional media, when it came to reporting on Bachmann's extremism. The biggest professional media platforms were still running puff pieces on her as recently as this year. Professional media outside the state saw her on television (lying and spreading paranoia) and recognized her for what she was immediately; this state's media have been covering up that aspect of Bachmann's politics ever since she first ran for office. But that changed, this year. The St. Cloud Times, the biggest daily in her district, told their readers that she was an extremist. The Minneapolis Star Tribune, the most important paper in Minnesota, finally acknowledged that she's a conspiracy nut and has been since her entry into politics. That's a potential game changer, here in Minnesota where it counts. The next time around, a motivated candidate can use those assessments in a run against Bachmann in a campaign against her; can use any of the regular denunciations of Bachmann as some kind of nut against her. That's an important change in the media climate, next time around--so NOW Tinklenberg announces that he's going to split the party if he doesn't get the nomination? That's like lobbing a hand grenade into the engine of your own ship, just after they've finished repairing it. 4) There have been *no* substantial changes in Bachmann's core of support--the talk radio conservatives, the conspiracy wing nuts who believe in her, and the evangelical political machine that backs her will be there for her next time around. No matter how bad her record of delivering on her conservative rhetoric has been, they'll stick with her. The contempt that millions of Americans have for her crazy demagoguery only *endears* her to those core constituencies. The money will be there, too: Bachmann has been an unwavering supporter of the finance lobby, for other lobbies, voting at their direction even as people in her district continued to lose homes and jobs. She will be as strong as ever next time around, because these supporters are not deserting her despite her non-performance and craziness. But Elwyn Tinklenberg decides that he will try to split the party, anyway? If Tinklenberg makes good on his promise to stay in no matter who gets the DFL nod, I predict another Bachmann win. That means that the following people lose: Reed, Clark (if she announces), the Independence Party, the majority of the people in the 6th district (who have proven that they really do want to "dump Bachmann")--and Elwyn Tinklenberg, because he can't beat her without the DFL behind him.

Bachmann's Anti-Census Fear-Mongering is an Old Trick

Interesting history of anti-census hysteria from the Beacon Broadside blog: Despite Congress's clear constitutional obligation to conduct a decennial census and its equally clear authority to determine how the Census will be conducted, there are still those who bridle at anything more than a nose count. In the field, those individuals are troublesome enough, but every now and then, one gets elected Congress, where they have the potential to make real mischief. In 1938, for instance, Charles William Tobey was elected to the U.S. Senate from New Hampshire; a staunch Republican and committed foe of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Tobey became one of the most outspoken critics of the 1940 Census. Among other things, he claimed that the Roosevelt administration planned to use politically-appointed census takers to skew the results in favor of Democratic strongholds. Tobey loudly announced that he would boycott the Census and actively urged others to do so, a stance that earned him strong criticism from Democrats and Republicans alike. .... sound familiar? ... more troubling is Bachmann's suggestion that people disobey the law and refuse to cooperate with the Census. It is yet another example of how the Republicans, once the party of law and order, have increasingly been taken over by a faction that will use any means necessary to promote their goals. Read the whole thing.

Bachmann Fear-Mongering on Fox About Health Care Bill

From Bachmann's You Tube channel: CM comments: Your healthcare system boggles my mind. 1. Your government pays more per capita on healthcare than almost anyone else (certainly more than Canada) 2. In spite of this, millions of people have no health insurance. 3. Some Americans think that it is wrong for the government to decide what services paitents can receive, but it is right for private insurance to decide even though it is in the insurers best interests to deny coverage. 4. A lot of the Americans who do have health insurance seem to still have to pay if they actually get sick. I have seen and heard many horror stories about the Canadian healthcare system from those who oppose changing the American system. I am not denying that Canada's healthcare system is far from perfect, but if any Canadian politician said "We should have a healthcare system like America's" their own mother wouldn't vote for them. Normally I make jokes about my love for Michele Bachmann, but your healthcare system is so stupid and crazy that Michele seems like pretty small potatoes. I guess that some will dislike what I have to say on this, but if anyone says I'm wrong they should also explain why Canadians have a longer life expectancy and a lower rate of infant mortality than you guys do. I'll try to be funny next time, this subject isn't very funny. Thanks for that information, CM. Don't think you have to treat Bachmann as a joke. The "Bachmann is funny" meme is getting old... it works to her advantage now. Bachmann is a member of Congress, not an entertainer. Reporters need to ask Bachmann serious questions. I would like to see reporters ask Bachmann if she supports the current health care system described in this video: More real videos about real people denied health care.

Do you think this is funny?

I haven't made up my mind yet. Comedy Central's Indecision web page photoshopped a calendar for next year, featuring the heads of prominent politicians pasted on to the bodies of a bunch of hotties. Here's their version of Michele, Ms. March 2009. I don't think it's that funny, but I'm posting it here because Emily Kaiser of the City Pages Blotter ran it and we try to be "completists in terms of Bachmann media coverage" here at DB. It is interesting that she's holding a heavy duty rapid weapon here. That's the way that me and two other artists did her on the cover of the City Pages (it references her whole "it's time for revolution because Obama's an anti-American tyrant" schtick, I guess. But I'm not sure it's funny, because I didn't laugh. You tell me. This one, on the other hand, is VERY funny. I'm sure of it. This is their photoshop of Bobby Jindal, the conservative governor of Louisiana and failed Republican spokesman: Now *that one* is funny, because of Jindal's expression and because it looks like they had to "photoshop in" his swimsuit. They did President Obama, too, but I'm not posting that because everybody knows what he looks like with his shirt off.

Bachmann & Barton's Revisionist History

Chris Rodda, Senior Research Director, Military Religious Freedom Foundation has a good article on Huffington Post called "The Idiocy of Texas and the Threat of David Barton". Rodda mentions Bachmann: Another example of Barton's grossly exaggerated role in a state's curriculum development involves everyone's favorite nut of a congresswoman, Michele Bachmann. Back in September, when Barton had Bachmann on his radio show -- introducing her as "a rock solid lady," and a "real class act" -- he brought up his previous encounters with her, including this: As a matter of fact, I worked with her on history standards up in Minnesota -- doing some history legislation, and making sure that they could not censor religious references from history books. So, what was Barton referring to here? Well, back in 2005, when Bachmann was still a senator in the Minnesota legislature, she and some of her fellow legislative wingnuts had bought -- hook, line, and sinker -- the wildly distorted story and propaganda about California banning the Declaration of Independence in public schools because it mentioned a creator. So, although existing Minnesota history standards already contained the use of the Declaration and other historical documents with religious content, Bachmann co-sponsored a completely unnecessary piece of legislation to "permit" these same documents that were already being used in the state's schools to be used in the state's schools, actually citing the bogus story about California banning the Declaration of Independence as a reason her unnecessary legislation was of the utmost importance. Barton's big role in all this? Well, he appeared before the Minnesota Senate Education Committee in support of Bachmann's legislation. Similar legislation had already been introduced by Minnesota state representative Mark Olson in 2001, and Olson, during a House Education Policy Committee hearing on his bill, had also brought in David Barton. Of course, without the real explanations of the circumstances surrounding Barton's role in these state history education related proceedings, and relying only on the deceptive way in which Barton describes his involvement, anyone unfamiliar with him would think he sounds like somebody who has lots of legitimate experience in developing history curriculums and is sought out by other states for this expertise. But, the biggest problem with Barton meddling with our country's textbooks is not his lack of qualifications. It's the fact that he's a big fat liar who will distort, misrepresent, and even fabricate historical events to further his Christian nationalist agenda and political ideology. Read the entire post... for more about the Religious Right's revision of history go to Chris Rodda's website. To listen to the broadcast mentioned in the article, go to this DB post. This picture is from Rep. Mark Olson's campaign literature from 2006 shows Olson and Bachman with David Barton at the MN Legislature:

I am Not an Arsonist

When you publicly criticize a public figure like Michele Bachmann, you have to expect flak from her supporters. Sometimes those people get carried away and say some really nasty things... and I expect that... I usually ignore it. However, a line was crossed when those critics speculated yesterday, with no evidence at all that I and two other bloggers committed a serious crime - setting fire to a garage in Saint Paul. I'm sure they will claim they were joking, but "jokes" of this sort, particularly about a crime as serious as arson have a way of becoming "fact" on the internet if they are not confronted immediately. It is important that I nip this one in the bud - I state for the record; I did not set fire to Mitchell (Mitch) Berg's garage, nor do I have knowledge of anyone who may have set fire to Mitch Berg's garage. I had no knowledge that Mitchell Berg's garage had burned until I read about it on his blog, where I also read the speculations in the comments that I and two others may have set the fire. I will go further; if arson was the cause of the fire, I urge that the arsonist be swiftly brought to justice. This is particularly important because Mitch Berg is a prominent political blogger and radio personality. If this fire was indeed arson and if there is evidence that it was politically motivated, the crime should be strongly condemned as a violation of his rights to free and unfettered speech as guaranteed to all Americans by our Constitution... and as such, a violation of all our rights to speak freely without fear. People as outspoken as Mr. Berg should not have to fear retaliation for having strong opinions. It's worth noting that I strongly condemned the vandalism of Congresswoman Michele Bachmann's garage and the property of other elected representatives when it occurred last year. The perpetrator(s) of that crime has yet to brought to justice. I again urge the authorities to re-open that case and apprehend that person or persons. UPDATE: Mitch Berg has posted a response that does more harm than good. Berg has refused to take seriously the speculations in his blog that I and two others may have set the fire and that he "wondered" that I had something to do with his fire. Those comments remain on his blog.. If those comments are not removed soon, I will begin publishing exculpatory facts relating to this incident to clear my name.... stay tuned. UPDATE: Looks like I won't be able to post exculpatory facts relating to this garage fire, because I have been informed that the incident is being investigated by the police.

Eric Black: Tinklenberg Will Not Pledge to Abide by the Endorsement

Eric Black at MinnPost has been speaking to Tinklenberg campaign staff who told him the the following: "El Tinklenberg is the best candidate in the field, and the only one who can defeat Michele Bachmann. He will work to earn the endorsement at the DFL convention. But our goal is to win in November, and if El is forced to fight through a three-way primary to take on Michele Bachmann, that's a battle he's ready to fight, and a fight we will win." Eric Black explains why a primary battle is a risky idea: Nationally and locally, Dems will want the best candidate to take Bachmann on, but also will want a unified party for the entire summer and fall of 2010, not a three-way primary that will leave the distracted and weakened eventual winner unable to concentrate on making the case against Bachmann until September. What do you think?

Commenters on Tarryl Clark's Probable Entrance

Earlier, Avidor posted about Sen. Tarryl Clark's probable entrance into the race. Both Eric Black from MinnPost and Tom Hauser from Channel 5 report this is coming. Commenters reacted: Yeah, we have to stay tuned on this one. But Black's article is still a good article to read. There's some good background in there. Also, he identifies Bachmann as an "arch-conservative" which is better than the old euphemisms they used to describe her politics ("social conservative," etc.) And her statements about Barack Obama being "anti-American"--well, in this article Black comes right out and calls them "crazy," in print. I think that's the first time any respected MN journalist has acknowledged that fact, for the record. The rest of the article is good basic background on the political field in the Sixth. It even references the Independence Party, which tends to be ignored by political reporters until after the election results come in. So a pretty good effort by Black, here. As for his prediction about Clark, we've been printing that rumor here for some time. It's just a rumor--if she runs, Black and Dump Bachmann look like "must-read local politics geniuses with inside channels of information." If she doesn't run--please forget we said anything about it. Bill Prendergast 07.15.09 - 1:59 pm | # Bill, Tell Tarryl that for an interview YOU will name a super hero after her in your next issue. And don't forget the ghosts please... Wellstone'sGhost 07.15.09 - 3:12 pm | # WG-- That's a sure-fire way to get her to *stop* talking to us. Tinklenberg was willing to give me a phone interview and sit down with Ken and Eva for an even better video interview. I hope that Clark will give us a little time if she decides to run. For my own part, I am going to be supporting *any* Bachmann opponent, providing that they have the best arithmetical chance of beating Bachmann. My only other restrictions are that they can't be wearing a Nazi armband or a communist hammer-and-sickle lapel pin. Anybody who's any more mainstream than Bachmann--Republican or Democrat--is okay by me, provided they have a real chance of winning. Bill Prendergast 07.15.09 - 4:08 pm | # Coincidentally, July 15 marked the first anniversary of my campaign against Michele Bachmann. I posted a one-year retrospective on my campaign website at http://www.immelman.us/news/imme...achmann-year-2/ On a personal note, my "association" with Dump Bachmann -- maybe someone should do a "penetrating expose" -- started in 2006, when I sent Avidor some of the glossy political smut against my friend Patty Wetterling -- most notably the flyer depicting two grooms on a wedding cake. After I announced against Bachmann in the Republican primary a year ago, Avidor graciously taped a candidate profile for TheUptake, which is available on this site. As Prendergast notes on another thread, we always knew if would be hard, if not impossible. Maybe others here have wondered at times -- as I have -- if it's all worth the effort, expense, and sacrifice. That's when Alfred, Lord Tennyson speaks to me: "To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield." Aubrey Immelman 07.16.09 - 3:17 am | # I like the Gandhi one: “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” Unfortunately, Gandhi didn't tell us what to do when they ignore you, laugh at you, and fight you all at the same time. I hope it works out to the same result. We seem to be on the right track, though. It's important to remember that we're getting more moral support this year than ever before. It was only two years ago that we were the lone voice in the country, when it came to publishing the fact that this particular elected official was a nut, liar and bigot. Now there are informed people all over the country who agree with us. We didn't do that (change the hearts of all those people.) All that was necessary for that, was for people outside the state to get a look at what she was saying--the national media and YouTube did that. But did play a part in changing the coverage of the local media, and that's quite an achievement for a little low-rent volunteer blog that never had any partisan support at all. I'm proud that the others let me write here. Bill Prendergast | # Bill, Ghandi left out, "... and then somebody shoots you." But after that happened, he was not able to modify quotes. Finally, Bill, Eva, Avidor, Karl & all - any chance yet of getting the same access to Maureen Reed as Tink allowed? She's kind of like a mystery candidate w/o any "issues" or "news" on her website. Just signup for emails, and contribute so far there: http://www.maureenreedforcongress.com/ She's had time to put more up; but clearly has made the choice to duck and cover until later. We wait. We see. Tarryl Clark so far seems best, and she has a track record that she will not back away from, as a TRUE not NEW moderate. No remake needed to try for caucus appeal. eric z 07.16.09 - 9:00 am | # I saw the KSTP thing, decided not to post it since it's not an official Clark announcement and there's no named source (as you hinted.) It's no improvement on the Black article, but I guess everybody is damn sure she's going to announce. Which, as you say, is a good thing. I can't answer your Maureen Reed thing yet. I bet you there will be a meeting between DB staff members, to see who's up for doing that. Video would be better than audio or print, and video takes some special effort. And you never know who will and will not agree to talk to us. Tinklenberg was very nice about it; Franken blew me off when I asked him to go live for five minutes on the subject of Bachmann. Bill Prendergast Reed's campaign has agreed to an interview with Dump Bachmann. We hope to have the interview scheduled sometime in August. I haven't attempted to contact Sen. Clark for an interview about this yet, but hope to soon.

Bachmann Warns Health Care Reform Means "New Abortion Clinics Would Have to be Built All Across America."

Steve Benen at Washington Monthly's Political Animal: At the press conference, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) said health care reform inevitably mean that "new abortion clinics would have to be built all across America." SBA List: Earlier this week, the pro-life members of the House came together to defend Life and challenge the inclusion of abortion in the House health care reform bill (H.R.3200). Chairwoman of the House Pro-Life Women's Caucus, Jean Schmidt (R-OH), was joined by Congresswomen Michele Bachmann (R-MN), Virginia Foxx (R-NC), and Mary Fallin (R-OK), as well as pro-life leaders Rep. Chris Smith and Rep. Joe Pitts.

Bachmann Ranting About Health Care Bill

Audio from the Dennis Miller radio show: via Think Progress: BACHMANN: Well, what does that mean? That means that politicians are going to substitute their choice for your doctor’s choice for you. That’s exactly what this bill does. Here’s the other thing about that bill. It’s a monstrosity. I have the bill printed out on my desk, it’s over 1,000 pages long. On the 16th page, it says whatever health care you have now, it’s going to be gone within five years. So your current health care plan, you’re not going to have in five years. What you’re going to have is a government plan and a federal bureau is going to decide what you get or if you get anything at all. Think Progress fact-checks Bachmann's bogus fear-mongering.

Good As You Takes a Look at Bachmann's Buddy Janet Boynes

Good As You has an excellent post on Janet Boynes and her faith-based, "ex-gay" racket: You get it? She was "broken." and now she's "fixed." And while she doesn't fully go into her drug/club/party ways, you can find all the usual claims in Janet's books and on her website. The bottom line: You will NEVER, EVER, EVER meet a married, successful gay professional with a loving family and stable home life who suddenly decides they are an "ex-gay." A crucial element for this movement is "being saved from sin," which means that the spokespeople must have been shrouding themselves in some sort of debauched, godless revelry (no matter how vague) or some wrecked home life in order to have a compelling enough story. Whether these folks are making up their past ways in order to pad their stories, or if they really were party animals is not even relevant. If the former, then it's par for this movement's deceptive course; if the latter, it means these people very well might have needed some self reflection, but about their social lives, not their internal desires. What matters here is that they, the organized "ex-gays," so fully need this element of the story in order to the keep their game alive. That should make everyone, regardless of placement along the "culture war" spectrum, ask themselves why. It's an excellent post.. read the whole thing. The ex-gay racket attracts some real creeps: NEW YORK – A new report by the website, “Ex-Gay Watch”, has cast a dark cloud of skepticism over “ex-gay” activist Matthew Manning’s tale of being “delivered” from homosexuality and AIDS. According to the report, Manning has been repeatedly dragged into court for allegations of inappropriate behavior and was even banned from a popular gym after improper sexual advances were made on a 22-year-old heterosexual male. Manning, a frequent television guest and the founder of Lighthouse World Evangelism Inc., based in Santa Rosa, California, has yet to comment on the allegations made in the investigative report. “The ‘ex-gay’ myth is one of the largest frauds ever foisted on the American consumer,” said Wayne Besen, Executive Director of Truth Wins Out. “We call on Manning to immediately close down his snake oil shop. We also urge those in the media who promoted his fake miracle to apologize and update their audience on the sordid facts that have been revealed.” Here's ex-gay guru Richard Cohen demonstrating "reparative therapy techniques" (CNN, May 2006}: Bachmann has allowed Janet Boynes to use her name promoting her racket on Exodus International's website: Janet Boynes has shared her testimony publicly to several audiences, including a Minneapolis women’s conference and with Minnesota State Senator Michele Bachmann, an untiring defender of family values. Los Angeles Times: 3 from ex-gay group are sorry Three former leaders of Exodus International, often described as the nation's largest ex-gay ministry, publicly apologized Wednesday for the harm they said their efforts had caused many gays and lesbians who believed the group's message that sexual orientation could be changed through prayer. Excellent video from IN THE LIFE about the so-called ex-gay ministries:

"Ex-Lesbian" Janet Boynes Tweets About Bachmann; "She Loves Her Constitutes!!"

UPDATE: Boynes corrects her tweet: Here's the original as it appeared this morning: Self-described ex-lesbian Janet Boynes, BFF of Michele Bachman & Mac Hammond tweets the following message: Had the opportunity to spend time with Congress Women Michele Bachmann of Minnesota. We are blessed!! She loves her constitutes!! Here's a recent two-part You Tube video featuring Janet Boynes. The video description: Christian author Janet Boynes discusses her book "Called Out" and her decision to leave the homosexual lifestyle behind in pursuit of God's purpose for her life. For more about Janet Boynes & her favorite congresswoman search Dump Bachmann.

PARDONGATE: Is it Unfair to Question Bachmann's Judgment and Ethics?

In the DB comments in the previous post, George Sherwood, who claims to be Michele Bachmann's step-brother said the following: To start, I don't have any personal experience with this case and have never spoken about it with Michele or any one associated with Michele's office. That being said, I don't think it says anything. I am sure there are people that you have met before that you felt were pretty good people and sometime over a year later you find out that they are not exactly how they presented themselves. I know this has happened more than one time for myself, but generally it is just something I chalk up to a learning experience and it isn't harped on for years. It isn't like the evidence of his continued mis-deeds was out there for every one to see and the support was provided in spite of this. On this site the case you have always made is the assumption that this was information about him that she should have known, so you are saying that she supported the pardon knowing that he was possibly still involved in shady dealings. Given the focus of this site, it is an assumption I would expect. Knowing Michele like I do, I would make the opposite assumption. What makes you so sure that she provided this letter of support despite knowing he was not on the stright and narrow path? Bill Clinton pardoned his half-brother and within a year was arrested again. Clinton was most likely closer to his half-brother than Michele was to this guy. So do you believe some can be rehibilitated or once a person has commited a crime should we just assume they will always be this way? First, let's look at whether Bachmann has criticized others for their judgement; choosing who they associate with. Lawrence Schumacher, October of last year in the Saint Cloud Times: In the last week, Bachmann also has said numerous times that relationships and advisers of candidates for public office such as Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama are “fair game” for public scrutiny, as they may affect the candidates’ views and beliefs. “The media needs to do their job in vetting,” she said following a St. Cloud Rotary Club luncheon last week. “Those associations are certainly fair game and something the media brings up.” Bachmann has also criticized Eric Holder for approving the pardon request of Marc Rich: Holder also testified to Congress that he didn't properly vet the Rich pardon and that if he had it to do all over again, he would have stopped it. Translation, he didn't do his job. So there you have it... Bachmann hoisted on her own petard. Bachmann, by her own admission in her letter freely admits associating with a man... who she knew was a convicted money launderer/drug and cocaine trafficker. Defending Bachmann's faulty judgement, Mr. Sherwood brings up Mr. Vennes' jail-house conversion. Why did it take a Federal investigation for Congreswoman Bachmann to suspect Frank Vennes Jr. was not exactly "reformed"? There isn't a lot on the web about Frank Vennes prior to the raid on his home last year . But what I have found with Google is pretty snarky. From an 8th Circuit Appeals Court decision: After pleading guilty and nolo contendere to money laundering, firearm, and drug offenses and serving a lengthy prison sentence, Frank E. Vennes, Jr., commenced this action against unnamed federal agents seeking damages in excess of $10,000,000 under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971). Vennes alleged that the agents had conspired to violate his rights under the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments by coercing and entrapping him into committing the charged crimes, thereby causing "an illegal indictment" to issue, and by seizing his business through an unlawful Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") jeopardy assessment. The district court1 dismissed Vennes's claims against the IRS agents, concluding that his remedies under the Internal Revenue Code preclude this type of Bivens action. The court granted summary judgment in favor of the remaining defendants on the ground that Vennes "has had his day in court, and on that day entered pleas of guilty or nolo contendere to the charges arising in part from the allegedly coerced activity." Vennes appeals. We affirm. Here's how he got busted: In August 1986, IRS agents investigating suspected money laundering by certain North Dakota car dealers were told that Vennes, a Bismarck pawnshop owner, had made numerous trips to Switzerland and might have experience in transferring funds to a foreign country. An undercover agent, posing as a Chicago investor, contacted Vennes and asked for help in transferring cash abroad. Vennes later admitted that in the next three months he and his codefendants received $370,000 from the undercover agent and transferred it, minus their substantial commissions, to the Bahamas, the Isle of Man, and Switzerland without complying with federal currency transaction reporting laws. In the last transaction, Vennes personally delivered $100,000 to Switzerland, where his associates lost or stole it. In May 1987, Vennes was charged in three indictments with numerous money laundering, firearm, and drug offenses. Acting on the advice of his attorney, whom he now accuses of ineffective assistance, Vennes entered into a plea agreement under which he pleaded guilty to one count of the money laundering indictment, and also pleaded nolo contendere to one count of illegally selling a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 922(b)(3) and to an information charging that he used a telephone to facilitate distribution of cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. Sec. 843(b). Vennes has a tall tale about how he was entrapped... but, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected his tall tale and concluded with this note: The record reveals that at one point, Vennes purchased cocaine from his own source in Florida after haggling with an undercover agent supplier about price and speed of delivery. This is not the conduct of one coerced or entrapped into crime. Aug 8, 2007 Orlando Sentinel article: Downtown developer Cameron Kuhn filed two lawsuits against his co-developer this week in state Circuit Court in Orlando, accusing investor Frank Vennes Jr. of refusing to settle financial disagreements and preparing a "smear campaign" to damage his reputation. Kuhn said he filed the suits Monday to pre-empt the smear campaign by taking the matter to court. "I was left with little or no choice but to file these actions and allow a court to determine whether or not their threats and attempts to intimidate me have violated laws related to proper and ethical conduct by a co-developer," Kuhn said in a written statement. Kuhn alleges that Vennes, who has homes in Minnesota and in Palm Beach County, is a major donor to Republican candidates and has tried to limit Kuhn's activities in Democratic politics and convert him to fundamentalist Christianity. From the Florida Times Union: Kuhn says things reached a boiling point last month, when Vennes told him he had lost interest in several of their joint ventures because of "inadequate returns on their investments." Kuhn said Vennes threatened to spread false rumors about the financing of those ventures if Kuhn didn't sign over all his property in Jacksonville and Orlando. At about the same time, Kuhn said Vennes accelerated the interest on a $2 million promissory note from 24 percent to 36 percent and refused to put up $821,000 of the $2.5 million they agreed to put up to develop a medical facility in Orlando. From the Peacebringer Musings blog: So the question is how does someone professing to be a man of God end up in the middle of such a scheme. The question I have is did Mr. Vendes ever truly convert or did he just learn what to say and buy influence through his apparent charity? Now I do not know the man and have no real capacity to give sound discernment and only God truly knows his heart. Yet, there are things that can be examined. According to the newspaper article, it appears the Mr. Vennes has never really been repentant of his initial crimes. He still calls himself a victim and apparently even sued the government claiming to be set up and coerced into committing crimes. If a man truely turned his life over to Jesus would that truly be where is heart is at, protesting victimization. It doesn’t sound right to me. Mr. Vennes even recently had asked Representative Bachmann (whose campaigns he donated to heavily) to petition President Bush for a pardon related to his past crimes. This just does not strike the heart of someone whose heart was repentant. ... and ... The other thing of concern is that Mr Vennes clearly seemed to be focused on collecting wealth and perhaps even influence. He owned several properties. He engaged in a conflict with a former partner, Mr Kuhn, about some properties and threatened exposure of finances ultimately resulting in getting the properties he wanted. In my mind these are not actions of a man surrendered to Jesus and seeking to enlarge the kingdom of God through bringing others to Jesus. Mr Vennes along with Mr. Petters and other associates clearly look to be people caught in the web of mammon. The love of money and disregard for others is clear in the alleged fraud. Right. And considering that Jesus was not too fond of usury, how the heck can someone call himself a Christian and charge 36 percent interest on a loan? Now, let's get to ethics. Bachmann performed a service to a big campaign donor... an action that raises obvious suspicions whether there was a "pay for play". From the 2008 edition of the U.S. House of Representatives Ethics Handbook: ... the Standards Committee has long advised Members and staff that they are not to give preferential treatment to casework requests made by the Member‘s supporters or contributors. (page 150) More generally, one of the ultimate purposes of the ethics rules is to help ensure that each governmental action is taken on the merits of the particular question, rather than any extraneous factors. On this point, one scholar on government ethics has stated: ―Ethics rules, if reasonably drafted and reliably enforced, increase the likelihood that legislators (and other officials) will make decisions and policies on the basis of the merits of issues, rather than on the basis of factors (such as personal gain) that should be irrelevant. (page 151) An individual‘s status as a donor may, however, raise an appearance of impropriety. (page 309) Adding to the appearance of impropriety - Vennes was not a constituent: On occasion a Member‘s publicized involvement in legislation or an issue of national concern will generate correspondence from individuals outside the district. A private citizen may communicate with any Member he or she desires. However, the Member‘s ability to provide assistance to such individuals is limited. The statute that establishes the Members‘ Representational Allowance provides that the purpose of the allowance is ―to support the conduct of the official and representational duties of a Member of the House of Representatives with respect to the district from which the member is elected.‖29 This statute does not prohibit a Member from ever responding to a non-constituent. In some instances, working for non-constituents on matters that are similar to those facing constituents may enable the Member better to serve his or her district. Other times, the Member may serve on a House committee that has the expertise and ability to provide the requested help. Of course, if a Member has personal knowledge regarding a matter or an individual, he or she may always communicate that knowledge to agency officials. As a general matter, however, a Member should not devote official resources to casework for individuals who live outside the district. When a Member is unable to assist such a person, the Member may refer the person to his or her own Representative or Senator. (page 309) Regarding Bachmann's judgment and also ethics, the letter is troubling. Here's the letter written on her official stationery:

PARDONGATE: New Info on Hedge Fund Tied to Petters

John Welbes at the PiPress about financier Gregory Bell: As a hedge fund executive tied to the Tom Petters fraud case awaits a court hearing today in St. Paul, U.S. prosecutors describe him as a flight risk with millions of dollars in off-shore accounts, including the Cook Islands and Switzerland. Off-shore accounts?.... hmmmm.... DB readers, can you name another associate of Tom Petters who was convicted of laundering $$$ in off-shore banks? (Hint: Bachmann requested supported a request for a pardon for the guy). Here's another interesting fact from the PiPress article: In August 2008, Bell wired $15 million from an account in the U.S. into a Swiss bank account, the prosecutors' filing says. Interesting... what happened the next month? Oh, yeah... On Sept. 24, Vennes’ Shorewood home was raided in connection with the multibillion-dollar Tom Petters financial investigation. According to the federal search warrant, Vennes was alleged to have hauled in more than $28 million in commissions for his role in luring five investors to pony up $1.2 billion in Petters’ alleged giant Ponzi scheme. Speaking of Vennes, the Petters-Fraud website posted a link to this December 08, 2008 Forbes article on Petters: Then there are David Harrold and Bruce Prevost, who set up Palm Beach Finance Partners in 2002 and marketed it as a hedge fund to provide financing of brand-name products to retailers. It raised $1.6 billion and in the last five years reported average annual returns of 12.5%. Most of the cash went to a Petters company that owes Palm Beach $1.1 billion. There's this comment: Over the years Harrold, 49, has bounced around at least five tiny investment shops. He filed for personal bankruptcy in 1991 and was slapped by the Florida Division of Banking with a $2,500 fine for "fraudulent transactions." Prevost, 48, used to work at a brokerage called Graystone Nash with Richard DeMaio, who got into trouble with the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission in 1993. While taking no action against Prevost, an sec judge said he had engaged in illegal practices similar to DeMaio's, such as refusing to send cash back to clients. The guy who brokered the deal between Petters and Palm Beach Finance was Frank E. Vennes Jr.--an ex-con sentenced to five years on charges of money laundering, illegally selling a firearm and facilitating the distribution of cocaine, in 1987. Vennes was paid commissions of $28 million by Petters, says an fbi affidavit. Palm Beach says it "had no basis for concern prior to Tom Petters' arrest." Says Douglas Hirsch, a lawyer for investors who put at least $50 million in Palm Beach: "Petters either found some pigeons in Bruce and David, or they were in on it, as well." As a member of the House Financial Services Committee, Bachmann should be more concerned with the shenanigans of the alleged Ponzi pirates instead of ACORN.

Bachmann Warns Health Care Reform Means "New Abortion Clinics"

Steve Benen at Washington Monthly's Political Animal: At the press conference, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) said health care reform inevitably mean that "new abortion clinics would have to be built all across America." From the comments: We should probably inform Ms. Bachmann that the new abortion centers will be built right alongside the new census bureau offices.

Eric Black: "Tarryl Clark will run for Congress in the 6th District"

MinnPost: She's been telling people for a while now that she was heading that way, and now I'm confident that she will announce. I haven't been able to speak to her directly about it. Stay tuned.... UPDATE: Eric Black posted this statement from an "authorized" political associate": "Sen. Clark is not ready to formally announce her candidacy for Congress from the Sixth District, but recently she has spent a great deal of time meeting with political leaders and key donors in the Sixth and across the state. She’s been overwhelmed by the outpouring of support she’s received. She knows how important it is to make a decision soon and wants to hit the ground running if she decides to run. She’ll formally announce her decision in the near future." UPDATE 2:Tom Hauser confirms (video).

Why Does Bachmann Hate Bicyclists?

Good opinion piece by Adam Voiland about Bachmann calling funding of bike trails "pork": Ok, Rep. Bachmann, we get it: you're against spending federal dollars on pretty much anything except defense. What you don't seem to get, however, is that by sticking your head into the sand and resorting to tired cliches about wasteful spending it is politicians like you who are bankrupting the country. Consider, Rep. Bachmann, that it just so happens that while you've been worrying about pork the Annals of Internal Medicine has been busy publishing research that shows men who walk or bike to work have significantly healthier body mass index, blood pressure, insulin, and triglycerides numbers than those who don't. Who cares, Rep. Bachmann? Well, in other words, people who walk or bike to work have a decreased chance of developing heart problems that require expensive procedures like angioplasty and bypass surgery. Let's just say, for example, that Mercy hospital, performed half the number of angioplasty procedures, bypass surgeries, and valve procedures that it performed in 2007. That alone would save the taxpayers in your county $1,842,244. And that's just for one year, and just one hospital from one county. Read the whole thing. Bicycles are a great mode of personal transportation... unlike the fantasy mode of personal transportation Bachmann wanted to waste taxpayers' $$$ on when she was in the Minnesota Senate.

Bachmann Drive-In Double-Feature

It's a nice night to take the top down on your "Government Motors" car and watch a Bachmann You Tube double-feature.. ***Intermission*** Drop by the concession stand for popcorn, hot-dogs, soft drinks and lots of taxpayers' $$$ for "Democrat taste buds".

Bachmann Still Blathering About the Federal Reserve

Uploaded recently to Bachmann's You Tube channel - her description: Rep. Michele Bachmann talks with CNBC's Larry Kudlow about the need to audit the Federal Reserve as a result of the financial and auto sector bailouts and potential bailouts for small businesses. audiovideo B endorses audit of Fed Kudlow blames fed for the tech bubble and the bank bubble McTeer? defends Fed K: breaking story is that Obama is going to use TARP money to give to small businesses what do you think of this idea? B: I think it's a really bad idea, just the way the automobile task force was a bad idea, just the way TARP in the first place was a bad idea. Injecting government into the private sector has proved to be a bust, not a boom. And I think honestly, Larry, we would have seen a recovery months ago if the federal government wouldn't have made a lot of these extraordinary actions. ... K: Bob McTeer said it was a good idea to help the banks. Do you? B: Well I just read two days ago an Arizona State University Professor said today after all of this intervention, government now controls or own 30% of all private business profits in the United States. That's before we nationalize health care. So the direction that we're going in is not positive. So I'm very concerned about that. McTeer: The fed has been audited for several years by a private outside auditing firm.

Pardongate: Who is Next to be Indicted from Ponzi Island?

Tom Petters and Bernie Madoff, both former denizens of Ponzi Island, now guests at the Graybar Hotel... will there be others? Dealbreaker.com speculates: Tom Petters was arrested for money laundering by the FBI last October and the SEC said there were $3.5 billion in losses for fund of hedge funds in his Ponzi scheme. For now, court proceedings in the Petters criminal case have been sealed - leaving the victims and the public with few answers about who else conspired in this maze of financial crime and abuse of investor confidence. One such person is a reformed convict turned multimillionaire Frank Vennes, who owns a spreads in Jupiter Island and Minnesota. Sources say Vennes met with Palm Beach's Prevost and Harrold several times in 2001-2002 at his Minnesota lake home to discuss how the managers would raise money solely to invest directly into Petters. The first PB Finance fund was started in 2003 and grew to $250 million. The second fund began in 2004 with assets at the time of its shut down of $850 million - both were promoted by Jonathan Spring who raised institutional money for other big hedge funds such as Carrington Capital. The fund's operating agreements never discuss investing only with Petters. As late as November 2007, Spring sent a letter soliciting a chance to invest more in what were then closed Palm Beach funds. He wrote, "The risks of this strategy are relatively straight-forward and identifiable....risks I have thought carefully about for the past 4 years." Vennes, Harrold, and Prevost have yet to be charged criminally for their involvement in Petters fraud. However, the MN US Attorney subpoenaed Vennes' emails when the feds reported that Vennes knew about the Petters Fraud back in 2007. Not sure if Dealbreaker is correct in all it's facts (I pretty sure the two homes it mentions were turned over the receiver), but it does appear Palm Beach Capital may suffer the same fate as Lancelot Investment Management. Stay tuned...

Michele Bachmann Fellow Traveller: The Admiral's Site Has gone down

Wonder why? This is from google cache. Recall that the Admiral is known for his assassination threat against Barack Obama. While Michele Bachmann ignores her own constituents, she doesn't have any problem corresponding with the Admiral, who lives outside her district. Since February I've had 3 or 4 direct communcations with Michele Bachmann. Not her staff, but her. She's been more than helpful in giving me information and fulfilling any request that I may have, and I don't even live in her district. Regardless of how you may feel about her, she's a very gracious and accomodating person. She even granted me an interview request. And I can't get the time of day out of my own representative! Why do folks here think the Admiral's blog was pulled? Please leave your thoughts in the comments. UPDATE: An observant DB reader notes that the post threatening President Obama is still available in the new Lake Minnetonka Liberty archives. From the comments: The blog was too beautiful to last... it was like Brigadoon... occasionally appearing out of the mists. markh | 07.13.09 - 7:50 am | # Ah, new location for the blog, with a Monday morning post already. http://lmliberty.wordpress.com/ Rook 07.13.09 - 7:54 am | # In short, in matters vegetable, animal, and mineral, the Admiral is the very model of a modern Major-A**hole. Avidor 07.13.09 - 10:26 am | # well, I hope some of it is that the Secret Service was asked to check out his previous statements wishing for someone to take out Obama. Perhaps, even though he has established his blog elsewhere, should he continue with such sentiments (since a threat against a President is a federal crime), the Secret Service will continue to keep an eye on him. Pr Chris Chris Miller

Michele Bachmann Has Lowest "Participation Rate" of MN Congressional Delegation

Michele Bachmann fan, Andy Applikowski posts about this, but fails to note that Bachmann skips the most votes (79% participation rate). The average participation rate for the 6th congressional district is: 94.5 and standard deviation is 7.35. Michele Bachmann is around 2 standard deviations from the mean. Keith Ellison's participation rate (85%), isn't good compared to other members of the delegation, but he is doing significantly better than slacker Michele Bachmann. Graph via CQ politics. UPDATE: If you sort by participation rate, Michele Bachmann has the 8th lowest participation rate in congress. 430 members of congress have a higher participation rate than Michele Bachmann. Keith Ellison is 14th lowest. Ellison is my congress member, and I will be contacting him about this.

The Ol' Gitty-Up Wants a Palin/Bachmann Ticket for 2012

Listen to "Gitty-Up" read this poem hallfway through the video: The men have had their chance and fell flat on their face I'm tired of suits and ties, I'm ready for some lace And forget about the Republicans and the Democrats too You must make a run at the office with a party that fits you With Michele at your side you can all take on the world Tell 'em like it is Sarah 'You go girl'! I've shown my support for you, I have rang the bell Now you go out there ladies and you give 'em hell!

Some good signs for our side

Yesterday Eva posted an article from the St. Paul Legal Ledger. I don't know the publication, but the article's important. For one thing, Bachmann is referred to by the reporter as an "ultraconservative"--not just as a "conservative." I don't know if the journalist knows it, but since the early 1960s "ultraconservative" has been the polite, "journalese" euphemism for "reactionary, right wing nut." For example, in the early 1960s the American news media used the term "ultraconservative" to describe the John Birch Society-- which believes in the existence of a centuries-old anti-Christian Master Conspiracy undetected by historians and news media outside their movement. Former Star Tribune political reporter Eric Black has claimed that he spotted Bachmann as "an ultraconservative" early on in her career. Unfortunately, Black made that claim fairly recently, long after Bachmann was elected to Congress. And unfortunately (if that is true that Black spotted her early on as an "ultraconservative") Black and the Strib took pains to keep that fact from the Strib readers. For years and over the objections of this blog, the Strib continued to portray Bachmann as a "conservative" in the tradition of Ronald Reagan. That was the image that Bachmann wanted the public to have of her. That's why a story like the St. Paul Ledger story is important. It suggests that the "conspiracy nut/extremist" view of Bachmann is "trickling down" through the Minnesota media. It suggests that it's now "okay" for non-blog print publications to report what we have reported along--the fact that she's off the political mainstream in terms of her extremist worldview; the fact that she's not "a Reagan conservative." If Bachmann wants to go higher in politics--she *can't* be identified to the public as an "ultraconservative" (even though she certainly is one in fact--a true believer in apocalyptic conspiracy thinking.) Successful conservative Republicans are those *avoid* such tags, no matter what they believe privately. Whether the reporter understands the significance of the term or not is irrelevant. As late as last year, such charges about Bachmann were not on record, in print, and could not be cited and quoted by other "serious news" media to describe Bachmann and her world view. This year, things are different. If the St. Paul Legal Ledger is ever called out to justify their characterization of Bachmann (which is unlikely)--they can now cite other mainstream professional papers for support: the editorial by the St. Cloud Times denouncing Bachmann's extremism and the editorial in the Star Tribune about Bachmann's conspiracy thinking. And it's local media coverage like that, that can snowball into "dumping Bachmann." That's the big picture, regarding local media and a possible change to election results. The other news here is the Tarryl Clark rumor, repeated again in the article. It seems to me that Reed and Tinklenberg will run whatever the odds against them. They know that whether they win or lose, there will be big grassroots money coming in from out of state to defeat the "ultraconservative" Bachmann. And the ability to raise funds--whether you're going to win or lose--is very attractive to some politicians. So the fact that Tinklenberg and Reed are in the race is not necessarily indicative of their belief that they can actually defeat Bachmann in this Republican gerrymandered district. A reminder: the way the district is gerrymandered, any conservative Republican can win this district. The reason that Bachmann got the GOP nomination for Congress (instead of some other Republican conservative is: Bachmann and the national and state theocratic organizations that guide and back her could destroy the candidacy of any other Republican candidate, if Republicans did not give *her* the nomination. She is quite literally able to terrorize the state GOP into submission by threatening withdrawal of evangelical voters from one of the few remaining GOP House seats. So the odds favor a Republican conservative in this district, as currently constituted. Why would any Democrat want to dash his or her career and time and money in a vain effort to thwart voting arithmetic? And that's why the Tarryl Clark thing is important to people trying to figure out what the odds of victory are, today. Clark is smart, telegenic and capable. She could raise money and win in any number of other races where local conditions favor Democrats. And she has no intentions of wasting her political advantages on a no-hope race in this Republican gerrymandered district. I conclude that if Clark enters this particular race, it will be because she has become convinced that the arithmetic in the 6th district has fundamentally changed since the last time Bachmann ran. If she decides to run, that's a signal to the rest of us that the election has morphed from "no hope for a Democrat in this Republican district" to "some significant hope for a Democrat in this Republican district." I think Bachmann is worried about a shift against her in the 6th district voting demographic, too. We've already reported here on one sign that she is worried: these new photo-op events she started doing this year about "non-insane, non-right wing" topics ("women's health" and "saving Social Security.") Bachmann's voting record shows that she doesn't really give a damn about these things, but she's trying to present herself as if she does. One commenter suggests that this is because she's doing worse with women voters in the district. If Tarryl Clark enters, that's a sign that there's been a real change in Dem election chances in a conservative district. Because, as I say, she's not the sort of politician who wastes her time. (My opinion of Tinklenberg and Reed is that they would run whether the math showed them winning or not. That's not dissing them as candidates; either of them would make a much better representative than Bachmann.) So if Clark enters, that's good sign for us Bachmann-dumpers--whether she gets the Dem nod or not.