Michele Bachmann One-Eighties on Major Policies

Michele Bachmann, formerly known as a strong proponent of a hands-off government with minimal regulations, has called for an increase of government expenditures and regulatory involvement in–shockingly–environmental matters. Bachmann has even endorsed the confiscation by government agents of private property when needed to save the environment. It is almost impossible to imagine how Bachmann’s major policy shifts will not play significantly into the upcoming election.

Here is a video of Bachmann, on the floor of Congress, explaining her dramatic and drastic new policy recommendations:

More details here.

Tags:

5 Responses to “Michele Bachmann One-Eighties on Major Policies”

  1. June 14th, 2010 at 12:02 pm

    Alden says:

    You really don’t understand that this is not a 180? The Federal Government has a purpose. It’s not to mandate healthcare or trample states’ rights. It can be very helpful in dealing with disasters. No one – except some random anarchists – is saying that we don’t need the Federal Government to do stuff, and occasionally take charge when the need arises. Especially when the Clean Water Act says it’s their responsibility.

    Obama even says that he’s in charge. Anyone who understands leadership knows that if your main course of action is to blame someone else, you’re not in charge.

  2. June 14th, 2010 at 8:27 pm

    Greg Laden says:

    Alden, don’t be a moron. You know perfectly well why Michele Bachmann says what she says when she says it, and it has nothing to do with a political philosophy.

  3. June 14th, 2010 at 8:43 pm

    Scott Shannon says:

    The question she faced was not “How can I justify my political philosophy with government intervention” it was “How can I make the Obama administration look bad”. We all know damn right that if Obama would have used federal powers to take over private vessels she would be making a lot more noise.

    In all honesty I actually would lean towards agreeing (somewhat, to think that the federal government knew the full scope on the first day is ludicrous) with her on this issue. I would also say that I would talk to people actually knowledgeable in the subject on whether borrowing private vessels would do much good and base my opinions on the data. However I would just say while her conclusion may be true her argument is grossly lacking and blatantly hypocritical.

    As a Canadian looking south I can only sigh at the utter lack of substantive arguments being made. There should be a new logical fallacy created specifically by basing a person’s opinion on the boolean R or D after their name.

  4. June 14th, 2010 at 9:04 pm

    Greg Laden says:

    Agreeing with Michele Bachmann on an issue is much like agreeing with a random number generator.

  5. June 16th, 2010 at 6:48 pm

    Stephanie Zvan says:

    Not even Michele Bachmann agrees with Michele Bachmann.

    http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2010/06/michele_bachman_106.php

SEO Powered by Platinum SEO from Techblissonline