Jan 03 2012

Amusing Quote of the Day

Categories:

From Michele Bachmann:

“So I think there’s a lot of soft hidden support that’s going to come out tonight for the caucuses,” Bachmann said. “I think a lot of people are going to be surprised.”

How’s that hopey-delusiony thing working for ya?

This post has no tag

36 comments

1 ping

Skip to comment form ↓

1

holytape

January 3, 2012 at 11:44 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment

Hidden support, invisible votes.
2

KathyO

January 3, 2012 at 11:49 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment

Well, I’ll bet she was surprised.
3

hitchens2965

January 3, 2012 at 11:55 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment

Howard Fineman reports Bachmann “could not get the full backing of the evangelical pastors in part because of her gender.” How religion poisons everything…even her bigoted fundy campaign gets hit by God sponsored discrimination.
4

dingojack

January 4, 2012 at 12:36 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

‘Consider my bouche, amused’.
- Dingo
5

raven

January 4, 2012 at 12:42 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

Iowa
Primary – 98.31% REPORTING
Caucus is Jan 3, 2012
CANDIDATESVOTES% OF VOTE.Mitt Romney (R)29,625 25%
Rick Santorum (R)29,584 25%
Ron Paul (R)25,875 21%

Newt Gingrich (R)15,974 13%
Rick Perry (R)12,410 10%
Michele Bachmann (R)6,016 5%
Jon Huntsman (R)732 1%
No Preference (R)13 10%

Rick Satanorum is a toad. I would put him in the class of civilization destroying monsters.

It’s interesting that the two top candidates of the fundie Tea Party are:

1. Romney, a nonxian.

2. Satanorum, a Catholic loon from a Fake Xian cult.

The fundies aren’t as influential as they pretend to be.
6

raven

January 4, 2012 at 12:48 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

Howard Fineman reports Bachmann “could not get the full backing of the evangelical pastors in part because of her gender.”

But these same reptilian fundie kooks backed a Mormon and a Catholic.

I doubt that Bachmann being female had much to do with it. I’m sure a few wackos were appalled that she was running around loose and wearing shoes.

But fundies are all hypocrites. Sarah Palin being female didn’t stop them from wildly cheering her on.
7

raven

January 4, 2012 at 12:55 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

Jon Huntsman is the most reasonable of the bunch. Even though I absolutely don’t trust Mormons for good reasons.

He got 1% of the vote. Dead last, even No one got more.

Shows where being a centrist and an intelligent human gets you in the Tea Party.
8

dingojack

January 4, 2012 at 12:56 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

MinnPost.com reports:

“Bachmann predicted a “miracle” finish on Monday, but it never came. Regardless, she was defiant in a speech to her supporters in West Des Moines on Tuesday night, indicating she’ll continue her presidential bid and even ratcheting up the rhetoric on President Barack Obama.

“[Obama’s] liberal reign will end and the American people and our economy will finally be free,” she said. “What we need is a fearless conservative … I believe that I am that true conservative that can and will defeat Barack Obama in 2012.”

Bachmann won none of Iowa’s 99 counties. In Black Hawk County, where Bachmann was born, launched her presidential campaign in June and addressed caucus-goers minutes before they got underway, she came in fourth, with 253 votes. It was the only county in which Bachmann cracked triple digits”.

How’s that ‘miracle’ working out for ya Michele?

Dingo
9

mmfwmc

January 4, 2012 at 4:02 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

A lot of people were surprised – all the voices in her head were stunned. Unfortunately, they don’t get to vote, because they can’t decide if they’re from Iowa or Minnesota.
10

laurentweppe

January 4, 2012 at 4:46 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

The fundies aren’t as influential as they pretend to be.

Paris vaut bien une messe, and so do D.C: anyone able to take back the White House from the atheistic Muslim with his radical anti-colonialist agenda and his invisible secular sharia usurper will have the fundies support.
11

KG

January 4, 2012 at 5:44 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

So, in the wake of her ~~stunning and unexpected triumph~~ solid 6th place with a hefty 5% of the vote, Bachmann has vowed to continue her campaign. Dingojack’s quote maybe gives a hint of her approach, with “true conservative” being code for “fundamentalist evangelical Protestant”. With Perry “suspending” his campaign, she and loopy Ron are the only “true Christians” left, in the eyes of the core fundy vote, and loopy Ron is unsound on war and drugs.

Who’ll be the next to throw in the towel? My hunch is that Bachmann will stay in as long as possible in hope of a VP nomination, so it will probably be Gingrich, barring an unexpectedly good showing in the next 2-3 primaries.
12

MikeMa

January 4, 2012 at 6:37 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

There may have been a lot of undecideds in Iowa, but few were undecided about Bachmann.

With Huntsman the only sane GOPer out there, he naturally finished at the bottom. Cannot wait to see the rest of them eat each other with negative ads over the next few races.
13

heddle

January 4, 2012 at 7:47 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

raven,

The fundies aren’t as influential as they pretend to be.

As you say. Over and over. On multiple blogs. Day after day. On multiple posts. Again and again. Never ceasing.

Even though I absolutely don’t trust Mormons for good reasons.

Not surprising you distrust an entire group of people in the tens of millions. Since when did simple-minded bigotry become a “good reason”? I’m sure David Duke distrusts people of color for “good reasons”.
14

Zeno

January 4, 2012 at 8:30 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

a lot of soft hidden support that’s going to come out

Was she thinking of her husband when she said that?
15

Zeno

January 4, 2012 at 8:34 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

raven: Satanorum, a Catholic loon from a Fake Xian cult.

I agree totally about Rick Santorum’s looniness. However, “fake Xian”? Calling Catholicism “fake Christian” is like calling Coke the “Un-Cola.” It is, in fact, “the real thing” (which does not make it any less delusional, but gives due recognition to its seniority and decrepitude — and fizziness).
16

beezlebubby

January 4, 2012 at 8:42 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

Aww, poor heddle has a burr under his/her saddle. Raven happens to be correct. All religions are simply man-made con jobs. Mormonism just happens to be the most transparent con job. Anyone so gullible to be suckered in by such a con job shouldn’t be trusted to hand out towels in the bathroom, led alone govern, no matter how m any of them there are. Not trusting someone is far cry from active discrimination, but keep rolling out that straw man heddle!
17

Scott Simmons

January 4, 2012 at 8:51 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

Huntsman didn’t campaign at all in Iowa. We’ll see what happens in New Hampshire, though I can’t say I’m particularly hopeful.
18

dingojack

January 4, 2012 at 8:59 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

Zeno – from the perspective of fundies (the core of the RRR voter-base), being a catholic is being a follower of ‘the whore of Babylon’ and therefore a ‘fake xtian’*. Do try and keep up!
Dingo
—–
* Yes, yes, David I know you’ve never seen snow, therefore it doesn’t exist…
19

d cwilson

January 4, 2012 at 9:06 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

I guess Jesus is just not that into her.

Calling Catholicism “fake Christian” is like calling Coke the “Un-Cola.”

I believe raven was describing the fundamentalist Christian perspective. As a group, evangelical Christians do not regard Catholics as true Christians. Perhaps they consider Catholics to be less fake than Mormons. Other Protestants are marginally better.
20

MikeMa

January 4, 2012 at 9:08 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

@Heddle
With regard to the fundie influence: By promoting an absolute disaster like Santorum to a near first place finish in Iowa, they effectively abrogate any claim to America or American values. Santorum is a racist, homophobic, anti-constitutional asswipe. I’m sad to be from the state that elevated him to the senate. I’m sure many from Minnesota know how that feels.
21

Doug Little

January 4, 2012 at 9:20 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

The fundies aren’t as influential as they pretend to be.

Unfortunately they are just influential enough to keep their personal coffers full with the donations of the credulous, after all that’s really what it’s all about.
22

raven

January 4, 2012 at 9:22 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

I agree totally about Rick Santorum’s looniness. However, “fake Xian”? Calling Catholicism “fake Christian” is like calling Coke the “Un-Cola.”

As an ex-Xian, they are all equally as Real, True, or Fake xians.

But that is irrelevant. It’s what the fundies believe because we are talking about the fundie’s beliefs. Not mine.

Traditionally, they hate the Catholics. Anti-Catholic bigotry in the USA was intense up until the later parts of the 20th century. The Reformation wars lasted 450 years and ended 12 years ago in Northern Ireland.

We all know the rules. The Catholics hate the Protestants and vice versa. The fundies hate everyone. Everyone hates them back.

It still exists among the fundies. The website of Michele Bachmann’s cult, the WELS, calls the Pope the antichrist. Some of their cult leaders are anti-Catholic bigots, such as Hagee.

And it works both ways. Pope Benny once called the Protestants Fake Xians.
23

democommie

January 4, 2012 at 9:28 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

“and loopy Ron is unsound on war and drugs.”

AND on the “War on Drugs”.

However, in the process of cutting, folding, spindling and mutilating the U.S. economy by slashing a $T from the gummint’s budget during his first year in office* Ron,Ron,do-do,Ron,Ron could take the faith based initiative concept and apply it to drugs, war and the war on drugs. Manlovin’ Marcus Bachman would make out like a camptown whore on payday.

*Not even possible without a few YEARS of study.
24

raven

January 4, 2012 at 9:31 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

The fundies aren’t as influential as they pretend to be.

The point remains. They couldn’t elect one of their vaguely humanoid toad candidates to lead candidate of their own polical party.

Romney isn’t even a xian. Satanorum is a Catholic, from what they consider a heretical, and evil cult.

One of the strangest latest trends is the fragmentation and breakup of the so called Evangelical xians. Evangelical is no longer synonymous with fundie xians or right wing extremist lunatics.

A lot of them are going mainstream. 30% of the Evangelicals voted for Obama. There are splits based on age, geography, and education between the right wing extremists and the more normal ones. A few of them are even accepting Heliocentrism the round earth, and evolutionary biology.
25

imrryr

January 4, 2012 at 9:33 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

“This isn’t just about polling. This is about what we’re seeing in reality, and I think Tuesday night people are going to see a miracle.”

Michele Bachmann (R) 6,016 5%

Uh… hmmm… Maybe she was talking about last night’s meteor shower?
26

daved

January 4, 2012 at 9:38 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

Huntsman bagged Iowa long ago and has been campaigning almost entirely in NH. He pretty much had the state to himself up till today, when Romney (flushed with his giant 8-vote-margin victory) and the rest of the pack arrive. I doubt he’ll win.

If I were part of the Obama campaign, Huntsman would be the candidate I would least want to see as the GOP nominee. I think they were worried about him from the start, hence sending him to China for a couple of years as ambassador to get him out of the way.

However, he just doesn’t seem to be gaining sufficient traction. Romney is very well known in NH, in part due to having been governor of the state just to the south, and is virtually certain to win (as things stand today). If Huntsman doesn’t come in at least second, which I doubt will happen, I think he’s toast.
27

raven

January 4, 2012 at 9:42 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

Hector Avalos is a former fundie minister and professor in Iowa.
Here is what he says about the Evangelical fragmentation.

My guess is that the All Hate, all the time is getting old. Hate works or they wouldn’t base their religion on it, but it just isn’t everyone’s cup of tea.

Des Moines Register, edited for length.

Guest columnist: What evangelical influence?
1:12 PM, Dec. 26, 2011 | Comments

Written by
HECTOR AVALOS

HECTOR AVALOS is a professor of religious studies at Iowa State University.

Ads by Pulse 360 AdChoices Today’s Breakout Penny StockFast Mover In Energy Tech Just Awarded Huge New $84 Million Solar Look no further than the Family Leader’s inability to reach a consensus on endorsing a single presidential candidate in order to understand the dramatic evolution of American evangelicalism in the last decade.

Self-described evangelicals are rapidly fragmenting and shifting toward more liberal positions. The leaders of the Family Leader, Bob Vander Plaats and Chuck Hurley, who are widely described as “influential,” are not even influential enough to persuade the rest of their own board members to endorse Rick Santorum, the former senator from Pennsylvania.

For the most part, the media has overlooked the fragmentation and generational shifts among evangelicals, who are often also lumped with “fundamentalists,” “social conservatives,” and “born-again” Christians.

Such fragmentation is not news to George Barna, the founder of the Barna Group, which tracks the religious beliefs of Americans. Years ago, he began noticing the widening generational gap between older self-described evangelicals and what are called the “Born-again Busters,” who range in age from 23 to 41.

In January 2010, Christianity Today, a respected evangelical magazine, asked Christian leaders what they thought the biggest change in Christianity had been in the prior decade. John Stackhouse, a professor of theology at Regent College (Vancouver, Canada), responded that it was the “rapid collapse of Christian consensus against homosexual marriage in North America, including among evangelicals.”

In her book, “The Fall of the Evangelical Nation: The Surprising Crisis Inside the Church,” Christine Wicker offers a more conspiratorial explanation for why the idea of major evangelical influence persists. She argues that evangelical leaders have purposely inflated their membership numbers in order to make themselves look more politically influential than they really are.

Wicker questioned a past claim by the National Association of Evangelicals, a major organization of evangelicals, that they represented 30 million people. This number has no real basis in fact, and the real number is probably a fraction of that. But such inflated numbers are used to attract politicians who are unaware of these questionable statistics.

In the last decade, evangelicals in Iowa have lost significant battles over Intelligent Design and gay marriage. While gaining some victories, self-described conservative evangelicals will find it difficult to overturn the overall social trajectory toward more liberal social behaviors.

All this does not mean that conservative evangelicals will have no influence in the future. What it does signify is that their endorsements will mean less than they once did.

In fact, Vander Plaats himself tried to downplay how much impact his endorsement would have before the caucuses. Santorum was nowhere in sight for the anti-climactic announcement.

And if Santorum, whose poll numbers are still near the bottom, does not gain much support in the Iowa caucuses, the aura of some decisive or unbeatable conservative evangelical “influence” on Iowa politics may never recover its luster.
28

dingojack

January 4, 2012 at 9:51 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

MikeMa – “… they [fundies] effectively abrogate any claim to America or American values. Santorum is a racist, homophobic, anti-constitutional asswipe“.
Are you absolutely sure about that? :D
Dingo
29

d cwilson

January 4, 2012 at 10:33 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

With regard to the fundie influence: By promoting an absolute disaster like Santorum to a near first place finish in Iowa, they effectively abrogate any claim to America or American values. Santorum is a racist, homophobic, anti-constitutional asswipe.

But those are the “American values” that they support.
30

chilidog99

January 4, 2012 at 10:39 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

According to anonymous sources, she has suspended her campaign.

maybe Herman Cain will buy her a pizza and hit on her.
31

d cwilson

January 4, 2012 at 10:43 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

@raven:

Avalos’ conclusions indicate that Evangelicals are undergoing the same generational shift that American society in general. Younger people are simply more accepting of homosexuals than older people. If this holds true, then the old republican trifecta of “Guns, God, and Gays” as a way to fire up the base does have a limited shelf life.

However, because older people tend to vote in larger numbers than younger people, the fundies can still exert a strong influence, especially in close primary races. Santorum’s catholicism may be a strike against him in their book, but he does speak the language of “Guns, God, and Gays” that still resonates with older voters.

Ultimately, they flocked to him by default. Romney isn’t considered “authentic” in their minds because of his past record. Perry is too stupid even for them and Bachmann lacks a penis.
32

abb3w

January 4, 2012 at 10:49 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

@13, heddle:

Not surprising you distrust an entire group of people in the tens of millions.

Exactly. Those Mormons are all people; and people just aren’t to be trusted.

+++Divide By Cucumber Error. Please Reinstall Universe And Reboot+++
33

raven

January 4, 2012 at 10:56 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment

Not surprising you distrust an entire group of people in the tens of millions.

Exactly. Those Mormons are all people; and people just aren’t to be trusted.

It works both ways. I certainly don’t trust or like the fundies any more than the Mormons.

I know what the fundies think about me and people like me. They openly and viciously hate us. They want to kill us.

They say so often and when they can find me, directly. Like a lot of scientists I’ve been getting death threats from them for over a decade and have long since lost count.
34

MikeMa

January 4, 2012 at 12:07 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment

@Dingo & d cwilson
The santorum/bachmann/perry/paul/fundie values are incompatible with our constitution and (I hope) with a majority of voters. Those values and fundie living in general are also mostly at odds with their babble as well.

Unless hypocrisy and lying are now mainstream American values. I do have to at least pretend they are not. Yet.
35

heddle

January 4, 2012 at 5:44 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment

raven,

They say so often and when they can find me, directly. Like a lot of scientists I’ve been getting death threats from them for over a decade and have long since lost count.

Yeah, sure they do. That’s totally believable. You’ve lost count. You are so on the radar.

I work at a national lab. I’ll be anyone $100 that if we survey the scientists, roughly a couple hundred, that there will be virtually no reports of death threats. (I have gotten one, so I can’t say none–but I have a way-above-average non-anonymous on-line presence.)

I seriously doubt you are a scientist, although yes, they sometimes become unhinged, irrational, deranged and paranoid, so it is possible– and I seriously doubt that you have received an uncountable number of death threats. I call bullshit.
36

abb3w

January 5, 2012 at 1:32 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment

I suspect, heddle that the frequency of death threats varies considerably from field to field. Stem cell researchers seem likely to get rather more than chemists.