Posted on 08/12/2011 8:07:59 AM PDT by markomalley
MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough had some tough words this morning for Michele Bachmann, the state of Iowa, and anyone who believes that the congresswoman has a fighting chance at “winning anything.”
While discussing his take on last night’s GOP debate, the “Morning Joe” host spouted off, unleashing several attacks on the GOP Rep. and calling her a “joke” several times and in many different ways and also targeting Iowans who are thinking of voting for her. NewsBusters has the transcript:
Michele Bachmann’s first answer, Mark Halperin, was “I wish the federal government had defaulted.” Had defaulted, a week after Americans had lost–some of them perhaps lost half of their pensions. Lost half of their 401(k)s, when trillions of dollars went down the drain [pounds the table] with Americans suffering, she said that and got applause, and if anybody thinks that guys like my dad are going to be voting that way when this rolls out of Iowa and New Hampshire and South Carolina, in the early stages, and really gets going, they are out of their mind and they are too stupid not only to prognosticate, they are too stupid to run Slurpee machines in Des Moines. I’ll let you go now. I got it off my chest.Michele Bachmann is a joke. She is a joke. And now I will pass it on to you. Her answer is a joke, her candidacy is a joke, and anybody that sits here and says she has any chance of winning anything is out of their mind. Take your straw poll, take your caucus, but Iowa, if you let her win, you prove your irrelevance once again.
Scarborough’s comments are stark contrast to his reaction to Bachmann after the first GOP debate. Back then he defended her from attackers and said she looked “in command:”
LMAO. Since you put it that way... That's funny. I watch these clowns as an exercise in opposition research. I have ceased to be amazed by them. They remind me of Gov. LePetomaine's cabinet in "Blazing Saddles" (harrumph, harrumph, harrumph!).
It looks like my answer does not fit in with others on this particular thread, but I’m going to share anyway.
I am no Democrat, nor am I a RINO. I am conservative. I also do not like how the press goes after conservative women.
However, that said, I thought Michele Bachmann looked very weak last night in the debate. I don’t watch Joe whatever his name is. I don’t watch MSNBC at all. But reading some of his thoughts here, I would not discount everything he said. She was not a “joke”, but she did not come off as a very strong candidate last night.
First, she let herself get involved in the playground bully fighting the panel set up between her and Tim Pawlente. Pawlente just looked mean, but Bachmann wasn’t well equipped to handle it professionally. She showed a lack of experience to draw from, relying instead on canned sentences her handlers must have made her practice over and over again. She did not stand on her own two feet last night. Perhaps we should give her another chance to see if she either just did not step up to the plate because of her handler’s instructions or if she just isn’t able to do it. Hopefully she can show more experience than she did last night, but last night was a dud night for Michele Bachmann in that respect.
She also really dropped the ball when asked how she could guarantee there would be no default when some economists said there could be. Now while I believed Bachmann during that time and stood by what she said... that no default would happen, I did so out of faith in her. She gave no foundation to her words back then. I just gave her my faith. When I heard how she stumbled all over that question last night, how she could not come up with ONE factor that led her to come to the conclusion there would be no default on August 2, I was VERY disappointed. All she could do was stick with her canned answer of how she fought... how she came out on the right side. Well to Representative Bachmann, I wanted to believe you. I DID, but we don’t KNOW if we came out on the right side on that specific thing. You... we.. came out on the right side that Standards and Poor said they would downgrade us if we were not more serious with spending cuts. Standards and Poor did not cut because “we may have had a default if we did not do something on August 2”. Get my belief once more here... I believed Michele Bachmann on the idea that we would not default on August 2, but that WAS totally out of faith and not out of anything she said to PROVE that. She had a chance to prove that last night, just not to me but to everyone, and she couldn’t even come up with an intelligent answer to that question... just canned words like “I fought” and “I was right”.
Also, for me, I was not at all impressed with Michele Bachmann’s answers overall last night. Can’t she say anything other than “I fought for this” and “I fought for that”. She’s a good fighter, of ideas, but I’m really seeing a person who is more a fighter of ideas and principles than a DOER of ideas and principles.
I know I’ll maybe get some real mean replies to my thoughts here, but at least know I was not out to see the worst in Michele Bachmann last night. I was totally surprised at the shallowness and inexperience I felt I saw last night. That was the first time I had even thought those things about her! I am sorry I do not agree with many of you, but at least know I did not want that to happen.
Perhaps she’ll pick herself up and be herself next time. Hopefully what she was missing last night was her own real self.
Why does anyone watch this clown or give a sh*t what he has to say?
I just can’t see independents voting for Bachmann. Waiting to see how she does in NH and SC.
I really chewed my son out the other day because he was watching him.
Thanks for your post. I was also disappointed in her last night. Felt her answers were more suitable to the campaign trail than to a debate.
Of course he doesn’t like her.
Most gay Democrats don’t.
Joe’s reminds me of a catty woman.
She was being herself last night. She was in Congress a few years and did not really achieve much. Yes, she fought a lot for a lot of things and cast many votes in Congress. But, so do the other 434 representatives.
After how she acted during that debate, I am utterly convinced of her shallowness. Her logic of voting no on the debt limit deal? No need to raise the debt limit. Why? She won’t say. Other than grand sloganeering. She even voted against the Cut, Cap and Balance. Again, the reason given? Slogans.
I don’t want her anywhere close to the Presidency.
Bachmann has been saying the same thing since she arrived in Washington. I don’t think she’s riding any wave. The country is finally waking up and realizing that she has been right all along.
She is equally qualified to Sarah Palin, and, in my opinion, more conservative than Sarah.
Both would be great because they have the right character and ideology, not because of their resume. I will enthusiastically support either.
He has achieved his goals because he is an ideologue who will not compromise. His evil should not be mistaken for incompetence and his effectiveness shows that principles (even evil ones) are more important than experience when it comes to effecting major changes.
To undo the damage, I believe strong conservative principles will be more important than executive experience. If Palin jumps in I will need to reconsider, but right now Bachmann is the most conservative of the pack hands down.
First of all, Michele has been in the minority party in Congress for her entire tenure, including now (though the GOP may be the majority party, the Tea Party is still a minority, and RINOism still prevails).
So it’s not surprising, then, that she hasn’t been able to, as you say, “pull off solutions”. She has been placed in a position where she has to defend against the proclivities of and over-active Congress and their desire to “do things”, instead of shrinking government and going home like they are supposed to.
The rest of your post is pretty insulting towards someone who has continually stuck her neck out IN FRONT of issues, and is a big reason why we may be in the beginnings of a revolution.
“I know I’ll maybe get some real mean replies to my thoughts here, but at least know I was not out to see the worst in Michele Bachmann last night. I was totally surprised at the shallowness and inexperience I felt I saw last night. That was the first time I had even thought those things about her!”
You aren’t alone. Didn’t watch the debate, but she’s quoted as saying, “I wish the federal government had defaulted”. I can’t take a candidate seriously who would “wish” for an economic humiliation of our nation. What did she suppose would happen here (and around the world) if the US were to default on incurred debt? Foolish.
That is a fine point of view. I am not going to quarrel with it. The fact remains that she has not accomplished much. And, I am not going to support someone who has not.
Michele Bachmann’s first answer, Mark Halperin, was “I wish the federal government had defaulted.” Had defaulted, a week after Americans had lost–some of them perhaps lost half of their pensions. Lost half of their 401(k)s, when trillions of dollars went down the drain [pounds the table] with Americans suffering, she said that and got applause,
///
Scarborough is the idiot.
the applause was by people who understood, we would not have defaulted on our debt, only on the massive increase in spending under Obama.
...and the stock collapse, could have been AVOIDED
if Congress has even agreed to the MINIMUM cuts that both S&P and Moody’s said was necessary to AVOID the downgrade.
that was known BEFORE the vote.
so the downgrade, and stock market losses Scarborough cries about, are the fault of everyone in Congress who voted “yes”.
She has repeatedly said that we don’t need to raise the debt ceiling, we need to lower the debt. She is ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.
Also, she opposed CCB because it leaves Obamacare untouched, which is a deal breaker for her.
She is about as anti-status quo as one can be.
The reason the TV only shows Scarborough from the waist up is to avoid the giant kneepads he wears to get his money from his libtard bosses. “Move your head, Scarborough, I can’t see the
TV...”
indianrightwinger, I agree with your assessment listed in your earlier post, that believing in something (good or bad) and voting a lot does not indicate one is ready to step into an American presidency.
Retired Greyhound is right too that Michele Bachmann has stuck her neck out and even sometimes stood out from the crowd, (she is very vocal), but I am now sensing that void of leadership experience too.
A governor can certainly have leadership and executive experience, but a House Representative, heck, even a state-level senator or representative can gain leadership experience too I think. It’s called life experiences. It’s called committee chair. It’s called producing believable and effective info and selling points of view. While it’s easier to see how a governor, military general, or an administration’s higher ranking staff member could gain executive or leadership experience, I don’t think it is impossible for a senator or representative to gain and exhibit those qualities. One thing in question here is: has she shown an ability to lead and win throughout her career?
Michele Bachmann is a very passionate conservative, and she is willing to stand up and exhibit a fighting attitude over issues, but I am thinking now she might need to have some political life experiences that give her some real substance and leadership abilities (or at least that prove she has them) before she is placed in what should be one of our most honorable political positions. The POTUS should not be a learning role. It should be granted only to those who have done great things with their life, who have shown they are successful in leadership and therefore prove they are capable of doing something even bigger with their life with those principles they stand for.
Perhaps Michele Bachmann could be a good candidate for a cabinet position, or let’s see if she can show some leadership qualities with a little more time in Congress - not just passion and courage in her beliefs, but leadership.
I’m also willing to maintain an open mind and see if she can do more in the following months than she has done up to this point. Will she be able to break away from speech-giving “sloganese” and actually say something more that makes us think, makes more people see her point of view, makes others want to follow her?
Before last night’s debate, I had not put her at the top, but I had not discounted her either, for either the presidency or even for a VP slot. Now, after last night’s debate, at least for ME, she came off as further marginalized. Time will tell if there is really more to come out than we saw from her last night.
Just my thought. I do hope she has a future somewhere though. She’s a good gal, and we should honor her courage.
Joe Scar and Bill Maher have a lot in common.
Deep-seated insecurity regarding women which brings about
these kind of over-reactions based in their own psychological instability, intellectual shallowness, lack of common sense, and inability to see anything objectively.
Notice how he demagogues the issue EXACTLY the way the far Left does. I happen not to be “a big Bachmann fan”, but I try to put everything in perspective, at least. The more powerless Scarby and the boys at MSNBC are (and the even more powerless they anticipate being in a few years), the louder they squawsk and scream and jump up and down in their chairs.Jeez, this guy was a CONGRESSMAN, presumably on OUR SIDE. I never watch him, maybe not even 2 minutes since he’s been on the air, but is he still with that empty dress Mika Bre-whatever?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.