Is Michele Bachmann Sarah Palin's Phil Crane?

The 2012 Election cycle is shaping up in many ways to be a mirror image of the 1980 election, which brought the Country and the world the great Ronald Reagan. The Democrats are set to renominate another monumentally failed and politically weak President, as they did with Jimmy Carter in 1980. The GOP Establishment is threatened, genuinely threatened, for the first time since Reagan menaced it thirty years ago, by the advent of a new Conservative superstar, Sarah Palin. And the Establishment champion who is designated to slay the new Conservative dragon? Well, you might say, "The cupboard has never been barer before." In Mitt Romney, the Establishment is fielding its weakest candidate in memory, an unskilled and stiff politician freighted with a legacy of big government, social liberalism and mandates in an election cycle in which libertarianism and the TEA party are ascendant. In other words, he needs help. Lots of help.

The Establishment failed to lure its first choice for a stalking horse, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, into the race. It has had to settle for three term Congressman Michele Bachmann and is busily engaged, through its media organs in pumping her up as the new Palin. Even some of the Conservative talk show hosts whom I respect (such as Mark Levin) have taken to lumping Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann (and even poor Herman Cain) in the same group of conservatives who are being "savaged" by the Establishment. (Comparing the treatment received by Michele Bachmann with that of Sarah Palin--rendering it for all intents and purposes, equivalent--is like comparing some light hazing at the SAE house on a sunny Saturday afternoon to twenty years in the Gulag Archipelago). Have we ever seen anything like this before, that is: a supposed conservative stalwart trying to take out the main Conservative threat to the Establishment? Well, yes we have. For those who don't remember, including even those radio talk show hosts who worked on Reagan 's 1976 and 1980 campaigns, and should remember, let me take you all on a little walk down memory lane.

During the 1980 Cycle, there was a six term Congressman from Illinois, Phil Crane, who was a leader in the conservative movement. In 1976, he had been Chairman of Reagan 's Illinois Primary campaign against President Ford. In 1978, he became Chairman of the American Conservative Union, which was gaining notoriety and funds for its high profile opposition to President Carter's Panama Canal giveaway and to the SALT II Arms limitation treaty with the Soviets. Also, in July 1978, a full 18 months before Reagan himself declared in November 1979, Crane announced that he would seek the Presidency in 1980. Crane tried to pose himself as a younger Reagan, "Reagan without wrinkles", one of his supporters said. Although it was patently obvious to all that Ronald Reagan was preparing his own run for the Presidency, Crane publicly stated his belief that Reagan would not run. (Sound familiar?)

And what was Reagan's reaction to this? Publicly, he was his sunny optimistic self, laughing off the age issue and declining to attack Crane. But privately? As Craig Shirley recounts (at page 33) in his epic story of the 1980 Campaign, "Rendezvous with Destiny", Reagan was hopping mad about Phil Crane's betrayal :

"Reagan was not happy about any of this. Earlier, Crane had as much as told Reagan's men that he would support Reagan again. Worse, Crane threatened to compromise Reagan's support among New Right leaders. Richard Viguerie, for example, joined Crane's direct mail fundraising. Although Crane was nowhere in the polls, he had assets. The America Conservative Union claimed 300,000 members. He had written three books, including 'Surrender in Panama', and had a nationally syndicated column...CRANE KNEW HIS CHANCES FOR WINNING THE 1980 NOMINATION WERE SLIM, BUT IF A MODERATE LIKE HOWARD BAKER OR GEORGE BUSH WON THE NOMINATION, THE CANDIDATE WOULD NEED A CONSERVATIVE RUNNING MATE TO CREATE A UNIFIED CONVENTION AND PARTY. AND IF CRANE SHAVED A FEW POINTS FROM REAGAN IN THE PRIMARIES AND IN SO DOING COST REAGAN THE NOMINATION, WELL, c'est la vie." [emphasis supplied].

But was Crane consequential? Yes and No. He did not succeed in denying Reagan the nomination, as he had pretty clearly intended to do. But he did have an impact on the nomination race. Thanks in part to Reagan's failure (as a result of bad advice) to engage in any retail politicking in Iowa, he was narrowly beaten by George H.W. Bush in the 1980 caucuses, 32-30. Indeed, Crane succeeded in his goal to "shave a few points from Reagan" in Iowa. The seven per cent Crane received in the Hawkeye state came almost entirely out of Reagan's hide. Had the Gipper had five days instead of five weeks, to recover in the New Hampshire primary, George H.W. Bush would likely have won the Granite state primary and, with it, the GOP nomination.

Can Michele Bachmann have a similar impact on the 2012 race? While that certainly appears to be her intent, no serious observer actually believes that she can defeat Romney or any other Establishment candidate any more than Phil Crane could have done in 1980. Like Bachmann, Crane's campaign was motivated by personal ambition, the desire for the Vice Presidency on a ticket headed by a moderate. However, there the similarities between Bachmann and Crane begin and end.

Crane's campaign was not so transparently a stalking horse operation as is Bachmann's. It boasted not just Viguerie, but New Right heavyweights such as Paul Weyrich. In short, there were no Establishment fingerprints on Crane's operation. It seemed to most observers to be a pure challenge to Reagan from the Right. Bachmann's campaign is top heavy with Establishmentarians, most notably (but not exclusively) Ed Rollins. Unlike Crane in 1978-80, she has received warm, recent and conspicuous praise from CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times and other lamestream media pipe organs, lending further support to the belief that she is engaged in a mission of which they approve. The Establishment's failure to promote Crane as a stalking horse may have been its fatal error of the 1980 cycle, and it was a direct result of its refusal to take the prospect of a Reagan nomination seriously. Make no mistake, the Establishment takes the prospect of Palin's nomination (and election) very seriously and it is responding accordingly.

Another distinction between Bachmann and Crane is that Crane's decision to run against Reagan was much less a frank betrayal than is Bachmann's challenge to Palin. To be sure, Reagan and his men considered it such, as did William Loeb, the influential publisher of New Hampshire's Manchester Union Leader (Rendezvous with Destiny, p.47). Crane had been a Reagan SUPPORTER, who was now deciding after a period of several years, to challenge the Gipper for a number of arguably valid reasons, most prominently his advanced age. Michele Bachmann is more properly characterized as a BENEFICIARY, a very recent beneficiary, of Sarah Palin who campaigned for her in a tough reelection fight just six months ago and raised boatloads of money for her, some of which is being used to pay Establishment "hit men" like Rollins to slime Palin. This leaves many voters, not just Palin supporters, with a queasy feeling about Bachmann and her character. Crane had no such problem with grass roots conservatives.

Can Bachmann succeed in derailing Palin or at least damaging her in the way Crane did to Reagan in Iowa? In another election cycle against another conservative candidate, I would say it was possible. Bachmann's is the third in a series of challenges from right wing long shots against more prominent, more nominatable conservative candidates. The first was Crane's challenge to Reagan. The second was Pat Buchanan's challenge to Phil Gramm in Louisiana and Iowa in 1996. Gramm was positioned as the conservative alternative to the Establishment champion, the ancient Bob Dole. He planned to ride momentum from victories in the Louisiana and Alaska Caucuses to a strong showing in Iowa, where Dole was favored and then defeat Dole in New Hampshire (where he was weak), before the race turned south where Gramm would sew it up. It was a good plan with a very good chance of success. However, Buchanan mounted a vigorous challenge to Gramm, painting the very conservative Texan as "soft" on embryonic stem cell research. He shocked Gramm, defeating him badly in neighboring Louisiana, a loss that crippled Gramm and likely ended his campaign. Buchanan went on to finish a close second to Dole in Iowa and defeat him in New Hampshire before the Establishment closed ranks against Buchanan and Dole secured the nomination. The upshot of the Buchanan challenge is that it eliminated Phil Gramm, whom the Establishment might have tolerated but did not want.

The problem with a successful challenge by Bachmann to Palin is two fold. Bachmann lacks the credibility with conservatives which Buchanan had achieved as of 1996, both in his work for Reagan and in his strong challenge to Bush 41 in the 1992 primaries. And Phil Gramm, a good conservative to be sure, is in no sense the political equal of Sarah Palin. Palin, like Reagan, is a transformational candidate with a huge national following that will stick with her through thick and thin. She veritably crackles with charisma. Poor Gramm, with his slow Texas drawl, was ripe target for the acerbic, quick witted Buchanan. Palin, it must be admitted by even her detractors, gives as good as she gets.

So, based on a historical analysis of other long shot candidacies in the recent past, it does not seem to me that Bachmann's challenge to Palin will turn out to be much more than a rather expensive snipe hunt, brought to you by the Establishment (specifically Mitt Romney), in which Bachmann will play her proper part but which, in the final analysis, is unlikely to succeed.

If, however, Bachmann's fool's errand does succeed, where Phil Crane's failed, it will mean the nomination not of Michele Bachmann but of Mitt Romney. If that happens, some of the conservative pundits who are railing against the Establishment, and recalling that the "Establishment threw everything they had at Reagan...[Howard] Baker, [George]Bush and [Bob]Dole", will be forced to concede that they forgot that it was a conservative quisling from within our own ranks who very nearly derailed the Gipper in 1980, Phil Crane, and would have been perfectly happy with a moderate like Baker or Bush, especially if it advanced his [Crane's] ambitions.

Reagan and his men never trusted or had anything to do with Crane again. They despised him for his treachery. While both Howard Baker and George Bush were welcomed into the Administration, Crane went from ascendant star in the conservative movement to a backbencher. Conservatives sometimes need to be reminded of the same history that we all lived through.

Has Michele answered the Romneycare question yet? If not, why?

Yes, she has long ago and recently criticized Romenycare. See the end of this list.

Why Bachmann is one of US and no RINO

Bachmann is a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, a supporter of the Tea Party movement and a founder of the House Tea Party Caucus.

Bachmann was born Michele Marie Amble in Waterloo, Iowa, "into a family of Norwegian Lutheran Democrats"

She married Marcus Bachmann in 1978.They have five children (Lucas, Harrison, Elisa, Caroline, and Sophia), and have also provided foster care for 23 other children.

Bachmann and her husband own a Christian counseling practice in Stillwater, Minnesota.

Bachmann also has an ownership stake in a family farm located in Waumandee, Wisconsin. Since the death of her father-in-law in 2009, the farm and its buildings have been rented out to a neighboring farmer who maintains a dairy herd on the farm.

Bachmann grew up in a Democratic family, but she says she became a Republican during her senior year at Winona State. She told the Minneapolis Star Tribune that she was reading Gore Vidal's 1973 novel, Burr: "He was kind of mocking the Founding Fathers and I just thought, I just remember reading the book, putting it in my lap, looking out the window and thinking, 'You know what? I don't think I am a Democrat. I must be a Republican.'"

While she was still a Democrat, Bachmann and her then-fiancé Marcus were inspired to join the pro-life movement by Francis Schaeffer's 1976 Christian documentary film, How Should We Then Live?. They frequently prayed outside of clinics and served as sidewalk counselors. Bachmann was a supporter of Jimmy Carter in 1976 and she and her husband worked on his campaign. During Carter's presidency, Bachmann became disappointed with his liberal approach to public policy, support for legalized abortion and economic decisions she held responsible for increased gas prices. In the 1980 presidential election, she voted for Ronald Reagan and worked for his campaign.

In 1993, Bachmann and other parents started a K-12 charter school in Stillwater, and she began speaking against a state-mandated set of educational standards, which propelled her into the world of politics.

In 2000, Bachmann defeated 18-year incumbent Gary Laidig to secure the GOP endorsement as State Senator for Minnesota District 56. She then defeated Ted Thompson of the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party (DFL) and Lyno Sullivan of the Minnesota Independence Party in the General Election. In 2002, after redistricting, Bachmann defeated a fellow incumbent State Senator Jane Krentz of the DFL for the newly drawn District 52.

On November 20, 2003, Bachmann and Representative Mary Liz Holberg proposed a constitutional amendment that would bar the state from legally recognizing same-sex marriage. In 2004, Bachmann and a coalition of religious leaders announced plans for a "Minnesota for Marriage" rally. Bachmann’s effort to place a marriage amendment on a referendum ballot in 2004 ultimately failed. She resurrected her proposal in March 2005 but it stalled indefinitely in a senate committee that April.

110th Congress

Voted for the surge

Joined Congressional delegation to the middle east

Opposition to higher education finance bill: Bachmann said her opposition was because "it fails students and taxpayers with gimmicks, hidden costs and poorly targeted aid. It contains no serious reform of existing programs, and it favors the costly, government-run direct lending program over nonprofit and commercial lenders. The bill passed the House and was signed by President Bush

Light bulbs: Bachmann introduced the Light Bulb Freedom of Choice Act, which would require a GAO report show that a change to fluorescent bulbs (CFLs) would have "clear economic, health and environmental benefits" prior to enforcement of lighting efficiency regulations that effectively ban conventional light bulbs. Bachman argued, "Each light bulb contains between 3-6 milligrams of mercury. There's a question about how that mercury will fill up our landfills, and also if you break one in your home, you'll have mercury that instantaneously vaporizes in your home.

Class action lawsuits: On June 3, 2008, President George W. Bush signed the Credit and Debit Card Receipt Clarification Act (H.R. 4008) into law. The bipartisan bill, which Bachmann coauthored with Congressman Tim Mahoney (D-FL), removes statutory damages to end "frivolous lawsuits" aimed at businesses

Domestic oil and gas production: During the summer of 2008, as national gasoline prices rose to over $4 a gallon, Bachmann became a leading Congressional advocate for increased domestic oil and natural gas exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and the Outer Continental Shelf. She joined 10 other House Republicans and members of the media on a Congressional Energy Tour to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colorado, and to Alaska.

Global warming: Bachmann has charged that global warming is a hoax and has been a vocal skeptic of global warming.

Opposition to the bailout: Bachmann opposed both versions of the Wall Street bailout bill for America’s financial sector.

On anti-Americanism: She criticized Barack Obama for his association with Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers, saying "…usually we associate with people who have similar ideas to us, and it seems that it calls into question what Barack Obama's true beliefs, and values, and thoughts are...I am very concerned that he [Barack Obama] may have anti-American views."

111th Congress

Global currency: On March 26, 2009, following comments by China proposing adoption of a global reserve currency, Bachmann introduced a resolution calling for a constitutional amendment to bar the dollar from being replaced by a foreign currency.

2010 Census: In a June 17, 2009, interview with The Washington Times, Bachmann expressed concern that the questions on the 2010 United States Census had become "very intricate, very personal" and that ACORN, a community organizing group that had come under fire the previous year, might be part of the Census Bureau's door-to-door information collection efforts.

"Armed and dangerous" quote: Regarding Obama's proposed cap and trade tax policy to limit greenhouse gas emissions. Bachmann said she wanted Minnesotans "armed and dangerous on this issue of the energy tax because we need to fight back." Bachmann's office quickly clarified that she was speaking metaphorically, meaning "armed with knowledge." However, according to the Star Tribune, her quote went viral across the Internet.

AmeriCorps: In 2009, Bachmann became a critic of what she characterized as proposals for mandatory public service.

Health care: Bachmann denounced the government-run health insurance public option, calling it a "government takeover of health care" that would "squeeze out private health insurance".Bachmann contributed to the "death panel" controversy when she read from a July 24 article written by Betsy McCaughey from the floor of the House.

Critic of President Obama's Asian trip

112th Congress

Leadership run: After the 2010 elections and the announcement from Rep. Mike Pence that he was stepping away from his leadership position in the House, Bachmann announced on her Facebook page her intention to seek the position of House Republican Conference Chair. As Bachmann is the founder of the House's Tea Party Caucus, her announcement caused some to see the leadership election as "an early test of how GOP leaders will treat the antiestablishment movement's winners". Many among the House's Republican leadership, including Eric Cantor and the retiring Mike Pence, were quick to endorse Rep. Jeb Hensarling for the position;

Committee assignment: Bachmann was selected by House Speaker John Boehner for a position "on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, giving her a new role as overseer of the CIA, the National Security Agency and the rest of the U.S. intelligence community."Bachmann, who had "not served on any committee that deals with foreign policy issues" requested the position, "a move that has fueled speculation that she may be planning to carry the Tea Party banner into the GOP presidential primaries."

Repeal of Dodd-Frank reform: Soon after being sworn in to her third term Bachmann introduced legislation to repeal the Dodd-Frank financial reform law. She stated "I'm pleased to offer a full repeal of the job-killing Dodd-Frank financial regulatory bill. Dodd-Frank grossly expanded the federal government beyond its jurisdictional boundaries. It gave Washington bureaucrats the power to interpret and enforce the legislation with little oversight. Real financial regulatory reform must deal with these lenders who were a leading cause of our economic recession. True reform must also end the bailout mind-set that was perpetuated by the last Congress."

Repeal of Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: Bachmann has characterized the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act as "ObamaCare", and has continually called for its repeal.She recalled to reporters that she called for debate to repeal the act "the morning after Obamacare passed". Joining with Rep. Steve King she introduced "the Bachmann-King repeal of health care bill" stating that it "is our intent in our heart to make sure that Obamacare is completely repealed."

On March 4, 2011 Bachmann (who was one of the six House Republicans to vote against the continuing resolution) expressed her unhappines with the move that gave a two-week reprieve to the fear of government shutdown, stating "I am vowing to vote 'no' on future Continuing Resolutions to fund the government unless there is specific language included to defund Obamacare and rescind the funding that has already been appropriated. Defunding Obamacare, along with defunding Planned Parenthood, must be non-negotiable planks in our budget negotiations."

In an appearance on Meet the Press on March 6, 2011 and during a March 7, 2011 interview with Sean Hannity, Bachmann declared that the Obama administration and the Congressional Democrats had hidden $105 billion in spending in the overhaul of the American Health Care System.

When asked during the Meet the Press interview if she would take back her previous comments that Obama held "anti-American views" and was running a "gangster government", Bachmann backed her statements, saying "I do believe that actions that have been taken by this White House -- I don't take back my statements on gangster government. I think that there have been actions taken by the government that are corrupt...I said I have very serious concerns about the president's views, and I think the president's actions in the last two years speak for themselves."

On Romneycare: Friday 6-17-11 The Hill Blog, Last Friday she said this (The Hill Blog).

-"Whether it's on the state level or the federal level, I think it's unconstitutional to require anybody to purchase health insurance as a condition of citizenship," Bachmann said, alluding to the Massachusetts law.

Romneycare

ObamaCareRomneyCareRyanBudget

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.