Don't think so. Someone came up to her and told her this right before the debate. Her error was not taking time to check it out.
That person (assuming they weren't there to sabotage her); needs to come forth and back up Bachmann.
Yes, but she screwed herself by doubling down on Perry saying that An executive does not get a mulligan.
“Someone came up to her and told her this right before the debate. Her error was not taking time to check it out.
That person (assuming they weren’t there to sabotage her); needs to come forth and back up Bachmann. “
Well then she is guilible and not fit to be president or even VP.
But that is my point: She did not have the sense to check it out.
When she is President, is she going to go with an idea just because someone says its true?
You have to know that is not a good plan.
She pulled the age old, “I met a guy who said....” BS that many politicans do.
The other things she does is tell you what she voted for when discussing an issue. Usually, it was voting for a bill that was defeated. Politicians think that matters to people.
It doesn’t.
She is toast. Get out the jelly.
That would show extremely poor judgment if it is what happened.
The odds that will happen are very long indeed. Even if (and that’s a huge if) that person comes forward, and even if (an even bigger if) it turns out that there is some evidence of mental deficiency that occurred at the same time as the administration of a vaccine, it will take a lot more than that to prove that the vaccine *caused* the mental condition.
Bachmann made an unforced error. There was absolutely nothing to be gained from telling (or re-telling) the anecdote she was told about this, regardless of when it was told to her, or whether the one case told to her checked out.
As anyone who has done some statistics knows, you can find a few instances of almost ANYTHING that is co-incident with a widely-administered vaccine, wide administration of some medicine or medical procedure, power lines, RF fields, the use of microwave ovens, whatever.
This sort of stuff drives people who are versed in mathematics nuts, because we have such an ignorant populace that it is nearly impossible to explain to them that sometimes just because A and B happened in a relatively close period of time doesn’t mean that they have anything to do with one another, unless we have a sufficiently large population where these issues occur in ways that we can statistically filter out the “noise” in the multiple variables in all these people’s lives.
The point she should have made was about government mandates in health care: She’s against them. Perry and Romney are for them, and that’s just like Obama too. That’s been her point all along on Obamacare, and she could have been consistent on that - and nailed both Perry *and* Romney, since they both are guilty of putting forth policy which TELLS people what to do about their medical care.
Ahhh.... but she didn’t do that, did she? She wanted to go for the tear-jerking emotion of administering injections to “innocent” “little girls,” while she didn’t mention Romney’s health care mandates.
She tried to get slick with her political tactics and it has blown up in her face.
Was totally in Bachman’s court.
She willfully spread unconfirmed rumors based on an unknown source.
I heard it on Hannity...pitiful.